I believe Doom 3 has high-poly modelling plus unique lighting. For example, instead of adding detail to the texture, they're modelling the detail in... such as buttons.
The question is... who will be able to run the game? I'm sure the PC gaming industry would benefit from Doom 3 but I'm just wondering how many people can run it (and when I say run it, I mean run it well.)
If there are any articles about this, let me know because I haven't heard people talking much about it.
something like 1.5ghz cpu gf3 and 256mb+ most prob higher
Hardly. The the game will not need a CPU like that, and likely only 128 megs of ram (for the minimum)
The way DooMIII works, is they make a low poly model (3,000?) and a high poly model (~500,000), with all the details. They then take the lighting information from the high poly model, and turn it into a normal/bump map, which is used on the low poly model. Due to some features not supported by other graphics cards, it may require a GF3, but that's where all the work will be done, you could get away with a lower CPU. As for ram, I have no doubt that they'll include texture settings for people with normal comps.
The code shown at E3 was running on an Intel 2.4Ghz at 1280x1024, according to one of my magazines. Given the idea of the game is to be slow paced and scary rather than really fast, the machine spec will probably still be quiter high
ahh, not to argue, but the pace of a game has no relation whatsoever to the system requirements. Unless by 'slow paced' you mean that it's meant to run at 10fps. What it would effect, is the number of enemies on screen at once (and thus, the number of polygons acceptable for each individual enemy). If due to that, they make 10k models, which many comps would be pressed to have ten on screen at once, it just means that they won't have ten at once, not that the requirements will go up.
As for the machine running it at E3, of course it's going to be the best they could come up with, I'd do the same thing if I were them. There's always code-optimization that still needs to be done, and models that still need to be cut down-- best to have the top of the line, so nothing can go wrong at such a major event.
When you really think about it, it doesn't take much more power than UT2k3, which uses 3k poly models for players (U2 is at 5k for some enemies, I believe). DooM3 is dynamic lighting, that's all, the methods they use to produce their bump maps and normal maps (Spec and diffuse are still hand done, I believe) are cool, but won't have on performance at all.
Apparently, it was designed to be slow paced because that was all the engine could cope with.
I'm probably wrong, but that's what I read.
Feel free to dispute it, though
Ahh, I hardly think id would do anything "because that's all the engine could cope with" ;P
It's more likely that the engine is more suited to it (ie, all the lighting code is best for a 'creepy' game)
But anyway, the choice has it's merits, when it comes to horror, less is more and all that, and like I mentioned, with only a few models to be on screen, they can be a whole lot more detailed.
I heard that it grunts and splutters on anything less than the new v/c coming out, now if I could just remember what it was called...
------------------ let the rage induced hallucinations begin...