DNF Graphics

[vincentdante]

What are you talking about ladiesandgentalmen? he was talking about Crysis gameplay and AI while your going on about how he couldn't have played it because of the graphics?

Yes your right about the graphics but clearly you didn't read what he said. I applaud you for being on topic though . TBH I don't kbnow what to think of DX10 anymore I might go and research it myself, All I can gather from this thread is that DX10 is easier to get more out of maybe?

Also on that wiki page you guys linked above the publisher for DNF is GOD games? If that's right what happened to take 2 I wonder? (probably got fed up of waiting I bet).

[Parkar]

Originally Posted by peoplessi

OpenGL has failed with their newest revision, and why is that, because they are too afraid to cut some of the old functionality away. That keeps hindering them a lot, in the future if they keep on doing that, it will fade away. That would be a shame, since two proper APIs is always better than having just one of which Microsoft would have "sole" control over.

Considering outside of windows, OpenGL is completely dominant so I doubt it's going anywhere.

Originally Posted by LadiesAndGentlemen

Yea ok maybe you've played the demo at medium settings, but mostly you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. For instance, in all other games, the character shadows are just pathetic little dark pixels drawn under their feet. Crysis is the only game in which the characters and every visible object cast a dynamic shadow not only upon themselves but also on the ground which varies in length and direction depending on infinite light sources. And that's just one of dozens of dozens of things that this game does that no other game can do.

But if you want to believe that DX10 is somehow better because of some vague crap you've read on Microsoft's site, despite there being almost no known functions added to it other than a fancy logo and an assload of marketing, then there's nothing I can do for you.

Please make sure you know what you are talking about before you make a claim in bold. I don't know if there are any games (there may very well even be) out there where every single object casts a dynamic shadow but there is definitely other engines capable of doing that. It's not like Crytek has come up with some magical shadow casting algorithm making their engine superior to all others when it comes to casting shadows.

Also note that it's not necessarily harder to do dynamic lighting in huge out door areas since that usualy means you have a single light souce (can't think of a situation in crysis where you had any other major light sources) while indoors you are likely going to need lightsources in each and every room and the walls will not block the light for free. Overlapping light sources are costly. In other words indoors are a more dificult situation to optimize in this regard.

The thing with outdoors is that you have potentially more resources to handle. It's generaly not more pixels to draw though which is a pretty big factor in todays graphics engines rather then polygon counts which used to be the big obstacle.

[LadiesAndGentlemen]

Originally Posted by Parkar

Also note that it's not necessarily harder to do dynamic lighting in huge out door areas since that usualy means you have a single light souce (can't think of a situation in crysis where you had any other major light sources) while indoors you are likely going to need lightsources in each and every room and the walls will not block the light for free. Overlapping light sources are costly. In other words indoors are a more dificult situation to optimize in this regard.

Now you're just trolling with that ridiculous argument. Even if overlapping took all of your Intel i7 quad core CPU usage, did you consider the ludicrous amount of objects that need to cast their own shadow in open air maps that would do the same? And like I said, that's just one of countless features, such as polybump, dynamic fog, objects that cast shadows on the fog, massive overlapping in interior environments when fighting enemies with firearms and surrounded by different light sources, environmental audio, soft shadows, parallax occlusion, unscripted AI, the most advanced Physics engine ever, particles and ropes that respond to wind and all kinds of other movie quality stuff and they make it work on today's computers. I mean what are you trying to say? That it's nothing special and that anyone could do it? And not only do they have all that stuff but they managed to make it look like the effects were crafted to perfection by artists and make almost every frame of gameplay a wallpaper quality screenshot. It's AMAZING.

Also, the only other game that has dynamic shadows and lighting is Flight Simulator X, and unless you set the rest of the graphics to almost minimum it's barely playable and it looks pretty ugly too, so there you have it.

[vincentdante]

It's funny, everyone I know tells me crysis sucks as well except for the graphics obviously . I just got it myself to test my new rig out with, going to play it later.

Personally I can't wait to see it set to very high with DX10

[Parkar]

Originally Posted by LadiesAndGentlemen

Now you're just trolling with that ridiculous argument. Even if overlapping took all of your Intel i7 quad core CPU usage, did you consider the ludicrous amount of objects that need to cast their own shadow in open air maps that would do the same? And like I said, that's just one of countless features, such as polybump, dynamic fog, objects that cast shadows on the fog, massive overlapping in interior environments when fighting enemies with firearms and surrounded by different light sources, environmental audio, soft shadows, parallax occlusion, unscripted AI, the most advanced Physics engine ever, particles and ropes that respond to wind and all kinds of other movie quality stuff and they make it work on today's computers. I mean what are you trying to say? That it's nothing special and that anyone could do it? And not only do they have all that stuff but they managed to make it look like the effects were crafted to perfection by artists and make almost every frame of gameplay a wallpaper quality screenshot. It's AMAZING.

Also, the only other game that has dynamic shadows and lighting is Flight Simulator X, and unless you set the rest of the graphics to almost minimum it's barely playable and it looks pretty ugly too, so there you have it.

I sounds like you don't know to much about how all this stuff is accomplished. The i7 would have nothing at all to do with the overlapping lights.

Just to make it clear, I was also not disputing your whole argument, if you look carefully all I was questioning was the claim that Crysis was the ONLY game that could do dynamic shadows on everything. Just to name a few that can do dynamic shadows, Doom3, FEAR, UT3(with ini tweaks in mods).

And now you are doing it again with the whole "the most advanced physics engine ever".

And for the record I am of the opinion that Cryengine is one of if not the most capable from a graphics point of view. But that doesn't make all other engine programmers inferior. There is no engine out there that is impressive because of just one feature (Most if not all of them can be found in whitepapers and a lot of the time with source code) but the complete package and how it is all integrated mkaes an engine impressive. Cryengine is no diferent just as the long list of features you just mentioned proves. All of them is done by other engines but few if any do all of them.

Edit: it's also not without it's price the engine can do all it does. It's the only game I have currently had to put to the side until I get my new machine.

[KO Gilligan]

Originally Posted by Parkar

I sounds like you don't know to much about how all this stuff is accomplished. The i7 would have nothing at all to do with the overlapping lights.

Just to make it clear, I was also not disputing your whole argument, if you look carefully all I was questioning was the claim that Crysis was the ONLY game that could do dynamic shadows on everything. Just to name a few that can do dynamic shadows, Doom3, FEAR, UT3(with ini tweaks in mods).

And now you are doing it again with the whole "the most advanced physics engine ever".

And for the record I am of the opinion that Cryengine is one of if not the most capable from a graphics point of view. But that doesn't make all other engine programmers inferior. There is no engine out there that is impressive because of just one feature (Most if not all of them can be found in whitepapers and a lot of the time with source code) but the complete package and how it is all integrated mkaes an engine impressive. Cryengine is no diferent just as the long list of features you just mentioned proves. All of them is done by other engines but few if any do all of them.

Edit: it's also not without it's price the engine can do all it does. It's the only game I have currently had to put to the side until I get my new machine.

What do you think about this sleeper?

The funny thing about Croteam's S3 engine is all the media we see is from a very rough looking printed publication then they scanned the article

I wonder if this is some kind of commerce issue that we can't see Hi-res in game screenies.

http://www.seriouszone.com/cms/articles/48_1.php

[Maruno]

That's funny, I thought this was the Duke Nukem Forever part of the forum...

[KO Gilligan]

Originally Posted by Maruno

That's funny, I thought this was the Duke Nukem Forever part of the forum...

Feel free to steer the ship back on topic anytime, Captain

[froggerdonkey]

DirectX 10?!?!?! ARE YOU MAD? dont give them an excuse to scrap everything and start over again!

[vincentdante]

Back on topic then, wikipedia say's it's DX10 which is very surprising to see it listed even if does turn out to be BS. So I guess we will just have to wait and see.

[Kristian Joensen]

Originally Posted by vincentdante

What are you talking about ladiesandgentalmen? he was talking about Crysis gameplay and AI while your going on about how he couldn't have played it because of the graphics?

Yes your right about the graphics but clearly you didn't read what he said. I applaud you for being on topic though . TBH I don't kbnow what to think of DX10 anymore I might go and research it myself, All I can gather from this thread is that DX10 is easier to get more out of maybe?

Also on that wiki page you guys linked above the publisher for DNF is GOD games? If that's right what happened to take 2 I wonder? (probably got fed up of waiting I bet).

Gather Of Of Developers(GOD Games) was a publisher founded by some development studios(including 3D Realms) which had being a developer friendly publisher as its main goal, for instance they let developers keep their IP. About 2 or so years after its founding, Take Two bought GOD Games.

When Atari(I think they still went by Infogrames back then) sold the DNF publishing rights to Take Two, DNF was formally gonna be published under the GOD Games brand, a brand that has since been discontinued.

What brand Take Two will use for DNF is not known but somehow I doubt it will be GOD Games. Probably 2K or Rockstar. But whatever they chose to do that is something that is of little consequence to either 3DR(I believe George once said he didn't care) or the fans.

[vincentdante]

Ah I see thanks for the info it's nice knowing these things

[Plagman]

Originally Posted by peoplessi

OpenGL has failed with their newest revision, and why is that, because they are too afraid to cut some of the old functionality away. That keeps hindering them a lot, in the future if they keep on doing that, it will fade away. That would be a shame, since two proper APIs is always better than having just one of which Microsoft would have "sole" control over.

Funny you say that, since OpenGL 3.0 is the first revision of the OpenGL specification that introduces a deprecation model. All the functionality that doesn't match modern programmable hardware has been marked as deprecated and isn't available when creating a forward-compatible OpenGL 3.0 context and will be "completely removed from future revisions". (quoting from the spec itself)
Also, OpenGL isn't fading away. It's still number one in anything profesionnal/workstation and it's still there in gaming, no matter what people say. All Blizzard/id/Epic PC titles use OpenGL. 3D graphics on Mac/PS3/iPhone/Linux? OpenGL. OpenGL has always been on par be it feature-wise or performance-wise. (and sometimes better, i.e. DirectX 10 features available when DirectX wasn't even released)
Picking between OpenGL and DirectX is pretty much a trivial matter from a technical point of view and doesn't affect the core design of a 3D graphics engine at all.

[peoplessi]

Yes it is, introducing it differs from actual ground up reworked API. As I said, A lot of CAD programs are moving to D3D. So the ground OpenGL was strong in before, almost the sole API used, is gone. I think that is alarming. I still stand by notion that OpenGL is hindered by their love for backwards compability.

For me, standardized routine(DirectX 10 and beyond) sounds more better, than doing everything via extensions (OpenGL).

http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2008/0...l-30-released/
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../08/11/2135259

[Parkar]

Originally Posted by peoplessi

Yes it is, introducing it differs from actual ground up reworked API. As I said, A lot of CAD programs are moving to D3D. So the ground OpenGL was strong in before, almost the sole API used, is gone. I think that is alarming. I still stand by notion that OpenGL is hindered by their love for backwards compability.

For me, standardized routine(DirectX 10 and beyond) sounds more better, than doing everything via extensions (OpenGL).

http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2008/0...l-30-released/
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?.../08/11/2135259

The use of OpenGL is far wider then just CAD or gaming on windows platforms. On anything other then these two DirectX isn't even trying to compete. In other words OpenGL ain't going anywhere.

[Plagman]

The "bad" OpenGL 3.0 reception was just a local problem due to the fact that some people were waiting for what was previously announced as Longs Peaks and canned later in the process by members of the ARB who didn't see the need of implementing the new object model as the spec laid it out. Longs Peak didn't introduce any new functionality and was still on par with D3D 9 feature-wise, whereas this version of GL3 is on par with Direct3D 10 without requiring any extensions (and is also available on XP); I'm not sure what the deal is with that need for a "ground-up reworked API". OpenGL as it is now totally matches the hardware and the API certainly doesn't cause a performance problem. API-level considerations such as this and "standardized routine" versus extension-based model (which OpenGL 3.0 doesn't require to be on par with DX10) are really trivial as a whole and don't have anything to do with the power and versatility of a graphics API.

Also, you're failing to realize that most of the CAD/pro workstation world is running Linux (and the freelance designer types are using Macs). Windows has _some_ market share, but the vast majority of the workstation market (with customers using products such as NVIDIA Quadro or AMD/ATI FireGL for a handful of them) is held by the Linux realm.

[peoplessi]

You fail to realize that in reality most CAD programs run on top of Windows, the likes of Autodesk software(Win only), SolidWorks, Bentley... So fort. CATIA dropped Unix support too. I haven't checked, but I bet most of Dassault Systemes -softwares have too changed to Windows only.

If OpenGL 3.0 is on the level of DX10, that's great.

Originally Posted by Parkar

The use of OpenGL is far wider then just CAD or gaming on windows platforms. On anything other then these two DirectX isn't even trying to compete. In other words OpenGL ain't going anywhere.

In those said enviroments, more likely it's going to fade away if they don't change the direction. In gaming / CAD, OpenGL less and less used.

Maybe we will get back to topic now as this is sorted?

[fast-1]

I know from certain gamers that openGL is bad with ATI Radeon graphic cards. Might be wrong it's not very good like Nvidia, not really tech savy so don't take my word for it.

[peoplessi]

Originally Posted by fast-1

I know from certain gamers that openGL is bad with ATI Radeon graphic cards. Might be wrong it's not very good like Nvidia, not really tech savy so don't take my word for it.

It used to be so that ATI had better Direct3D drivers and nVidia had better OpenGL drivers. Nowdays the difference in speed from drivers is pretty negblible, but nVidia has better support for OpenGL overall. In games, the difference is neglible.

[Plagman]

peoplessi: Don't forget Autodesk Maya. It's true that some businesses shifted to Windows, but you have to keep in mind that back in the day, 100% of the pro 3D graphics market was owned by SGI/IRIX workstations. Given the inertia these kind of businesses have (really long testing and hardware/software renewal cycles to minimize technical problems which could impede their workflow) the majority still hasn't moved away from a Unix world (pro Linux solutions like RHEL being the usual compromise). Dassault is a substantial player in this industry, but there are definitely plenty of others which sum up for a lot of market share. As for being off-topic, the original topic was kind of boring and you being wrong and me being right makes for a much more enjoyable discussion.

fast-1: ATI traditionally hasn't been very caring for their OpenGL implementation until a few years ago, so OpenGL games would indeed lose to NVIDIA with comparable hardware (or have bugs usually fixed with updated drivers at some point). Now that ATI is out of the Apple field, the next OpenGL gaming milestone for them is Riddick 2 and then Rage. It'll be interesting to see how they fare then.

[peoplessi]

Plagman, of course SGI has sold almost everything they have, and halted development on their primary areas of expertise, MIPS, IRIX. I am well aware of where OpenGL originates. Still, I haven't seen overwhelmingly positive reception for OpenGL 3.0. It's a year later than DX10, and offers the same level of features.

The undeniable fact is that DirectX 10/11/1* and Direct3D is gaining momemtum, and OpenGL is fading.

[Plagman]

As I said before, DX10 level of features was available in OpenGL since november 2006, even before DirectX 10 was officially out and months before the first DX10-compliant title shipped. OpenGL 3.0 just made it core functionality, which is not that different. And now that the wave of "GL3 isn't Longs Peak!" haters has faded a bit, people are overall pretty enthusiastic about the feature-set and the deprecation model.

And my whole point since the beginning of this discussion has been that what you call an "undeniable fact" is far from it in my opinion. My points being:

• OpenGL workstation biz still standing strong
• Linux being the primary platform for visual computing
• every Mac game (Mac gaming is growing slowly, already relatively strong with all Blizzard titles including future ones)
• every iPhone game
• every PS3 game
• still a few PC titles coming (Wolfenstein 2, Riddick 2, Rage, don't forget Epic and Blizzard games)
• I think id Tech 5 has the potential to be a hit and sell licenses like cupcakes. In this case, we'll see a big spike of OpenGL PC gaming
• OpenGL still being the popular API for amateur/indie/cross-platform projects (warsow, emulators, etc)

I think we reached that point where we're just disagreeing for the sake of it, so please admit you're wrong.

[themaniacboy]

Originally Posted by Jiminator

most developers are not interested in spending a lot of effort for a small number of people that can use it. The tech needs to cook for another couple of years. Updating XP with it would certainly help justify the cost.

the best choice is windows 7, though it's still a beta it is much better than vista, and i'm getting tired of XP

[peoplessi]

Plagman, I don't get your point, I said that OpenGL is losing momentum, which is true. Everything has been said in that regard. The amount it being used is not increasing, that was the point, I can't really see what you are arguing about.

Show me those enthusiastic developers. Based on the OpenGL forums, there aren't that many(id basically alone).

[KO Gilligan]

Originally Posted by themaniacboy

the best choice is windows 7, though it's still a beta it is much better than vista, and i'm getting tired of XP

I put Windows 7 in a nice Dual-Core/HD2600pro build for the kids a couple of days ago, and it's been rock solid with everything I throw at it... Both newer and older games. I even used a dirt cheap Foxconn Mboard

Already miles ahead of what Vista was on release day. I hope they don't ruin it by the time I actually buy a copy

[Laokin]

Originally Posted by LadiesAndGentlemen

DX10 isn't some sort of magical box full of fancy graphics. If anything looks different than in DX9, it's because the developers made it that way, which is exactly what they did in Bioshock.

*Ahem* DX10 is a completely different graphics api. First and fore most it supports Shader Model 4. The difference between shader model 2 and 3 are HUGE. Likewise with 1 and 2.

This means they can do a lot more with effects. Also, DX10 is more efficient. Meaning more frames less hardware usage which = more room for even fancier graphics (high poly models, Higher resolution PS effects [normal mapping ect.] bigger maps or more models on screen perhaps.)

The reason why DX10 and DX 9 look so similar is because to this day there isn't one Direct X 10 generation game. They all start as DX9 and as a result get ported to DX10 and they change a few effects. This is why DX10 mode usually garners less fps as well since the game isn't completely built on DX10 code. It's DX9 code ran threw a DX 10 compiler + few new DX 10 code effects (like the FOG in bioshock.)

Thank you very much :-)

[Laokin]

Originally Posted by KO Gilligan

I put Windows 7 in a nice Dual-Core/HD2600pro build for the kids a couple of days ago, and it's been rock solid with everything I throw at it... Both newer and older games. I even used a dirt cheap Foxconn Mboard

Already miles ahead of what Vista was on release day. I hope they don't ruin it by the time I actually buy a copy

This is because windows 7 is vista. Doh! Windows 7 is on the vista kernal. Essentially windows 7 is a re-optimized vista. Aka Service pack 2. They gave it a new name because Vista wasn't selling.

Also, as long as you have next generation hardware vista runs better than xp. Stop reading all the propagated media. If your system is powerful enough to run vista like a computer that runs xp it's gold. What a new OS is not supposed to be more demanding to run?

I seriously don't understand this logic.

I use vista 32 with an E8500, 9800GX2 with 4gb's of ram and a terabyte.

Crysis Warhead set to 'Enthusiast' -- check.

P.S.
Every new feature in windows 7 was cut from vista. How does that saying go? Cutting is shipping.... or something like that

[Laokin]

Originally Posted by Plagman

As I said before, DX10 level of features was available in OpenGL since november 2006, even before DirectX 10 was officially out and months before the first DX10-compliant title shipped. OpenGL 3.0 just made it core functionality, which is not that different. And now that the wave of "GL3 isn't Longs Peak!" haters has faded a bit, people are overall pretty enthusiastic about the feature-set and the deprecation model.

And my whole point since the beginning of this discussion has been that what you call an "undeniable fact" is far from it in my opinion. My points being:

• OpenGL workstation biz still standing strong
• Linux being the primary platform for visual computing
• every Mac game (Mac gaming is growing slowly, already relatively strong with all Blizzard titles including future ones)
• every iPhone game
• every PS3 game
• still a few PC titles coming (Wolfenstein 2, Riddick 2, Rage, don't forget Epic and Blizzard games)
• I think id Tech 5 has the potential to be a hit and sell licenses like cupcakes. In this case, we'll see a big spike of OpenGL PC gaming
• OpenGL still being the popular API for amateur/indie/cross-platform projects (warsow, emulators, etc)

I think we reached that point where we're just disagreeing for the sake of it, so please admit you're wrong.

Epic uses Direct 3D as well as blizzard. Blizzard uses Direct Draw and Direct 3D. Epic always had support for OpenGL but it was always "experimental" only. iD is the openGL developer. Quake always ran better and preferred openGL. Why is this? Because Carmack prefers Apple.

There is no use for openGL in the indie market either. Sounds like your just making stuff up now. Emulators are illgal, so they don't count. Crossplatform games? Yeah because xbox uses openGL.

OpenGL is used for sony game. This is also another reason on top of the cell that developers don't wish to bother with the ps3. When they write code for PC they usually use Direct X these days. Why? Because to port to 360 all you have to really do is run it through a different compiler.

Ps3 has to be heavily modified and depending on the game engine bring up support for openGL. This is the main reason Orange Box doesn't run well on ps3.

Also "[*]Linux being the primary platform for visual computing."

What world are you living in? Because seriously.... I never met a person who chooses to use Linux for anything other than a dedicated server. If you take the average amount of computers in the USA and assigned %'s to the operating systems they would probably go something like this...

Microsoft Windows (9x,2000,XP and Vista) 96%
Apple OSX 2%
Linux 1.5%
Unix .5%

You realize there are hundres of thousands of office buildings in this country. All have thousands of computers in them. Virtually all of them Microsoft?

As much as it's sad to see, but openGL won't be around much longer. Apple will come out with their own API for things like Ipods and Iphones, and sony will probably end up using Direct X in the long run, just like the next Microsoft console will have blue ray player.... They have to unless a new format that some how surpasses Multi layer BR discs with a 1tb maximum capacity... Oh did I mention the 1TB BR disc is backwards compatible to very first blue ray players? Google it.

Oh snap. It's evolution broham... nothing personal.

[LadiesAndGentlemen]

Originally Posted by Laokin

I use vista 32

And you're proud of that?

[Plagman]

*sigh*
First of all, all Epic and Blizzard PC games support OpenGL and it's not "experimental"; they're sold on Mac. (with the exception of UT3 still being ported)

Then, a ton of indie games are based on open-source id technology or custom OpenGL engines. (a non-exhaustive list: Warsow, Nexuiz, Savage, Savage 2, Cube, Sauerbraten, Alien Arena, OpenArena, Tremulous, Urban Terror, and lots of others). And for the cross-platform part I meant Linux, BSD, Mac kind of platforms. I won't bother replying to the "Emulators are illgal, so they don't count" comment.

That statement: "This is the main reason Orange Box doesn't run well on ps3" has no basis in reality (I'll gladly accept a link to an official statement on the matter to prove me wrong, though). As I said before the graphics API is a _trivial_ element when it comes to performance or engineering time. The PS3 platform is known to be trickier to develop for, and not because of OpenGL.

I'm no sure you understood what I called "visual computing". Think Tesla/Quadro Plex users. And yeah, those are pretty much dedicated servers.

[Frift]

u only have to read to the part "Because Carmack prefers Apple." and one should know that this guy has no clue at all...
pls dont write anymore bs anywhere, ppl might believe ur "lies".

[helious]

Originally Posted by Frift

u only have to read to the part "Because Carmack prefers Apple." and one should know that this guy has no clue at all...
pls dont write anymore bs anywhere, ppl might believe ur "lies".

Well, he is right.

Carmack does prefer apple.
Most ID games, are also presented on mac first..

[Joe Siegler]

We've gone so far off topic here, that I don't think you can even see the track you fell off of some time back in the thread.

This does't have anything to do with DNF here.

[2012PL]

Hi there..

my question is .. how advanced will graphic be? Kind of Crysis like? or we can say that:"graphics are not as much important as gameplay" ?

[Minty]

http://www.3drealms.com/duke4/images..._1680x1050.jpg that advanced.

[Joe Siegler]

Originally Posted by 2012PL

Hi there..

my question is .. how advanced will graphic be? Kind of Crysis like? or we can say that:"graphics are not as much important as gameplay" ?

THe game will be fun. It will look great. Don't worry about the details - you'll hurt yourself doing so.

[Psyrgery]

Originally Posted by Joe Siegler

THe game will be fun. It will look great. Don't worry about the details - you'll hurt yourself doing so.

CONFIRMED! Duke Nukem Forever will be FUN!

Well, enough kidding. That's what I wanted to hear from somebody who has got to see the game (I suppose). Not that "This game will break your graphic card appart with pure graphic awesomeness!".

I just wanted to know it'll be fun, and I'm not being ironic whatsoever. I'm fed up with graphics-card eating games, being all of them boring to death. I just want Duke, and to have fun playing a game of him, nothing more.

However, now I'm more impatient than before

God, how much more will we have to wait until getting to play the game!

[2012PL]

the reason why i asked that question is that DNF should be about FUN in the first place... but it won't hurt if ti will have really good graphics too :]

[Psyrgery]

Originally Posted by 2012PL

the reason why i asked that question is that DNF should be about FUN in the first place... but it won't hurt if ti will have really good graphics too :]

Well, I'm currently using the Christmas gift Wallpaper, and the graphics look helluva cool imho.

The Pigcop looks sweet as hell, one friend of mine after having watched the wallpaper said: "Dude, that shit looks more like a Were-Pig instead of a Pigcop, what a huge mass of piggy muscles!"

[prophecy holder]

Looks like another Doom 3 clone from that one trailer. I think it was jace hall or something like that. It just didn't look...Duke Nukem Forever 2001 (best imo).