doom 3 = garbage

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

thejackal1

Senior member
Mar 28, 2002
884
0
0
Originally posted by: bootymac
Yeah, I totally agree with the OP. Get's pretty repetitive after a while. And the flashlight thing, that was the first thing I didn't like :p Anyhow, I couldn't last 1 hour playing that game. Never bothered saving and as soon as I died, I shot up UT2k4 :D

Well, good thing I didn't spend any $.

Pirate? Aye Matey!
 

dennisjai215

Banned
Apr 16, 2004
1,261
0
0
game play is too slow for my liking.. boring.. everything gets repeated.. i dont even need to use the flashlgiht i know every corner i run or any small tight spot will have a monster so i just shoot in it and i SEE THE BLOOD fly out.. HOW THE FVCK do you see BLOOD IN THE DARKNESS? DOES IT GLOW? nah doubt it.. it just sucks
 

CTrain

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2001
4,940
0
0
I actually finished the game and it was OK.
The graphics is way superior than any games out right now.
While Far Cry and UT2004 graphics are good....its just kinda(how can I word it) cartoonished or theres not a solid feel to it.

While so many people argued that "well, its dark and meant to be played that way"
Id could have easily made it more fun by maybe switching levels a little bit.
You know like dark one part and maybe some light in another part.
The most annoying thing was spending the whole game playing Alpha/Delta Labs...WTF.
How about some more levels in Hell ?? Or maybe some levels outside of all the damm the Alpha Labs ??

What would be fun is if 3DRealms licensed the engine and make a Duke Nukem game out of it. It would sell like hotcakes.
Serious Sam 2 was 10x funner to play. Bring me Serious Sam 3..
 

Booster

Diamond Member
May 4, 2002
4,380
0
0
IMO, the Doom 3 game is very much like Aliens vs Predator 2, only with better graphics, but less scary and less interesting. They copied pretty much everything - reloading weapons, reading PDAs and operating computers and machinery, as well as darkness, and scary sounds. That fireball throwing creature, for example, makes exact same sound as an alien appearing in AVP2. I didn't expect ID go that low, why on earth couldn't they not copy that garbage and stupid mistakes of AVP2?

So yes, the game does suck. I haven't played a single game since 2001 (when I went through the AVP2), now I decided to try to game again - and WTF, it's the same frigging AVP2! I hate too many monsters appearing out of nowhere out of circles, this is really annoying and stupid, I'd rather prefer them to be real and actually exist on that level beforehand, as in reality, and the fact that they disappear when killed.

But... the game can actually be funny. Search for the 'fight club' mod when all you got are your fists and flashlight, that's when real fun begins.

I did the game entering 'god' and 'give all' in a few hours, I have to confess I'm not using latest hardware here (only a 9600), but I'm sure I got adequate perception of the gameplay.
 

yhelothar

Lifer
Dec 11, 2002
18,409
39
91
I wonder what monitors people are using who says doom3 is dark... honestly, it was fine on my 21" superbright FD Trinitron. I hardly used my flashlight.
 

ucdbiendog

Platinum Member
Sep 22, 2001
2,468
0
0
youre an idiot. end of story, go black to playing solitaire where you wont get scared.
peace
 

user1234

Banned
Jul 11, 2004
2,428
0
0
Originally posted by: Evadman
It is the same as Doom2 but darker, with better graphics. I don't like dark, but hey, did you expect hell to be bright and shiney?


I thought hell was glowing bright red, kind of like a lava soup
 

vegetation

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2001
4,270
2
0
Didn't like it at all. Doom2 was much better, heck I even went back to playing it after one round of doom3. Even though the graphics are primitive, it was more fun. Just another proof supporting how great graphics in a game means nothing in itself.

 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
without an uber video card the game sorta falls flat. you need the visuals to be top notch for decent atmosphere. still, its pretty repetitive.
 

dethman

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
10,263
3
76
far too annoying a game for me. walking around just waiting for silly monsters to jump out at you. far cry was much more fun. at least that required some strategy.
 

user1234

Banned
Jul 11, 2004
2,428
0
0
check out the doom 3 vs far cry thread. I agree doom 3 was a disapointment, I got bored by it within half an hour, but I still keep playing... maybe it will get better, but I can't spend more than half an hour on it at a time. One thing I will admit, the game is very scary, but it's like a cheesy horror flick using all the cheap tricks to scare you, but just like in the movies, to be considered a good game it should have had something more than repetetive closet monsters. I also agree with the poster that said it's very much like AVP2 - that game was scary too. The best thing about doom 3 is all the future games which will be based on this engine which I'm sure some of them will be really good.
 

konakona

Diamond Member
May 6, 2004
6,285
1
0
Or how about Far Cry, a game with such a horrible ending that the last level just throws you in the middle of a volcano with 20 enemies armed with rocket launchers powerful enough that the splash damaged from just 2 rockets kills you?
i couldnt agree more. the game was average at best in my experience.

OP, i thought you were THE ONE! cant you just see the codes just by looking at the screen? :p

There are no monsters. Then you'll see, that it is not the monsters that come out, it is only yourself.
 

konakona

Diamond Member
May 6, 2004
6,285
1
0
Originally posted by: user1234
the last level in far cry is indeed very chalenging, but far from impossible. Actually the hardest fight is against kruger (the boss fight), the last fight in the volcano is not too bad - check out the game guide for tips - http://www.gamespot.com/features/6094321/index.html

kruger was rather easy for me, the one when you open the door at that huge valley with that broken bridge was pretty tough (didnt pick up sniper rifle)
 

user1234

Banned
Jul 11, 2004
2,428
0
0
Originally posted by: VanillaH
Originally posted by: user1234
the last level in far cry is indeed very chalenging, but far from impossible. Actually the hardest fight is against kruger (the boss fight), the last fight in the volcano is not too bad - check out the game guide for tips - http://www.gamespot.com/features/6094321/index.html

kruger was rather easy for me, the one when you open the door at that huge valley with that broken bridge was pretty tough (didnt pick up sniper rifle)


there is actually a way to go back inside to the armory during the fight - all you have to do is push a chair or crate under the door so it doesn't close behind you..... this is another example of the complete freedom far cry gives you to come up with unique strategies to out smart your enemies.
 

I started playing Quake 2 again last night. I think it's a better game than Doom 3.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I'm playing through it now. I'm a few hours in. My impressions:

1) It runs like crap. 2500+ cpu, 512 ram, GF 3 ti 200 on minimum settings (I mean absolutely everything turned off at 640X4800) it's OK, but still gets slow downs. Before you make fun of my system, this sytem played Far Cry at a faster setting and the net result was that Far Cry offered much better graphics, with wide open environments.

2) The game is too fvcking dark. I've never had to play an FPS game in the past where I'm spending 1/3 of my time walking around with a flashlight, then switching to a weapon when I need to. This would be novel if used a little, but it is simply tedious now.

3) It's really no longer scary - just annoying - that the monsters keep popping out of impossible-to-see closets from behind me. Really silly.

4) The environment is not interactive. You can't even shoot out monitor screens for frig's sake. Even sh*ty FPS games have had that basic funtionality for years.

5) I like how the interaction with computers works, and how the mouse becomes a mouse on the terminal that you're using. Dito for locked cabinets.

Basically the game is, as I always predicted it would be, a bad game with maybe a good engine. We won't know if the engine is worth having waited for until somebody with the ability to design a good game takes it and does something with it. Idsoftware hasn't been able to make a good game in years, because they bring nothing to the table that they hadn't brought to the table with Doom 1. This solidifies my stance that they are an engine shop and that their _games_ are crap. I'm glad I didn't pay for this game. I'll finish it, but I get bored after about 15 min playing.

Oh yeah before I stop, not that I'll ever play this in multi, but 4 people to a level? Pitiful. Jon Carmack should spend more time building that rocket and forget the game industry. I would suspect that only the most diehard hardcore fanbois would play this through, and play far cry through, and consider this better. FC is hands down, and by a long, long shot (not that Doom3 would know anything about shooting at distance, because the engine can't handle large rooms for sh*t), a superior game.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,677
6,250
126
Never expected much from Doom3, so I didn't rush out and get it. From what I've heard(good and bad) it's pretty much what I expeced, a Tech Demo. Maybe when I see it in some Bargain Bin somewhere I'll get it.
 

DurocShark

Lifer
Apr 18, 2001
15,708
5
56
I'm glad I didn't buy it. I nearly did. Then I got to play it at a friend's. 20 minutes later I was bored.

The original Quake was much more playable.
 

Rent

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2000
7,127
1
81
Oh wait, I thought thNEOone said all games are a waste of time? And now you don't like Doom3?

Boohoo.

 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
1) It runs like crap. 2500+ cpu, 512 ram, GF 3 ti 200 on minimum settings (I mean absolutely everything turned off at 640X4800) it's OK, but still gets slow downs. Before you make fun of my system, this sytem played Far Cry at a faster setting and the net result was that Far Cry offered much better graphics, with wide open environments.

well i guess u can say that far cry can more easily look good on low end cards, but d3 beats far cry pretty well once u get into the high end.
 

theNEOone

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2001
5,745
4
81
Originally posted by: Rent
Oh wait, I thought thNEOone said all games are a waste of time? And now you don't like Doom3?

Boohoo.
christ almighty. it amazes me how people can remember silly little threads from months prior. what's more, you remembered my opinions from that thread.

edit: i can't even find the thread, how long ago was it?!?!


=|
 

Judgement

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
3,815
0
0
I've never even played doom3, or doom2, and I've never looked at any screenshots.


But in my drunken state I can conclude from your review that the game developers deserve to lick a gay mans ass.