Doom 3... I don't like it

[Gomce]

Okay, IMO Doom3 is a flop, it's so 2001-2002 game not 2004.
FAR cry is a lot more interesting game.
+ I don't see eyecandy that can impress in this game to justify the high system requirements.

With the exception of Quake 1 seems I hardly like any game carmack did. I didn't like Doom 1 and I don't like this too. It's plain and simply boring. Indoor levels and corridors...hmm AVP was scarier! This game isn't optimized at all.

- Levels are very plain
- object interaction, also outdated, you hardly interact with objects
- corpses dissapear, yeah, welcome to 1999
- AI, 1999...
..
The only thing good about this game is how the people are modeled, but nothing extremely special here too...I'm not impressed. Now I regret ordering the MSI 6800Ultra to replace my 9800XT.

This game isn't unique.

MaxPayne was IMO unique, Far Cry was unique...Doom 3 is simply outdated, like DieKatana or whatever that game was (also a Carmack Flop if I remember right).

.
my specs:
3000+ OC to 2150 mhz
9800 XT
2 x 17" LCD, Samsung 174T
2 x 512 Kingmax OC, ddr500
2 x 80 GB Maxtor in Sata Raid 0
Chieftec case with 350W Psu

played doom3 on 1280 x 1024, medium settings

 

[Schadenfroh]

my only complaint is the sound, i can see removing to corpses to save system resources, some stay as long as you dont blast them into chunky kibbles.

 

[Gomce]

I like to play with dead corpses on FarCry. It's fun...

 

[BlueWeasel]

Well, as far as image quality goes, D3 is the best game I've seen so far. Granted, I've not played Far Cry, and this is the first new game I've bought since Call of Duty and Max Payne 2 around Christmas last year.

I'm playing at 800x600 with medium settings, and it still looks awesome. I can only imagine what it looks like at 1600x1200 with Ultra settings on a pimped out system and a 6800U. For me, speed always takes precedence over eye candy, and I've got D3 heavily tweaked, and it still looks great to me.

I'm only a few levels into it, but the game play is starting to get repetitive. The atmosphere is great, but I tend to enjoy games with large open environments. I'm sure I'll stay with it to the end, but I don't think about D3 at work all day like I have with other games.

 

[oLLie]

I don't think Carmack had anything to do with Daikatana. As for the topic of this thread, I dunno since I don't have Doom 3.

Ollie

 

[ArmchairAthlete]

Well suit yourself, I've really been enjoying the game.

EDIT: There's a mod to take care of corpses disappearing if you don't like that.

 

[DefRef]

The fact that this guy doesn't know who's responsible for Daikatana (hint: not Carmack) and thinks the levels aren't detailed (try opening your eyes) while starting ANOTHER thread to crap on D3 says it all: NOTHING!

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: DefRef
The fact that this guy doesn't know who's responsible for Daikatana (hint: not Carmack) and thinks the levels aren't detailed (try opening your eyes) while starting ANOTHER thread to crap on D3 says it all: NOTHING!

romero's elite robot frogs were tuff

 

[Todd33]

I'm finding Doom 3 to be a bit of a bore. It looks 2004, but it plays like 2001. Even Half-Life 1 and Halo had more to offer in game play. I also think Far Cry looked and played better. IMO.

 

[rainypickles]

Originally posted by: Todd33
It looks 2004, but it plays like 2001.

totally true. bump mapping alone makes everything looks nice.

 

[Jigglelicious]

You mean the AI is like 1996. The AI in both Unreal and Half Life are far superior to anything i've seen in Doom3, and those were released in 1998!

 

[Firus]

I'm very displeased with all the hype and then, yes it is just a 2001 style game. As far as cool and fun go, Painkiller has much better physics and it was really fun to play with the corpses. I fell into the hype and bought it and now I kinda regret it. It will look good on my shelf next to Shadowbane DOAC and other games I bought and played for a month.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Jigglelicious
You mean the AI is like 1996. The AI in both Unreal and Half Life are far superior to anything i've seen in Doom3, and those were released in 1998!

If I recall something I read correctly, the Grunt AI in Half Life couldn't move and shoot at the same time.
Not advanced really, but it was well used and covered up. The Grunts acted like they had vague intelligence, and they masked the lack of shoot/move quite well.

 

[HostVisions]

I'm finding it more enjoyable now that I've gotten a bit deeper in the game. Give it some time. I'm midway through Delta Labs. Actually got stuck once for a brief period at that loader/wall of boxes section. Even had to cheat once and I'm playing it on normal.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Gomce
I like to play with dead corpses on FarCry. It's fun...

The human corpses stay if you don't blow them up. The demons are the ones that burn away.

 

[Looney]

So what, the game's not for you. What game out there satisfies 100% of everybody who plays it? Are you expecting a pat on your back because you don't find it enjoyable?

 

[Hadsus]

As far as Doom 3 playing like an old game.....well, they are all pretty much fundamentally the same. Kill the enemy with a one person party (well, some use more) using guns, rifles or other fun armaments....may be demons, may be soldiers, maybe whatever. It's not rocket science and it's not complicated. None of them are. For me, what makes or breaks an FPS is atmosphere. Is it interesting? Is it scary? For example, I liked the original SoF alot. You went all over the world and the game dripped with atmosphere. No One Lives Forever....same thing. Doom 3 is like that too. Flipping between flashlight and weapon in a dark, confined space filled with un-Godly creatures. That's atmosphere and plenty of it. Far Cry.....meh. No atmosphere. It's more peek-a-boo I see you.....bang bang bang bang bang. Standard FPS with pretty graphics. Painkiller.......Serious Sam set in a dark, dreary atmosphere. Tedious. Very few FPSs are as scary as Doom 3 and that alone makes it worthwhile.

 

[gcbrowni]

I just posted this at another site. I think maybe I would also comment about the middle game being repetitive and thinking "Gee, I wonder where the Imp will materalize when I pick up that med pack.". It's not good the player is thinking about the meta-game instead of the game itself.

===================

I've seen quite a few threads on several sites praising Doom3, and a couple of threads saying it 'sucks.' This is my own view.

Doom3 does not suck, but it is also not the end-all and be-all of FPS gaming, as the !!!!!!s seem to think. The best way to describe Doom3 is 'It's Doom, with graphical updates.'

I bought the game at 10:30am the day it was released and finished it Sunday, thanks to my wife and kids being away for the week, playing mostly in ethe evenings. I played it on an AMD64 3000 with 1gig and a 9800 pro/256. I generally don't play co-op or multiplayer, as a general rule of thumb. I'm going to compare the game to Far Cry in some places, since I think Far Cry still holds the FPS crown.

My initial experiences were amazing. I swear to you, I had to get up from the game several times; it was just too intense. The tension was amazing. I've driven 85mph through the Pennsylvania Turnpike at night, in the mountains, in a thunderstorm. The game compared to that; my chest was tight. Looking back, I think some it was due to the chaotic radio chatter from my fellow marines. I think that added immensly to the experience.

The next night the tension wasn't as high (the chatter dropped off?) and I setteled in to things. By the end of the night I started to feel a little disappointed. That feeling was reinforced over the next few days. Somehow, I think having a shotgun made me more tense; I knew it gave me a chance and somehow that was worse.

What Doom3 gets right
The graphics are amazing, and so is the sound. I liked the PDA's, e-mail, and external website references. In fact, MORE e-mail and logs would have been great. I don't think I would have minded having to search through more entries to find the 'important' ones. The storeyline is better than the vast majority of games (including Far Cry) and is developed well. I liked the 'multimedia' way the story was developed also; using several sources to explain and develop what was going on.

What Doom3 could be better at
The level design is linear, and today I don't think you can make a great game with linear levels. Some of this may be due to the 'enclosed' nature of the levels, but large portions of Far Cry were enclosed also, and I didn't get the felling they were linear. I'm not sure why. Things need to be more open-ended. The poor enemy AI is a result of the level design, I think. The enclosed hallways makes flanking hard. I was disappointed with the way enemies spawned as well. A person-sized panel drops away and a monster jumps out, or you step on an obvious trigger and three guys teleport in; that just feels cheap to me for some reason. The game is too dark. Now, I don't tropical Far Cry light levels on Mars, but there needs to be enough light to see the pretty expoding bodies. I was also not happy with supply placement. Finding something in a locked cabinet is fine, but finidng medpacks and ammo in corners in hallways just didn't sit right with me, especially in Hell. Geez, you'd think the Big Red Guy would send out a couple of imps to clean the things up and dump them in the lava so some random marine couldn't pick them up. Maybe more of finding the supplies on the bodies of dead marines would of been better. Several other games have done this and I think it works better. I was also not too happy with the generic feeling of the rooms and hallways, and the objects in them. It didn't feel right; maybe I was looking for more object interaction, I don't know. I'm pretty sure the replay value is hurt by the linear level design and the enemy-AI issues; I can't see myself replaying this the way I did Far Cry.

Doom3 feels like a Survival-horror FPS; Resident-evil via a FPS view. I might characterize Far Cry as a Strategic FPS, I think.

Doom3 looks and sounds great, and plays just like the origional Doom. That's its greatest strength and its greatest weakness. IMHO, Far Cry has set the gameplay bar very high, and Doom3s gameplay just doesn't measure up.

 

[xSkyDrAx]

I just don't get you people who are crapping on Doom 3. Wake up, Doom 3 is a REMAKE of Doom 1. What were you expecting?? Running around the black mesa complex/some island? Looks like you guys bought into the hype and didn't bother to see what the game was about? Were you surprised when you found out that it was a corridor crawl with little to no light? Are you surprised that the gameplay is similar to Doom 1? Doom 3 is NOT one of those games with the tons of puzzles and objectives and if they bought the game because they thought it was, it's their own damn fault for not knowing what they're getting into. Carmack did exactly what he INTENDED to do so I don't think the game is a flop. And anyone who says the textures are bland needs a vision check. All this b!tching about how the game flopped only makes me laugh at all the people who bought into the hype and the hype alone and bought the game as well as new hardware to play it and only to find that it's not what they're expecting because they didn't bother to look up on the game.

 

[Balt]

I liked DOOM and DOOM2, but DOOM3... I can't stand it. I've tried really hard to get into the game but it just isn't happening.

Here's what I don't like about it:

The engine feels awkward. Movement isn't smooth in the least. Things as simple as jumping and strafing seem horribly inferior to all other ID-based engines. This isn't due to system performance, because the system I've been playing it on is excellent.

The shotgun is the worst piece of crap to ever hit any game. You shoot an enemy from five feet away and half of the spread will miss because the pellets disperse so much. You literally have to run right up to their face and blast them to do any damage. The shotgun in DOOM/DOOM2 was a workhorse, this is a POS. And there is no weapon that seems to replace it as a workhorse.

The "AI" is horrible. Taking one step to the left to stand behind an explosive barrel to dodge my fire does not give me the sense that you are an intelligent enemy.

The maps... mierda. Repetitive hallways that all look the same. Then you finally reach an objective only to have to backtrack to some other hallway to find a PDA for security clearance. Here's an idea: why doesn't the sarge constantly barking orders give me clearance to all of the areas? It just makes the game tiresome to have to backtrack all the time. Especially when everything looks the same.

This I like about the game:

It looks nice.


Just one man's opinion, but I'm disappointed. Maybe the game will get better, but I don't know if I can keep playing long enough to find out.

 

[Howard]

http://ducttape.glenmurphy.com/

 

[kazeakuma]

I started playing Doom 3 a couple of days ago. Impressive at first, I liked checking the complex out before all hell breaks loose, it was fun to explore. The atmosphere and tension at the beginning is great, but doesn't seem to hold out long. My biggest problem with Doom 3, would have to be it's so PREDICTABLE. It's bad when you walk into a room, and know if you walk over there, trigger enemy. Pick that up, trigger enemy. Often I blow away the corpses on the ground that are supposed to rise up and scare you well before I should. AI is average at best. Even zombie marines who duck behind cover seem to rise up at the same interval every time. Sort of like Duck, 1,2,3,4, Stand & Shoot, Duck, 1,2,3,4, etc.

I'm still going to finish it, but it's not up there with the FPS classics. AvP2 scared me more as the marine and kept the tension going. I'm kinda over the scariness and it's just a matter of choosing the right weapon to take enemies down.

 

[Drayvn]

What i think is that the atmosphere, the tension, the scary parts, all start to fade away after a while since u get used to it, nothing changes, yes they are great, but since there is no variation it doesnt hold out for long, and since its 20 hours long its gonna really have to come up with new things.

One way to think of this is, could u watch a 20 hour scary movie and still be frightened at the end, or will u have just gotten used to it, because i know i would have, i would have predicted what eill happen round that next corner...

Also i dont like it the way ppl are saying u just believed the hype... Do u mean the hype that iD said, great graphics (true) great sound (well so so) great physics (needs improving) and everything goes downhill from there, and this is what iD said that Doom 3 will be about...

But instead its just Doom with updated graphics, well done to JC, but he only made the graphics engine, so its not him we need to blame for the lack of gameplay. For some reason, every sequel i have seen which doesnt improve on gameplay (like better controls, better AI, better everything really) fails to be impressive, even with good graphics.

There are more games that i can think of that have less than great graphics with amazing gameplay than i have seen amazing graphics and below average gameplay.

Also i believe what this one guy said in another forum, when a new game comes out with graphics like Doom 3, or better, it would have been forgotten More games survive on its gameplay than graphics nowadays

 

[KevinH]

The AI is definitely horrendous. The scare factor has all but disappeared a few hours into the game. I just finished it and the last half began to get tedious.

Demon spawns in...some marine zombies jump you from the back. Boo! Every scare tactic was a variation of this. Cheap thrills at first. Ambience is amazing. Read Jakub's review over at www.firingsquad.com. Hit's the nail RIGHT on the head. Some people may have fun with this but you can NOt tell me the action is any more than this.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

How many damned threads do we need on the SAME EXACT TOPIC? So you don't like D3? Post it in one of the existing threads, or cry me a river . . .