SoulAssassin
Diamond Member
- Feb 1, 2001
- 6,135
- 2
- 0
The game is great for about an hour, then it becomes very predictable, repetitive, and annoying.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 82,854
- 17,365
- 136
Looks like everyone already said it.
Doom 3 is fun for the first level or two. Then you realize its not going to get genuinely scary (as opposed to AvP 2), and you will be doing the EXACT SAME THING for each level of the game.
Except the end. The last level where you're in Hell was pretty cool, but the horrible action, annoyingly simple enemies, rotten level design and overused datapad sequences will probably make you quit long before you get there.
Far Cry was better looking & had more frequent (and better) scares, the enemies used their brains once in a while, and the action was good from start to finish. The acting was even cheesier than Doom 3, but anyone who will play a video game for 20 hours just because of the acting probably needs to go read a book once in a while.
FEAR was all the best things that Doom 3 and Far Cry and AvP 2 had to offer with a much more engaging storyline. The only problem with FEAR is by the time you get through Perseus Mandate you will be longing for something new.
The only game I can think of with better action than Far Cry or FEAR is Serious Sam 1st & 2nd Encounter. And a lot of people dont like that type of action, so you will probably go back to other classics like No One Lives Forever and Alien Vs Predator.
STALKER should not be compared to any of those games. If you absolutely have to compare it to something, look at Deus Ex or System Shock 2.
EDIT:
Rather than bump this just to hate some more, I will restrict my hate to the current post.
Most places gave the game a good review. I suspect they may have been bribed.
This is one of the few groups who gave it a low score: 3/5.
With the release of Doom 3 this week, one of the most anticipated games in the history of the world saw the end of a massive five-year development cycle. Why have hordes of gamers, both casual and "hardcore", been waiting so long with so much hope for this title? The answer lies back in 1994, when the original Doom was released, initially as shareware over modem-based computer bulletin board systems and ultimately ending up on store shelves. The empire that Doom built became the empire that is iD, so it's of crucial importance at this point in gaming history, to remember why exactly it was that Doom was so impressive. It is my goal to show just how poorly this new incarnation lives up to its predecessors.
Doom had graphics that were unheard of at the time, presenting the first-person perspective in a way that seemed more engaging than previous efforts. True, Wolfenstein 3D predates Doom by two years, but not only did it lack the market permeation that Doom saw, the gameplay was significantly slower, and altogether different than the experience Doom provided. It was that experience that kept the franchise alive not only through two actual sequels (Doom II: Hell on Earth and Final Doom) but also any number of repacks offering only a few new levels or minor modifications (Such as Ultimate Doom).
So, after taking Doom to the next logical level, true 3d, with the Quake series, iD went "back to the lab" for five years and sequestered themselves away, promising that their next title, Doom 3, would be a true successor to the series. And people believed. And waited. And waited. Waited for a game that not only promised to offer unprecedented levels of realism in terms of visuals, but for a game they hoped would provide the same fresh, new experience that Doom had in 1994.
This is not that game.
Undeniably, the graphics and sound are unbelievable. You've undoubtedly seen the endless screenshots and gameplay movies at this point. Even on a pretty modest system, Doom 3 has a distinct look that's both gritty and realistic, to the point of seeming like a pre-rendered movie in places. However, ingenuity is where Doom 3 falls flat on its face.
The gameplay here is at least 5 years out of date. "Emergent Gameplay", that is, the idea of non-scripted events that just happen as a result of world complexity, are nowhere to be found here. Instead, expect doors that open as soon as you have walked passed them, lights that darken as soon as you've picked up an ammo belt, and all the other scripted events that haven't seemed original since, well, since Doom.
Is it fair to come down so hard on a game for being a copy of itself? That's an interesting question, but, sadly, one that doesn't really apply - one of the main features that gave Doom its longevity after players had killed every demon themselves was a cooperative multiplayer mode that let a team of marines work through the single player game in unison. That would have worked perfectly in this game, but iD elected to leave the co-op play out. Perhaps they knew that a user-made modification to allow co-op was one of the first things that would be developed, but if that's the case, I say to them, "Shame on you!" Any game, but especially one with a $54.99 price tag, should be complete out of box, and it really is my opinion that Doom 3 without cooperative multiplayer represents an incomplete product. It should come as no surprise that one of the "exclusive features" being hyped for the Xbox version is co-op.
In fact, the multiplayer modes in general are extremely lackluster. The official server only supports 4 players at once, which strikes me as completely ludicrous. An iD representative was quoted several days before release on the topic, citing the large overhead of the engine as a reason that most servers wouldn't be able to handle more than 4 people without chugging, but I think that has to be false ñ this is the same technology that Ravensoft is going to use to bring use Quake IV, and you can be very sure that that game will feature 32 player arenas if not more.
I should, at this point, take the time to mention that just as all the features from the original Doom have not made the transition to this new game, there are, in fact, a few gameplay mechanics in Doom 3 that the earlier games did not have: a flashlight, which looks and works suspiciously like Half-Life's flashlight, as well as health stations that bring the health and HEV stations from Half-Life to mind. The monsters show a strong influence from games like Undying and Silent Hill. Oh yeah, and you can look up and down this time, just like every other FPS. My point, of course, being, that in addition to being influenced by their own earlier projects, iD has ripped off pretty much every successful FPS since Doom in one way or another, and worked those elements into Doom 3 with varying degrees of success.
Another thing that really bothered me is that while there are some Deus Ex like narrative elements in the form of PDAs that you find containing video discs and email, sometimes these mechanics actually work to distance the player from the game. Twice within the first 4 hours of Doom 3, I received an in-game email with a web address on it, requiring me to save, exit the system, launch a browser, and then go back into Doom and sit though that long initial load again seemingly needlessly.
While the levels look very nice, they don't exactly hold together as cohesive environments. iD must have spent a lot of time modeling pipes for this game: in fact, it would seem to me that they must have had a department of artists working round the clock all five years doing nothing but producing pipe-related assets. Seems everywhere you look, there's a giant pipe with sixteen smaller pipes coming out of it. What are all these pipes carrying? They're not labeled "hot water" or anything like the pipes in Half-Life. Sure, they add a sense of.... Something..... but it's hard to say just exactly what. And the overall layout of the base is enough to give MC Escher a headache: you don't think about it too much as you fly from room to room, but when you realize that you've been to nine floors and only seen 1 bathroom but 3 kitchens, something is amiss. Looking at the maps in the official Prima guide didn't help much, either: it made the environment more accessible, but it still doesn't really feel like anything that would actually be constructed (although those of you familiar with William Gibson's book Neuromancer may find a striking similarity between the Martian base in Doom and Gibson's descriptions of the Straylight facility).
All in all, there isn't much else to say about Doom 3. Graphically, we've defiantly reached yet another milestone in the history of video games, but that's something we do every few months anyway. In terms of gameplay, the Serious Sam games remain at the top of my list of Doom ñ clones: even though the graphics pale in comparison to Doom 3, the games are still more fun, and I believe the same can be said for Painkiller. And if you're looking for a fun, cohesive singleplayer FPS with gorgeous graphics and decent multiplayer to boot, you don't have to look any further than the recently released FarCry. In summary, Doom 3 is a game you should buy if you're looking for the new Killer App to show off your 600 dollar video card, or if you're such an addict of Doom-style gameplay that you still play Doom95 on a regular basis. Everyone else might be well advised to check out the games that I have mentioned above, or just keep their fingers crossed and hope Valve avoids the trap iD sprang with Doom 3, with their upcoming release of Half-Life 2.
And thats pretty much how I feel too. They worked their butts off for everything EXCEPT playability, which is the whole purpose of a video game: To play it.
Incidentally, most reviews were written in August of '04.
Most of them were also excellent. Too bad the game itself wasnt.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/act...3/review.html?mode=web
Doom 3 is fun for the first level or two. Then you realize its not going to get genuinely scary (as opposed to AvP 2), and you will be doing the EXACT SAME THING for each level of the game.
Except the end. The last level where you're in Hell was pretty cool, but the horrible action, annoyingly simple enemies, rotten level design and overused datapad sequences will probably make you quit long before you get there.
Far Cry was better looking & had more frequent (and better) scares, the enemies used their brains once in a while, and the action was good from start to finish. The acting was even cheesier than Doom 3, but anyone who will play a video game for 20 hours just because of the acting probably needs to go read a book once in a while.
FEAR was all the best things that Doom 3 and Far Cry and AvP 2 had to offer with a much more engaging storyline. The only problem with FEAR is by the time you get through Perseus Mandate you will be longing for something new.
The only game I can think of with better action than Far Cry or FEAR is Serious Sam 1st & 2nd Encounter. And a lot of people dont like that type of action, so you will probably go back to other classics like No One Lives Forever and Alien Vs Predator.
STALKER should not be compared to any of those games. If you absolutely have to compare it to something, look at Deus Ex or System Shock 2.
EDIT:
Rather than bump this just to hate some more, I will restrict my hate to the current post.
Most places gave the game a good review. I suspect they may have been bribed.
This is one of the few groups who gave it a low score: 3/5.
With the release of Doom 3 this week, one of the most anticipated games in the history of the world saw the end of a massive five-year development cycle. Why have hordes of gamers, both casual and "hardcore", been waiting so long with so much hope for this title? The answer lies back in 1994, when the original Doom was released, initially as shareware over modem-based computer bulletin board systems and ultimately ending up on store shelves. The empire that Doom built became the empire that is iD, so it's of crucial importance at this point in gaming history, to remember why exactly it was that Doom was so impressive. It is my goal to show just how poorly this new incarnation lives up to its predecessors.
Doom had graphics that were unheard of at the time, presenting the first-person perspective in a way that seemed more engaging than previous efforts. True, Wolfenstein 3D predates Doom by two years, but not only did it lack the market permeation that Doom saw, the gameplay was significantly slower, and altogether different than the experience Doom provided. It was that experience that kept the franchise alive not only through two actual sequels (Doom II: Hell on Earth and Final Doom) but also any number of repacks offering only a few new levels or minor modifications (Such as Ultimate Doom).
So, after taking Doom to the next logical level, true 3d, with the Quake series, iD went "back to the lab" for five years and sequestered themselves away, promising that their next title, Doom 3, would be a true successor to the series. And people believed. And waited. And waited. Waited for a game that not only promised to offer unprecedented levels of realism in terms of visuals, but for a game they hoped would provide the same fresh, new experience that Doom had in 1994.
This is not that game.
Undeniably, the graphics and sound are unbelievable. You've undoubtedly seen the endless screenshots and gameplay movies at this point. Even on a pretty modest system, Doom 3 has a distinct look that's both gritty and realistic, to the point of seeming like a pre-rendered movie in places. However, ingenuity is where Doom 3 falls flat on its face.
The gameplay here is at least 5 years out of date. "Emergent Gameplay", that is, the idea of non-scripted events that just happen as a result of world complexity, are nowhere to be found here. Instead, expect doors that open as soon as you have walked passed them, lights that darken as soon as you've picked up an ammo belt, and all the other scripted events that haven't seemed original since, well, since Doom.
Is it fair to come down so hard on a game for being a copy of itself? That's an interesting question, but, sadly, one that doesn't really apply - one of the main features that gave Doom its longevity after players had killed every demon themselves was a cooperative multiplayer mode that let a team of marines work through the single player game in unison. That would have worked perfectly in this game, but iD elected to leave the co-op play out. Perhaps they knew that a user-made modification to allow co-op was one of the first things that would be developed, but if that's the case, I say to them, "Shame on you!" Any game, but especially one with a $54.99 price tag, should be complete out of box, and it really is my opinion that Doom 3 without cooperative multiplayer represents an incomplete product. It should come as no surprise that one of the "exclusive features" being hyped for the Xbox version is co-op.
In fact, the multiplayer modes in general are extremely lackluster. The official server only supports 4 players at once, which strikes me as completely ludicrous. An iD representative was quoted several days before release on the topic, citing the large overhead of the engine as a reason that most servers wouldn't be able to handle more than 4 people without chugging, but I think that has to be false ñ this is the same technology that Ravensoft is going to use to bring use Quake IV, and you can be very sure that that game will feature 32 player arenas if not more.
I should, at this point, take the time to mention that just as all the features from the original Doom have not made the transition to this new game, there are, in fact, a few gameplay mechanics in Doom 3 that the earlier games did not have: a flashlight, which looks and works suspiciously like Half-Life's flashlight, as well as health stations that bring the health and HEV stations from Half-Life to mind. The monsters show a strong influence from games like Undying and Silent Hill. Oh yeah, and you can look up and down this time, just like every other FPS. My point, of course, being, that in addition to being influenced by their own earlier projects, iD has ripped off pretty much every successful FPS since Doom in one way or another, and worked those elements into Doom 3 with varying degrees of success.
Another thing that really bothered me is that while there are some Deus Ex like narrative elements in the form of PDAs that you find containing video discs and email, sometimes these mechanics actually work to distance the player from the game. Twice within the first 4 hours of Doom 3, I received an in-game email with a web address on it, requiring me to save, exit the system, launch a browser, and then go back into Doom and sit though that long initial load again seemingly needlessly.
While the levels look very nice, they don't exactly hold together as cohesive environments. iD must have spent a lot of time modeling pipes for this game: in fact, it would seem to me that they must have had a department of artists working round the clock all five years doing nothing but producing pipe-related assets. Seems everywhere you look, there's a giant pipe with sixteen smaller pipes coming out of it. What are all these pipes carrying? They're not labeled "hot water" or anything like the pipes in Half-Life. Sure, they add a sense of.... Something..... but it's hard to say just exactly what. And the overall layout of the base is enough to give MC Escher a headache: you don't think about it too much as you fly from room to room, but when you realize that you've been to nine floors and only seen 1 bathroom but 3 kitchens, something is amiss. Looking at the maps in the official Prima guide didn't help much, either: it made the environment more accessible, but it still doesn't really feel like anything that would actually be constructed (although those of you familiar with William Gibson's book Neuromancer may find a striking similarity between the Martian base in Doom and Gibson's descriptions of the Straylight facility).
All in all, there isn't much else to say about Doom 3. Graphically, we've defiantly reached yet another milestone in the history of video games, but that's something we do every few months anyway. In terms of gameplay, the Serious Sam games remain at the top of my list of Doom ñ clones: even though the graphics pale in comparison to Doom 3, the games are still more fun, and I believe the same can be said for Painkiller. And if you're looking for a fun, cohesive singleplayer FPS with gorgeous graphics and decent multiplayer to boot, you don't have to look any further than the recently released FarCry. In summary, Doom 3 is a game you should buy if you're looking for the new Killer App to show off your 600 dollar video card, or if you're such an addict of Doom-style gameplay that you still play Doom95 on a regular basis. Everyone else might be well advised to check out the games that I have mentioned above, or just keep their fingers crossed and hope Valve avoids the trap iD sprang with Doom 3, with their upcoming release of Half-Life 2.
And thats pretty much how I feel too. They worked their butts off for everything EXCEPT playability, which is the whole purpose of a video game: To play it.
Incidentally, most reviews were written in August of '04.
Most of them were also excellent. Too bad the game itself wasnt.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/act...3/review.html?mode=web
Inspector Jihad
Lifer
- Apr 17, 2005
- 13,465
- 3
- 81
go to circuit city as they have a 50% of 19.99 games. doom3 and its expansion should be 10 bucks each. so is stalker. not sure about fear though.
ConstipatedVigilante
Diamond Member
- Feb 22, 2006
- 7,671
- 1
- 0
Yep, IMO Quake 4 is much better than Doom 3. Doom wasn't all that scary - just startling at times. Quake 4 had a nice "I'm a soldier in an alien war" feel to it. I haven't really liked Bioshock that much though - it feels very consolized and I can't see a damn thing. I hate shooting at crap I can't see.
Edit: It's difficult to pick between FEAR and STALKER as they're both great games. I'd pick STALKER if you've already played Quake 4 or Doom 3. FEAR's battles can get boring after awhile as you keep fighting the same enemies, but fighting is incredibly fun with all the sparks, blood, and bullets flying around. STALKER has a pretty creepy feel to it. You're just one man alone in a wasteland, trying to survive your next encounter.
stalker is more demanding, of both your system and your time. It's easy to get lost and frustrated. And if you get lost and frustrated after playing it for 12 hours, you might not want to restart and jsut give up.
Far Cry is beautiful and is easy on the system. It will give you a taste of what Crysis is like. (after you play Far Cry, just imagine if it got invaded by AvP)
DOOM 3 is a good game. Fun, relatively scary (in headphones with the lights out). Good bargain for $20. It has many mods.
I'm playing FEAR now, I and like it.
Definately recommend the Orange Box though, because you can play Half Life 2 and the subsequent Episodes straight through. Orange Box is probably your best deal.
Quake 4 is great. Good deal for $20.
BIOSHOCK is awesome too, quite different than the others.
For $10, you can pick up Far Cry. You can get it online for free some places, its just injected with ads on the menus. (who cares!?)
Also, check out Rainbow Six: Vegas and Ghost Recon: Advanced War Figher 2 (GRAW:2)
I think of all the games I've played over the past year or so, GRAW:2 had me most involved.
STALKER.
Doom 3 was a graphics showcase and little more...and it was a 2004 graphics showcase. Modern titles outdo it in many areas.
Doom 3 was a graphics showcase and little more...and it was a 2004 graphics showcase. Modern titles outdo it in many areas.
apoppin
Lifer
Doom iii is boring as hell ... Quake 4 is everything D3 should have beenOriginally posted by: 40Hands
I've never played stalker but out of Doom III and FEAR, I would pick FEAR.
Quake 4 is also better then Doom III, IMO. I :heart: the Quake series. Quake 1 was good for mods like Team Fortress and was 3D with OpenGL!! That's right, I said 3D!Quake 2 had good single player (which Quake 4 was a sequel to) Quake 3: Arena is the only one that didn't grab me. I just found it boring. It might have been because of me having dial-up when it was released...
BUT ... BIG sale going on a Circuit City ... you can get some great games for $10 or less including PREY and FEAR ... hurry .. ends tomorrow
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2153534&enterthread=y
i picked up:
Jericho for $8 [bad bad reviews]
Perseus Mandate - for $10
Titan Quest - $6.98
Titan Quest: Immortal Throne $10.00
NWN2/MotB - $10.00
Guild Wars, NightFall .. Collector's Edition - $9.48
SilverFall - $8.98
That is 7 games for less than the price of a new game and an expansion!
For Less than $10 each there are also GRAW2, G3, FEAR, NWN2, Overlord, Armed and Dangerous, PREY, IL-2 1946 Oblivion Shivering Isles. CoJ, RE4, HL2, STALKER, Quake IV .. ah , yes ... Doom III and more,
I've had Doom 3 sitting here brand new in the box since right after it came out. My PC at the time wasn't good enough to run it. Just built a new on in November. Guess I should open the box now.
The PS3 doesn't let you program in BASIC, so he has no idea what you're talking about.
I remember coding a million lines in BASIC just to make a stupid parachute game. Damn.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 11K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter