How do you think i iwll do with Doom 3?

[MemberSince97]

I think you'll do fine....

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Put it this way - if you cannot run all of the advanced lighting that the game was designed for, then there is no point in playing the game. If there is one word that is to describe Doom3, then it is atmosphere, and without awesome lighting effects, the main selling point of the game is lost.

What you just said, in effect, is that the game has no selling point. Real life has far more atmosphere than this game. And if we want to see this particular type of atmosphere? Well, like I said, there's always tech demos. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I just think most gamers these days will buy any damn thing that's built on a shiny engine. Color me unimpressed.

 

[bcoupland]

Originally posted by: Insomniak

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Put it this way - if you cannot run all of the advanced lighting that the game was designed for, then there is no point in playing the game. If there is one word that is to describe Doom3, then it is atmosphere, and without awesome lighting effects, the main selling point of the game is lost.

What you just said, in effect, is that the game has no selling point. Real life has far more atmosphere than this game. And if we want to see this particular type of atmosphere? Well, like I said, there's always tech demos. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I just think most gamers these days will buy any damn thing that's built on a shiny engine. Color me unimpressed.

What he meant was that the game will not be as good and the gameplay will not be as good without all the special effects. I think you would be much more scared
with a high polygon count, bump-mapped, demon sneaking up on you as you listen to it thumping and moaning horribly in 5.1 Dolby Digital, than being mildly
worried when a demon, which on low graphics, looks like something out of a 60's sci-fi flick with arms and legs made of cardboard. Which would scare you more?
Getting you emotionally involved is the key to a sucessful game.

 

[bcoupland]

Also, I refuse to comment on how the game will look or run on a system w/ a GF4 MX and a P4 1.5, simply because I haven't seen it, and
neither has anyone else. (unless you work for ID, or something)

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: bcoupland
What he meant was that the game will not be as good and the gameplay will not be as good without all the special effects. I think you would be much more scared
with a high polygon count, bump-mapped, demon sneaking up on you as you listen to it thumping and moaning horribly in 5.1 Dolby Digital, than being mildly
worried when a demon, which on low graphics, looks like something out of a 60's sci-fi flick with arms and legs made of cardboard. Which would scare you more?
Getting you emotionally involved is the key to a sucessful game.

I don't deny that - but I'm saying if you take away the good graphics, are there still things about the game that are noteworthy and impressive? In Doom 3, I submit that there are not. Let's take a look at some other high profile titles and compare:

Half-Life 2: Ditch the graphics, and we still have the rather impressive physics based gameplay.

Battlefield 1942/Vietnam: Ditch the graphics, and we still have a huge variety of vehicles and weapon kits to choose from, as well as tons of team strategies.

UT2k4: See Battlefield games.

Neverwinter Nights: Remove the graphics, and there is still a great story, character customization, and high environmental interactivity.

Doom 3: Take away the graphics and you have....well, Doom 1 :\

I've already played Doom 1. And Doom 2. I stopped playing dooms at Doom 3 (it was called quake). And then came Doom 4 (Quake 2). Now they're set to release Doom 5. It's the same game. In a new engine. Again. Is there any wonder I'm tired of this stuff? I certainly find it a wonder that people have payed for the same game four times and are getting geared up to do it again. I wonder if the staff at Id ever laughs about this (all the way to the bank...) ?

I think the engine is amazing, and there's no doubt the game looks wonderful and that John Carmack is one of the best, if not the best, 3D programmers in history. But the game that Id has chosen to put on this engine looks flat, old, tired, and unimpressive to me.

 

[DoughKey]

Originally posted by: Fuchs
I GARUANTEE that the biggest difference with D3 you can make is adding another 512 ram.

GARUANTEE ehh? I'd wager that a jump from a 5900 series to a 6800 would net a larger frame rate increase.

*poke*

-D

 

[DoughKey]

My $0.02 would be to wait, see how your machine does and then upgrade appropriately. Your hardware is pretty recent overall and I'm guessing it'll perform pretty well. Remember that they've been demoing Doom 3 at E3 since 2002. At some point it was probably developed on similarly powered hardware.

-D

 

[MemberSince97]

I'm certainly waiting myself...

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: bcoupland
Also, I refuse to comment on how the game will look or run on a system w/ a GF4 MX and a P4 1.5, simply because I haven't seen it, and
neither has anyone else. (unless you work for ID, or something)

The GeForce4 MX is physically incapable of doing the same thing as the 6800 series. If it was capable of it, the NV40 GPU would just be a modified Geforce4 MX GPU... and I think we can all agree that is not the case.



Insomniak... Who gives a flying cow pie about HL2, BF1942, etc. etc. This thread is about Doom 3 and how it will run on the OP's hardware. Then someone brings up that it will run fine on a GeForce4 MX, and that may be true depending on your definition of fine. If fine means 30 frames per second no matter what resolution and what features are unsupported or disabled to get it to run at 30 frames per second, then yes, it'll work fine.

A GeForce4 MX absolutely WILL NOT run Doom 3 with all the detail and eye candy that a 6800 will. I say that with 100% confidence. It doesn't take a developer from id to say that to make it true. All it takes is an understanding of what the GeForce4 MX is capable (or in this case, incapable) of. Saying it's possible is like saying a 386 MIGHT be able to run software designed for the Athlon-64 because nobody's tried it and proved it can't yet. It physically does not have the capability.

What you just said, in effect, is that the game has no selling point.

No, he said nothing that eludes to that even in the most vague way. Doom 3's selling point is the experience provided by the graphics. How do you get "no selling point" from that? The graphics ARE the selling point.

If you only have a GeForce4 MX video card, forget about Doom 3 because it's NOT FOR YOU. Yes it will run on a Geforce4 MX... no it will not run well. Brand new video games are targeted at enthusiasts, not the less than casual gamer who has a GeForce4 MX and a 1.5 GHz Pentium 4 with 256 MB of PC100 SDRAM. Nobody in their right mind buys a GeForce4 MX to play PC games, so Doom 3 doesn't have to run well on it... it's two generations old for pete's sake! Even when it was brand new it was still a piece of crap, castrated GeForce4.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Insomniak

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Put it this way - if you cannot run all of the advanced lighting that the game was designed for, then there is no point in playing the game. If there is one word that is to describe Doom3, then it is atmosphere, and without awesome lighting effects, the main selling point of the game is lost.

What you just said, in effect, is that the game has no selling point. Real life has far more atmosphere than this game. And if we want to see this particular type of atmosphere? Well, like I said, there's always tech demos. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I just think most gamers these days will buy any damn thing that's built on a shiny engine. Color me unimpressed.

No, what I said is you need powerful 3d hardware to get the cool effects and atomosphere of the game... It should be like a horror movie - without the proper lighting and effects, it would look campy and lame.

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: bcoupland
Also, I refuse to comment on how the game will look or run on a system w/ a GF4 MX and a P4 1.5, simply because I haven't seen it, and
neither has anyone else. (unless you work for ID, or something)

The GeForce4 MX is physically incapable of doing the same thing as the 6800 series. If it was capable of it, the NV40 GPU would just be a modified Geforce4 MX GPU... and I think we can all agree that is not the case.



Insomniak... Who gives a flying cow pie about HL2, BF1942, etc. etc. This thread is about Doom 3 and how it will run on the OP's hardware. Then someone brings up that it will run fine on a GeForce4 MX, and that may be true depending on your definition of fine. If fine means 30 frames per second no matter what resolution and what features are unsupported or disabled to get it to run at 30 frames per second, then yes, it'll work fine.

A GeForce4 MX absolutely WILL NOT run Doom 3 with all the detail and eye candy that a 6800 will. I say that with 100% confidence. It doesn't take a developer from id to say that to make it true. All it takes is an understanding of what the GeForce4 MX is capable (or in this case, incapable) of. Saying it's possible is like saying a 386 MIGHT be able to run software designed for the Athlon-64 because nobody's tried it and proved it can't yet. It physically does not have the capability.

What you just said, in effect, is that the game has no selling point.

No, he said nothing that eludes to that even in the most vague way. Doom 3's selling point is the experience provided by the graphics. How do you get "no selling point" from that? The graphics ARE the selling point.

If you only have a GeForce4 MX video card, forget about Doom 3 because it's NOT FOR YOU. Yes it will run on a Geforce4 MX... no it will not run well. Brand new video games are targeted at enthusiasts, not the less than casual gamer who has a GeForce4 MX and a 1.5 GHz Pentium 4 with 256 MB of PC100 SDRAM. Nobody in their right mind buys a GeForce4 MX to play PC games, so Doom 3 doesn't have to run well on it... it's two generations old for pete's sake! Even when it was brand new it was still a piece of crap, castrated GeForce4.

Exactly. It's kind of annoying that people are arguing semantics with you, Jeff7181, about "we don't know what a GeForce 4 MX will look like in D3," because you and I know damn well that it will run like junk. We know one thing - it will look like crap; it will not have the per-pixel lighting that *requires* DX 8-9 level hardware, and it will thus not be playing the game *as the developer intended it to be played* .

 

[Jeff7181]

Exactly. It's kind of annoying that people are arguing semantics with you, Jeff7181, about "we don't know what a GeForce 4 MX will look like in D3," because you and I know damn well that it will run like junk. We know one thing - it will look like crap; it will not have the per-pixel lighting that *requires* DX 8-9 level hardware, and it will thus not be playing the game *as the developer intended it to be played* .

Careful what you say... someone will probably point out that Doom 3 is OpenGL and try to make you look like a fool for even commenting about Direct X in a Doom 3 thread. :roll:

 

[railer]

I'm sure D3 won't look like crap on a GF4MX. It will look...."good", IMO. You guys just want to feel like your spending $400 on a vid card was a sound investment, and it makes you angry that an essentially free video card like the GF4MX could possibly play D3 at enjoyable settings. I can't wait to fire it up on my laptop, with a 32 meg 5200 go. I'll post some screenies, so a few of you (with $400 video cards) can shriek: "Oh my god how can you POSSIBLY play like that?!?! It looks like CRAP!" And I will laugh and continue to enjoy D3 on my laptop. I'll enjoy it more on my main rig with the 9700pro of course....but it'll will be fun on the lappy too.

Oh, and to the original poster: I just picked up a 512 meg stick of Kingston pc 2700 for $45 AR at OM, that was with a $10 coupon that a ton of people got in the mail. Cheap upgrade for ya.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: railer
I'm sure D3 won't look like crap on a GF4MX. It will look...."good", IMO. You guys just want to feel like your spending $400 on a vid card was a sound investment, and it makes you angry that an essentially free video card like the GF4MX could possibly play D3 at enjoyable settings. I can't wait to fire it up on my laptop, with a 32 meg 5200 go. I'll post some screenies, so a few of you (with $400 video cards) can shriek: "Oh my god how can you POSSIBLY play like that?!?! It looks like CRAP!" And I will laugh and continue to enjoy D3 on my laptop. I'll enjoy it more on my main rig with the 9700pro of course....but it'll will be fun on the lappy too.

Oh, and to the original poster: I just picked up a 512 meg stick of Kingston pc 2700 for $45 AR at OM, that was with a $10 coupon that a ton of people got in the mail. Cheap upgrade for ya.

See... here's yet another example of someone who has no idea how this stuff works. The 5200 is DX9 compliant... it can do all the pixel shading that needs to be done in Doom 3... it'll do it slow... but comparing still screens isn't going to show the difference. Hell, I can crank Far Cry up to 1600x1200 with 6XAA and 16XAF with my 9800 Pro and make an absolutely wonderful screenshot... but at 5 frames per second, the game will be unplayable.

The GeForce4 MX IS NOT DX9 COMPLIANT AND HAS LIMITED DX8 SUPPORT. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the GeForce4 MX to do ANY kind of advanced pixel shading.

Man... how hard is this to understand?

 

[Fern]

"The GeForce4 MX IS NOT DX9 COMPLIANT AND HAS LIMITED DX8 SUPPORT. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the GeForce4 MX to do ANY kind of advanced pixel shading.

Man... how hard is this to understand? "

Well, I predict that we are about to find out in a bigger way than ever before. Have you ever looked at the marketing hype on the box of a G4 MX. The advertising hype makes it sound like it'll play EVERY game in an unbeliveably fantastic way with mind blowing graphics.

Deus Ex 2 revealed a lot of unhappy campers. Ran out bought the super dooper card (G4 MX) and couldn't even play the game IIRC! I noticed most people (John Q Public) look to see how many MB of video ram a card has, and use that soley tojudge it's value.

Kind of sad, but I can see a lot peeps wasting their money on FX 5200 cards with 256MB of ram after this game comes out. (Especially if the D3 retail box has anything about 256MB recommended to play at high settings.) I think the deceptive labeling on these low-end products sucks. "DX 9.0 Compliant" or some nonsence printed on tne box of a vid card that can't handle DX 8.1 features. I don't think it serves the gaming industry very well either.

My $.02 worth

 

[Gamingphreek]

I would like to know how a Geforce 4 mx is running this game. Doesn't support 3/4's of the features.

Also PCGamer ran a certain thing on the test... lol not much help but it is in one of the many doom III threads.

-Kevin

 

[railer]

Who ever said the GF4mx was dx 9 compliant? Not I. You think games can't possibly look good if they're not running dx9? Most people who buy Doom3, will NOT have dx9 cards. Most people will have original radeon's, Radeon 8500's, GF2/3/4's, etc. ID is not a stupid company, and they're not going to make a game that looks like crap on 95% of the word's PC's. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Umm the cards dont have to be DX9 compatible DoomIII is an OpenGL game.

Also i highly doubt MOST people still have one of those cards as their primary graphics card that they willl use to play DIII. Where did you get that %. Horribly wrong... most people dont have any of those cards... i would be willing to bet its mostly GF4MX's, and any of the last gen stuff (5200's 5700's 9600's 9200's)

-Kevin

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Umm the cards dont have to be DX9 compatible DoomIII is an OpenGL game.

Also i highly doubt MOST people still have one of those cards as their primary graphics card that they willl use to play DIII. Where did you get that %. Horribly wrong... most people dont have any of those cards... i would be willing to bet its mostly GF4MX's, and any of the last gen stuff (5200's 5700's 9600's 9200's)

-Kevin

This is all pretty much anecdotal, but I think you are overestimating peoples hardware. I would be willing to bet the majority are using a geforce4MX or lower.. like radeon 8500 etc.

Actually the 8500 still runs things pretty damn well. I have one in my wifes machine with a 1700+ and it runs everything quite well, including the world of warcraft beta which is running in opengl by default.

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: bcoupland
Also, I refuse to comment on how the game will look or run on a system w/ a GF4 MX and a P4 1.5, simply because I haven't seen it, and
neither has anyone else. (unless you work for ID, or something)