Hanging with the evolving FPS genre.

[Falciform]

Do you all think 3DR learned from id's mistake with Doom3? I'm talking about relying on the Doom name and not improving gameplay all that much. Now, don't get me wrong, I've always been a fan of Doom and really enjoyed Doom3, but I've got to admit that most critics were right in that it's gameplay wasn't up to par with current FPS evolution. The gameplay was, for the most part, the same as it was in the shareware version of Doom. What do you all think DNF will have to do to keep the same Duke feel, but also successfully compete with newer titles? I'll list a few I can think of.

Interactivity set DN3D apart from everyone else and I think it still can, while keeping the Duke feel. The more it's incorporated into gameplay rather than a sideshow, the better. My hopes are up for the physics engine.

Gameplay. While I enjoy blowing stuff up, I do want to feel like I have a reason for blowing stuff up, other than beating the level.

Graphics. Duh.

Weaponry. I think Duke has this covered.

[Junius]

I think pretty much the entire gaming community has already transitioned from the Doom-era gamplay. Id made a strategic mistake by believing that fragging was the ultimate and sometimes only point to a WASD/mouse game and it shows in the disappointment of even their biggest fans (including myself.) I have faith that if DNF is released, it will have a great deal of post-HL gameplay to it.

[zilppuri]

How do you justify them making "strategic"(?) mistake? Didn't ANYBODY buy their game? And you are one of their biggest fans? I'm guessing their biggest fans would understand what they were aiming for with Doom3 and how they infact archieved it all. It's not their fault if you went to store and bought bananas thinking they are oranges.

Also I think the FPS "evolution" is very weak at best. When people talk about gameplay, they talk about blowing more and different stuff up. When they talk about interaction,they talk about buying soda cans and one-key-conversations.

It's point-and-click in the end. You strafe-shoot your way through, and sometimes hide in the shadows and behind boxes.

I'm quite sure that DNF will deliver as great FPS game, but I'm not too naive to think it will be revolution in game world. They will say "It's good, but it's still another FPS game".

[Kristian Joensen]

Not to worry 3DR hasn't made that "mistake" in the first place so there no reason to "learn" anything from Doom 3. Everyother word out of Scott's mind is "story" or "Character" that is when he isn't using some marketing term.

[Cerberus_e]

and yet another thread about a new member hoping DNF will be true to Dn3d unlike doom 3 was to doom
so what if doom 3 doesn't have adanced gameplay, ecause there is nothing wrong with old school gameplay.
they certainly didn't make a mistake by releasing doom 3... it's my favourite 2004 game.
honestly, I think it's funny how every month a new member joins that makes his first thread about how DNF follows DN3D, then proceeds to talk about the doom-doom3 relationship

[DissidentRage]

Falciform said:
Do you all think 3DR learned from id's mistake with Doom3?

What mistake?

[Falciform]

Cerberus_e said:
and yet another thread about a new member hoping DNF will be true to Dn3d unlike doom 3 was to doom
so what if doom 3 doesn't have adanced gameplay, ecause there is nothing wrong with old school gameplay.
they certainly didn't make a mistake by releasing doom 3... it's my favourite 2004 game.
honestly, I think it's funny how every month a new member joins that makes his first thread about how DNF follows DN3D, then proceeds to talk about the doom-doom3 relationship

Maybe your veteran status gives you the right to jump to conclusions without taking a moment to understand what I wrote. I won't hold it against you, but instead explain myself further. Doom3 was true to Doom in almost every respect. There was very little gameplay change at all. After eleven years there was no change other than graphics. I said I enjoyed the game and I didn't lie. The "mistake" I referred to was the fact that id felt the formula that worked eleven years ago was going to work again and have the same impact. It didn't. It only worked with self-proclaimed "veterans" such as yourself. I enjoyed it for what it was, but I still understood what all the "newbies" were bitching about. Doom3 doesn't hold a candle to a game like Half Life when you consider the game as a whole for a new market.

Honestly, I think it's funny how every new forum I go to has some self-important jackass who thinks it's cool to let the new guy know his choice of a thread was overused and pointless. Just to let you know, I did a quick search and couldn't find any threads with the same idea before posting. Feel free to prove me wrong, Learnèd One.

[Cerberus_e]

I never claimed I'm veteran, neither did I claim to look down on you.
but it's still funny how every month a new member makes a thread about "DN3D => DNF" vs "doom => doom 3". I don't see what's insulting about that
I also didn't claim you didn't like doom 3. I saw you like it. I just said I don't see anything wrong with old-school gameplay.
you're WAY overreacting. (eg: self-important ). your offensive language wasn't needed.

EDIT:
http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthread...68&page=2&vc=1
http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthread...05&page=0&vc=1

that doesn't mean your thread is pointless and shouldn't be made, just read these 2 posts to understand what i find so funny. those are all the first post of a new thread.

[Hudson]

Roger said:

What mistake?

Well, that it was boring, monotonous and sucked for one thing

[DissidentRage]

Hudson said:

Well, that it was boring, monotonous and sucked for one thing

Hey, didn't you go into the game thinking that anyway, then end up replaying it later with an open mind and decided it didn't suck, or have you regressed.

[Cerberus_e]

well, self-important jackass will now answer your question, it was just a matter of time before I found the quote:

Charlie Wiederhold (lead developer or how it's called):

We are trying to innovate in the areas that we feel are important. We just hope that the players agree. Judging from the reactions to Duke 3D at the time and the for people who have been able to see the game, we're pretty sure we're on the right track.

and Scott Miller (big boss of apogee/3dr, later George became co-owner as well):

Joseph, our overriding goal is to add a significant building block to the "franchise." This requires making a game that is innovative, fun, and executed to near perfection. We apply this same battle plan to all of the games we're involved with, including Max Payne. Basically, we refuse to release crap.

both of these quotes prove DNF will be innovative, so it's not like your complaint with doom 3 (not that I think doom 3 doesn't have anything new over doom, because I think the story is a lot more fleshed out and there are puzzles, unlike in doom, etc...)
but you think that, so I provide you these quotes

[X-Vector]

Cerberus_e said:
both of these quotes prove DNF will be innovative

Statements of intention do not equal proof.

To find the proof, you first have to wait until the pudding is ready and then eat it.

[Kristian Joensen]

X-Vector we already KNOW that you assume it will suck.

[Simon Charles]

Falciform said:
Do you all think 3DR learned from id's mistake with Doom3? I'm talking about relying on the Doom name and not improving gameplay all that much.

Although I've given up on Duke long ago, I still believe 3DR as competent game developers. So yes, I think a new Duke game would deliver on gameplay and not just rely on its name.

[Imfamous]

Simon Charles said:

Although I've given up on Duke long ago, I still believe 3DR as competent game developers. So yes, I think a new Duke game would deliver on gameplay and not just rely on its name.

lol at Hudson.

And yeah, I agree with Simon. I hope and bet DNF's gameplay is a mix between what we saw in the Prey trailer and the Killzone 2 trailer.

[hell-angel]

Cerberus_e said:
and yet another thread about a new member hoping DNF will be true to Dn3d unlike doom 3 was to doom
so what if doom 3 doesn't have adanced gameplay, ecause there is nothing wrong with old school gameplay.
they certainly didn't make a mistake by releasing doom 3... it's my favourite 2004 game.
honestly, I think it's funny how every month a new member joins that makes his first thread about how DNF follows DN3D, then proceeds to talk about the doom-doom3 relationship

I second this, Doom 3 was a great game and true to what doom was.
The same with Quake 4, I loved that game so much.

And I am sure the same will happen to DNF. I will love it.

Now, stop whining and welcome to the club of DNF lovers

[Kalki]

Doom 3 was a nice game. It got boring though and the plot was essentially a backstory revealed. Also it didn't have neither the frantic run and gun of the earlier dooms nor did it do anything radically different gameplay-wise to set it apart for some people.

Innovation in FPSs are currently done in two categories besides tech:

1) Story: The same reason you watch a movie. If the concept/narrative doesn't appeal to you, why bother with the aim'n'shoot?

2) Gameplay: It is not important that the gameplay be revolutionary. It should be unique to the game and that's what matters. This signature gameplay would consolidate the game's identity for the future.

DNF could either build on what Duke3D did or do something unique that sets it apart from everything else. Probably a little of both.

[hell-angel]

I disagree with you about doom not having a different gameplay. It is different to other game because it takes a step back to the core of what is fun. It didn't use all the bells and whistles because the original didn't have them.

Sure, it was a bit slower paced then the previous (and other) titles but when the action started it still was pretty fast enough not to get an frag fest and challenging enough to be entertaining.

Doom 3 was different because it was not trying to innovate the gameplay. And god damn it, I loved the game for that.

[Cerberus_e]

hell-angel said:
Now, stop whining and welcome to the club of DNF lovers

he still has to give his impressions on my 2 quotes, maybe he doesn't like it it could be too good or so

[FireFly]

Kristian Joensen said:
X-Vector we already KNOW that you assume it will suck.

Do we? I was under the impression that he's keeping an open mind.

[Kristian Joensen]

It doesn't seem to be open toward the possibility that Cerberus_e was correct.

[trackit]

I agree that Doom 3 was somehow disappointment to many (me inluded) Doom 3 didnt have almost any way to interact with surrounding world, and im not talking about insane level on interactivity here... just the basics. it gave me the feeling/impression that i was in some kind of world covered with plastic shield that nothing can brake through. and its not "plastic" that bothers me but the "shield".
(F.E.A.R is much better in that department for example...)

Its surprising that after 10 years DN3D is still most interactive FPS that i have seen. Im sure DNF will raise the bar once again for next 10 years. I just wached again 2001 trailer and i must say that i want to play that "5 years old game" more than any currently released title...

[FireFly]

Kristian Joensen said:
It doesn't seem to be open toward the possibility that Cerberus_e was correct.

Not at all. He's saying we can only judge whether Cerberus_e is correct when we play the game - that will be the proof.

[hell-angel]

Cerberus_e said:

he still has to give his impressions on my 2 quotes, maybe he doesn't like it it could be too good or so

The quote is not to good. But the meaning of the quotes is great.

[Imfamous]

Doom 3 was a downright dissapointment. Prey looks excellent though. So does Killzone 2. I picture DNF's gameplay being a mix, which would kick all kinds of ass.

http://moses.gametrailers.com/stream...e2_kk::m:black

http://moses.gametrailers.com/stream...y_e35::m:black

[Cerberus_e]

Imfamous said:
Doom 3 was a downright dissapointment.

what did you expect from doom 3 that it didn't accomplish.
don't say something generic like "a good game". be specific.

Imfamous said:
http://moses.gametrailers.com/stream...e2_kk::m:black

the trailer looks so fake (I had never watched it up until now).
it would be such a huge coincidence to stand just next to that marine that gives you another gun.
I'm sure that part of the game won't be even half as fun as that video indicates.

[Imfamous]

Hudson's post on Doom 3 about sums it up.

As for the KZ2 trailer, of course it's fake. Just look at the way the person "playing" moves the gun/camera. My point is though, that there should be some intense, multi-person firefights with Duke, some EDF soldiers, octabrains, enforcers, etc.

[Twin]

i think all this thread is about is how we don't want duke nukem forever to rely on the game being called duke nukem to sell it as ID did we doom...

in a way id were right with what they produced with doom 3 but it just didn't have anything on top of the doom experience...i think that's what most people were looking fr...doom with extra new tech stuff that we've seen recently in first person shooters...

i'm hoping that with duke nukm forever we still hve the duke 3d feel to it but more...i want more interactivity...more guns, more explosions, more babes, more one-liners and more character development than the half-life series....

to put it in short, i want everything good about every first person shooter X's 10

[Cerberus_e]

Imfamous said:
Hudson's post on Doom 3 about sums it up.

I asked to be specific

Twin said:
doom 3 but it just didn't have anything on top of the doom experience...

it did: story, puzzles, more varied level design with pipes to crawl between, vents, ...

[Little Conqueror]

This is a thread about DNF and how it'll have to contend with an evolving FPS genre, not whether Doom 3 is part of that evolution or not, but I guess the whole topic's been lost.

[ZuljinRaynor]

Hudson said:

Well, that it was boring, monotonous and sucked for one thing

I'm sorry but that was HALO and HALO 2 and not Doom 3.

[The Count]

I never quite understood why expectations on DNF are mostly compared to Doom3. Aren´t there any other modern FPS ? HL2 ? Far Cry ? Anyone ?
Besides, AFAIK id never claimed to revolutionize gameplay with D3.
It actually could have been better / more immersive in some parts (e.g. teamplay with marines-bots or outdoor-levels on earth like in Doom2).
But playing Doom3 in a darkened room at night with headphones on still gave me enough chills for my money

[Cerberus_e]

Little Conqueror said:
This is a thread about DNF and how it'll have to contend with an evolving FPS genre, not whether Doom 3 is part of that evolution or not, but I guess the whole topic's been lost.

that's not true, he thread starter brought doom 3-doom comparision in the mix, so the topic is about that too.

The Count said:
Besides, AFAIK id never claimed to revolutionize gameplay with D3.

on the contrary, they said themselves you wouldn't get serious sam gameplay, but they'd throw one or two enemies at you at the same time.
when I played doom 3, it was 100% how I expected to be.
those who say "doom 3 is a disappointment" obviously haven't followed the development enough (and I even did only partially follow development). of course you can't blame them for not follow doom 3's development, but that doesn't give them the right to say the game is a disappointment because it looked much better.

[Cerberus_e]

The Count said:
I never quite understood why expectations on DNF are mostly compared to Doom3. Aren´t there any other modern FPS ? HL2 ? Far Cry ? Anyone ?

because doom 3 has an original (doom) just like DNF has an original (duke3D).
there is about the same amount of time between both games of both series.

[mysteryperfecta]

I think DNF will give us new things, while remaining "old school" in many respects. 3dr is led by old-school gamers, who've developed old-school games to this point, and have expressed a fondness for old-school FPS conventions.

Doom 3's gameplay design can arguably be called a "mistake", but more accurately, it was simply a "decision". Doom 3 got many good reviews, and there are still plenty of gamers who still enjoy simple run-and-gun (or creep-and-gun). So I don't know whether there is any urgency to abandon the old school. The old and the new can co-exist, at this point.

However, today's new school will be tomorrow's old school. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of today's gamers have never played Doom (or Duke3d). They may be considered slight (and even boring) for many. Personally, I prefer the sophistication of many of today's FPSs, so you won't see me resist the evolution.

[Falciform]

For me the bottom line is Doom3, for what it was supposed to be, was great. But when compared to other games such as Half Life 2, it lacked things that other developers had grasped. All I'm saying is that I hope DNF doesn't just make a leap forward from DN3D, but a leap forward from all the other games and their innovations as well.

mysteryperfecta said:
Doom 3's gameplay design can arguably be called a "mistake", but more accurately, it was simply a "decision".

Completely agree. Felt more like a tech demo in the end for me personally.

[SyntaxN]

Imfamous said:
Doom 3 was a downright dissapointment. Prey looks excellent though. So does Killzone 2. I picture DNF's gameplay being a mix, which would kick all kinds of ass.

http://moses.gametrailers.com/stream...e2_kk::m:black

http://moses.gametrailers.com/stream...y_e35::m:black

Killzone 2? The graphics are going to pwn, but I doubt that much more will happen
And for DOOM³, in the beginning I was disappointed, but some months later I played through it and realized how damn great this game is!

[Cerberus_e]

stockboy said:

Completely agree. Felt more like a tech demo in the end for me personally.

then you disagree.
and what's with all those people calling games like doom 3, HL2, ... tech demos?

Falciform said:
All I'm saying is that I hope DNF doesn't just make a leap forward from DN3D, but a leap forward from all the other games and their innovations as well.

then my quotes don't suffice

[Falciform]

Cerberus_e said:then my quotes don't suffice

No, the quotes bring a little comfort, but I won't be satisfied until I see the end product. And I'm in no great hurry for it to come out, either, since I don't have a computer capable of running it as it should be anyway.