PDA

View Full Version : Demo impressions- this game sucks


Imfamous
12-12-2004, 02:40 PM
Today I DLed the 3 level demo, and have to say that Doom 3 sucks.

From the getgo, Doom 3 feels like Half-Life, except shit.

What gave id the idea that it's fun walking around in complete darkness? I don't see where all the credit for Doom 3's visuals comes from when you can't even see a quarter of the textures.

The sound was okay, but it certainly had its share of flaws. How come each surface that you punch makes the same sound? And worse, how come the shotgun makes the sound of shooting a tin can with a BB gun?

Not even the gameplay was good. The controls feel like you're treading through molasses. It also sucks how the level design is layed out like a maze, often become frusterating.

I know I won't be buying this game. Anybody who doesn't have Doom 3, and is considering, get Chronicles of Riddick DX instead.

Inanimate Carbon Rod
12-12-2004, 03:01 PM
Thanks for your advice.




:no one cares:

avatar_58
12-12-2004, 03:09 PM
Imfamous said:
From the getgo, Doom 3 feels like Half-Life, except shit.




Then play half-life.


Imfamous said:
What gave id the idea that it's fun walking around in complete darkness? I don't see where all the credit for Doom 3's visuals comes from when you can't even see a quarter of the textures.




I actually didn't find it "that" dark in most areas. The ones that were extremely dark did that to hide monsters and to try and make you wonder what the hell could be waiting for you.


Imfamous said:
The sound was okay, but it certainly had its share of flaws. How come each surface that you punch makes the same sound? And worse, how come the shotgun makes the sound of shooting a tin can with a BB gun?




You are punching and shooting walls to judge the game? Odd...but I know of many games that share this issue using metal sounds for things that should not.


Imfamous said:
I know I won't be buying this game. Anybody who doesn't have Doom 3, and is considering, get Chronicles of Riddick DX instead.



Thats really your opinion but I find movie based games to mostly be a run of the mill game with movie characters thrown in.

JimboC
12-12-2004, 07:55 PM
avatar_58 said:
I actually didn't find it "that" dark in most areas. The ones that were extremely dark did that to hide monsters and to try and make you wonder what the hell could be waiting for you.


The funny thing about that is that the couple of times I did jump out of my skin were in very well lit areas. Every time I was in a dark area I was expecting something to jump out at me.

kylemf88
12-12-2004, 08:09 PM
I also DLed the demo. I didn't feel any of the things you felt. I felt that is was a nice game. I looked in pk4 files and saw that the textures aint anything special. So the game is all about the wonderful dark lighting. It's what makes the game look so good. The only reason I wont be buying this game is because I'm a *****. I will be to scared to play the hole damn game.

Mountain Man
12-12-2004, 09:13 PM
Imfamous said:
Today I DLed the 3 level demo, and have to say that Doom 3 sucks.


It's not a bad game provided you don't expect too much from it. Basically, it's old school gameplay with pretty graphics. Expect more than that and you probably won't like it.

Kevin Wolff
12-13-2004, 12:00 AM
I downloaded the demo and it crashed my computer 20 seconds into the game. I'm definately not buying it.

...

http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dopefish.gif

December Man
12-13-2004, 02:27 PM
I have to quote some journalist from a polish computer magazine(CD-Action): "Doom 3 is the biggest disappointment of the year. The game is very common and boring; it's hard to enjoy the graphics with all that darkness(...) Year 2004 is the year of FarCry(and NOT Doom 3 or boring Half-Life 2)".
What do you think of it?

Merlijn
12-13-2004, 03:58 PM
Well it's very easy. If you don't like the "feel" of a certain game, then you obviously won't like the game. If you don't like the character of Duke, you won't enjoy the game.
If you can't stand dark claustrophobic hallways on a remote facility on mars with scary monster lurking in the shadows - then you won't like Doom3.

To each his own.

I tought Doom3 was a very immersive, scary and enjoyable game.

BTW

Saying it's just old gameplay with pretty graphics is wrong IMHO. Quake and old Doom never had this level of immersion and atmosphere. With Doom3, it was like I really *was* on a lonely research base on Mars. Quake and Doom1/2 where just anonymous hallways.

Duoae
12-13-2004, 05:00 PM
I liked all three. However, Far Cry felt the most finished and had well thought out gameplay IMO. So i would probably have to agree with the writer.

DissidentRage
12-13-2004, 05:30 PM
December Man said:
I have to quote some journalist from a polish computer magazine(CD-Action): "Doom 3 is the biggest disappointment of the year. The game is very common and boring; it's hard to enjoy the graphics with all that darkness(...) Year 2004 is the year of FarCry(and NOT Doom 3 or boring Half-Life 2)".
What do you think of it?



Saying it's a common game is pretty laughable. If you want common and boring, play a Tom Clancy game. As for it being the biggest disappointment, they were probably hoping for something that was never promised in the first place and ended up playing the game to kind of justify their bitching instead of just to play it.

Gaming magazines have lost their credibility to me anyway. The last time I saw a game magazine they were glorifying a run-of-the-mill anime-type Japanese action game and they scored Max Payne 2 as a 7 while giving Dead To Rights- a complete rip-off of Max Payne, only way shittier and commercialized- a 9 and a comment of "very original concept."

Dutch
12-13-2004, 10:15 PM
Well I got round to playing this game, and will quickly post my thoughts. Finished it on veteran, then on nightmare. There were homages to the original Doom of course but I think I was more reminded of Quake 2. It was also very reminiscent of Half life, with the whole research base disaster scenario, and other little things. It really wasn’t that dark, or to put it another way I was not bothered by the darkness. The game has a good scary atmosphere at times… I jumped about 2 or 3 times for the whole game, the biggest one was for the imp that was in stasis, and hooked up with tubes somewhere in Delta labs hehe. PDA’s were probably more annoying than fun…one time when listening to an Indian guy complaining about his co-workers I had a sinking feeling that I was supposed to be laughing. The story is, hmm well there wasn’t a story. I found it quite irrelevant to be reading a pda about some guy hearing strange noises a few days ago, when I’ve just blown up five hellish demons. The weapons were pretty good, and quite well balanced. One thing that got me killed a lot is you couldn’t switch weapon while reloading. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/doh.gif


The game is filled with imps, most of the monsters have a good variety but for the imps. They are so noisy and dramatic, and I grew sick of strafing their fireballs in such cramped spaces, and waiting for them to inevitably teleport in every time I picked up some armour. Give me some Doom imps any day. The nightmare difficulty level, where you start off with the soulcube and your health always saps back to 25 made for some interesting gameplay. Favourite monster’s probably the revenant, the pinky demons, and the tentacle guy (once I figured out you could own him simply by ducking hehe) least favourite was the ugly and gay cacodemon. I was looking forward to hell, but after being initially impressed it was pretty standard stuff. The bosses were cool, despite the final boss being too easy. Far Cry was more fun, but at least you could save, and Doom 3 never had anything as annoying as rocket launcher snipers. I won’t be playing it again, I’m through with this game, although it was a good way to waste a few days. Expecting Half Life 2 to be better

Neptune
12-14-2004, 12:58 AM
Imfamous said:
Today I DLed the 3 level demo, and have to say that Doom 3 sucks.

From the getgo, Doom 3 feels like Half-Life, except shit.

What gave id the idea that it's fun walking around in complete darkness? I don't see where all the credit for Doom 3's visuals comes from when you can't even see a quarter of the textures.

The sound was okay, but it certainly had its share of flaws. How come each surface that you punch makes the same sound? And worse, how come the shotgun makes the sound of shooting a tin can with a BB gun?

Not even the gameplay was good. The controls feel like you're treading through molasses. It also sucks how the level design is layed out like a maze, often become frusterating.

I know I won't be buying this game. Anybody who doesn't have Doom 3, and is considering, get Chronicles of Riddick DX instead.



You know, I'm getting really tired of these three year olds comming in here and say DooM 3 sucks. What's worse they compare it to Half-Life 2 and 1 ALL THE ******* TIME. Jesus christ! How often does one of us (DooM 3 fans) go into THEIR thread and start shit about THEIR game? I mean, I have no problems with peoples opinions, but come ON! This is getting out of hand.

The ONLY thing in the way of a Half-Life 2 bashing thread over on their part of the forum is that "Half-Life 2 dissapointment" thread. WTF?!

Word of advice: Get the ***** out of our forums. We don't go it you yours.

FireFly
12-14-2004, 02:07 AM
I think he was just posting his opinion.

DudeMiester
12-14-2004, 02:20 AM
Neptune said:
Word of advice: Get the ***** out of our forums. We don't go it you yours.



Umm... I post in the HL2 forums. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif hehe, so does Draz.

Neptune
12-14-2004, 06:10 AM
I meant like post shit in their forums. I mean, yeah, I've posted in there too. But never anything negative about HL2. But it's funny how a single day can't go by without one of those little HL2 fanboys running over here and say "Doom 3 sucks". You know what? ***** you! Besides that, it would be different if we had one solid thread dedicated to bashing doom. But it seems like everyone and there brother enjoys stating that Doom 3 is a bad game (Which is a complete opinion. I think Doom 3 is FAR better than the shit HL2 turned out to be!) in nearly every thread in here. I mean look at the "Doom 3 expansion" thread. It was a perfectly fine and innocent topic about the new expansion. You morons turned it into a "HL2 is better/ doom 3 sucks" thread.

Beelze
12-14-2004, 10:20 AM
Its biggest flaw is it's unvariety in just about everything (enemy encounters, art/level design, scare tactics, arsenal, and gameplay in general).

It was enjoyable, even if it got tedious.

Mountain Man
12-14-2004, 10:22 AM
Merlijn said:
Saying it's just old gameplay with pretty graphics is wrong IMHO. Quake and old Doom never had this level of immersion and atmosphere. With Doom3, it was like I really *was* on a lonely research base on Mars. Quake and Doom1/2 where just anonymous hallways.


I agree, Doom 3 does have a nice presentation. However, the actual gameplay mechanics are not much more advanced than the original Quake. Doom 3 is a straight-up run and gun shooter with linear gameplay and predictable monster spawns, but this doesn't make it a bad game. Actually, it can be quite enjoyable, provided your expectations are in line with what it's prepared to deliver.

Orochi Avlis
12-14-2004, 10:59 AM
I liked it. Not the best game this year, but nice all the same. Minus the overuse of the Imps and the bodies gibbing way to easily.

I just loved how defenseless when I was using the flashlight. It got my adrenaline up and made me nervous.

FireFly
12-14-2004, 11:32 AM
Neptune said:
I meant like post shit in their forums.


I don't see anything wrong with expressing an opinion.

Kalki
12-14-2004, 11:44 AM
Neptune said:

Imfamous said:
From the getgo, Doom 3 feels like Half-Life, except shit.




You know, I'm getting really tired of these three year olds comming in here and say DooM 3 sucks. What's worse they compare it to Half-Life 2 and 1 ALL THE ******* TIME.

Umm... he compared it to Half-life, not the sequel!?

bonch
12-14-2004, 11:46 AM
Roger said:
Saying it's a common game is pretty laughable.




Doom 3 is clearly an intentional step backward in time to the old gameplay of shooters that was common in the 90s. I still laugh at every monster closet I encounter (I'm replaying the single player). Like it or not, it was made as an homage to the old shooters, but in 80% pitch black darkness and monochrome textures with no color. A lot of the areas are almost entirely black and white and nothing more (that's my main criticism besides the braindead gameplay).


Neptune said:
You know, I'm getting really tired of these three year olds comming in here and say DooM 3 sucks. What's worse they compare it to Half-Life 2 and 1 ALL THE ******* TIME. Jesus christ! How often does one of us (DooM 3 fans) go into THEIR thread and start shit about THEIR game? I mean, I have no problems with peoples opinions, but come ON! This is getting out of hand.

The ONLY thing in the way of a Half-Life 2 bashing thread over on their part of the forum is that "Half-Life 2 dissapointment" thread. WTF?!

Word of advice: Get the ***** out of our forums. We don't go it you yours.



Maybe it's just me, but you seem rather defensive and insulting when it was just some guy posting his opinion based on the Doom 3 demo. I hate to break to ya, but he's not the only one who feels that way about the game. Plenty of people post their criticisms of Half-Life 2 in the Half-Life 2 forums. If the guy was trolling or flamebaiting, that would have been something different, but he wasn't, so if reading Doom 3 criticism upsets you, you should skip over it.

Drazula
12-14-2004, 03:23 PM
DudeMiester said:

Neptune said:
Word of advice: Get the ***** out of our forums. We don't go it you yours.



Umm... I post in the HL2 forums. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif hehe, so does Draz.


I haven't bashed HL2. Steam and Source keep me busy enough! http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Duoae
12-14-2004, 05:10 PM
Doom 3 is a straight-up run and gun shooter with linear gameplay and predictable monster spawns, but this doesn't make it a bad game.




I think you could quite easily insert HL2 instead of Doom 3 there.

Decker
12-15-2004, 01:02 AM
Duoae said:


Doom 3 is a straight-up run and gun shooter with linear gameplay and predictable monster spawns, but this doesn't make it a bad game.




I think you could quite easily insert HL2 instead of Doom 3 there.



Gads! There's a light year between the two in this aspect. Their approach to gameplay is as different as night and day (as different as two games of the same genre can have). Stop and think before posting something that simplistic.

If you insert HL2 there, the only valid point is linearity.

laffer
12-15-2004, 01:15 AM
I disagree. I realize that HL2 has some stuff Doom 3 doesn't and that the Grav Gun is a new feature, but it's not all that different from other FPS's.
Could you mention some of the extreme differences you're referring to?

Decker
12-15-2004, 02:44 AM
In regard to Duoae's post I was replying to, this is how HL2 complies with run-and-gun gameplay with predictable monster spawns rules of FPS gaming, from the top of my head.

Running:
- By foot
- By hovercraft
- By buggy

Gunning:
- Handguns
- Mounted guns on vehicles and barricades
- Laser guided RPG
- Anything you can grab as projectiles via gravgun
- Running down with vehicles
- Collapsing props from under/above the enemy

Monster spawns:
- From underground
- From dropships
- Patrolling
- Via plantation from pods
- From underwater

The predictable monster spawns thing is just out of place. They don't just spawn in front or behind you in HL2. The combine soldiers approach you the way humans do, Striders patrol the blocks, Antlions jump from the ground, the mine thingies dot the highway, manhacks approach from above cutting through props and so forth. Every enemy spawn follows a certain logic. Compare that to Doom's approach where an enemy comes from a dark corner or teleports behind you. If you want to call the monster spawns in HL2 predictable, you HAVE TO admit it's much less so than in D3.

Weapons-wise it's the same deal. In HL2 you kill enemies with guns, yes. But you also kill them with props using the gravgun, using the crane, running them over with vehicles, bashing them against each other and whatnot. Again, do the much-hated HL2-D3- comparison and you'll find Duoae's one-liner quite invalid.

In both games you proceed through areas killing enemies, they're both first person shooters, yes. But the base design of each game is very different, as is their approach to the genre. Duoae's original statement about their gameplay being carbon copied was so short-sighted it borderlines between hilarity and stupidity.

Duoae
12-15-2004, 04:46 AM
Okay first off. It is run and gun because that is all that there basically is to the game. The most challenging puzzle i faced throughout the whole game was the filling of the room with water. Every enemy you can shoot is able to be killed.

The monsters do spawn in. Usually behind things so you can't see them. There are several speed runners who have mentioned being able to get into buildings fast enough to see the enemies spawn in above them and then drop to the floor. You are basically pursued all the time, so when you come to a lull in the action you know there will either be a set piece around the next corner or the end of a level. Just because they don't spawn in visual range or right next to you doesn't change this fact.

I still stand by my statement:

"Half life 2 is a straight-up run and gun shooter with linear gameplay and predictable monster spawns, but this doesn't make it a bad game."

I never said that they were carbon copied. Both games can run off the same elements and be completely different in terms of gameplay. This realisation is not hilarious or stupid as you may think. It is a fact of game design. If you also factor in the point that Doom 3 is very similar to the original HL in some ways it makes them even more similar since HL2 is just a graphically and physically updated HL1.

Decker
12-15-2004, 06:31 AM
Looks like a significant difference in our interpretations of the two games. I consider the very basic frame of the genre itself to be the only truly unifying factor between the two.

This could REALLY take a while. So instead of reiterating and extending on the points I mentioned originally, I think it's better to just drop it, since this thread is getting badly derailed.

But I do see what you mean when you say both games can run off the same elements and be completely different in terms of gameplay. And no, such realisation not stupid. Sorry 'bout that. I thought you just flipped the remark without any further thought to it, for reasons unknown http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

Beelze
12-15-2004, 07:33 AM
Duoae said:


Doom 3 is a straight-up run and gun shooter with linear gameplay and predictable monster spawns, but this doesn't make it a bad game.




I think you could quite easily insert HL2 instead of Doom 3 there.



Two meanings for the word expression "straight up" (straight):
"Uninterrupted; consecutive"
"Not mixed with anything else"

Half-Life 2 does feature run-n-gun gameplay, but it has variation. Doom 3 does not have enough variation.

Also, the "monster spawns" in Half-Life 2 aren't any more predictable than in any other game (or reality). You know where enemies can come, and where they probably will come. In Doom 3 this was even more obvious (or maybe I was just good at guessing). In Doom 3 that meant a failure because most of the time the tactics used to scare you consisted of a monster appearing somewhere supposedly unexpected.

Also, he said linear gameplay. Whereas Half-Life 2 is linear regarding the levels, Doom 3 has linear (as in monotonous) gameplay and linear levels.

Mountain Man
12-15-2004, 07:57 AM
Decker and Beelze hit the nail on the head.

Claws
12-15-2004, 12:41 PM
Ultimately both HL2 and D3 are quite generic FPS games with one or two new gimmicks and beautiful graphics. HL2 got the physics and D3 got the lighting, I feel they both didn't utilise these new gimmicks in meaningful ways.

Now Halo2 on the other hand is a true innovative game... jk.

Duoae
12-15-2004, 04:27 PM
Decker said:
Looks like a significant difference in our interpretations of the two games. I consider the very basic frame of the genre itself to be the only truly unifying factor between the two.

This could REALLY take a while. So instead of reiterating and extending on the points I mentioned originally, I think it's better to just drop it, since this thread is getting badly derailed.

But I do see what you mean when you say both games can run off the same elements and be completely different in terms of gameplay. And no, such realisation not stupid. Sorry 'bout that. I thought you just flipped the remark without any further thought to it, for reasons unknown http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif.



I can agree to that. I understand what you are getting at as well. Perhaps we are coming at the same idea from different directions.

Vexed
12-15-2004, 06:24 PM
Claws said:
Ultimately both HL2 and D3 are quite generic FPS games with one or two new gimmicks and beautiful graphics. HL2 got the physics and D3 got the lighting, I feel they both didn't utilise these new gimmicks in meaningful ways.

Now Halo2 on the other hand is a true innovative game... jk.


I would like to hear some meanigful utilizations for physics and lighting from you then.

Doppelgofer
12-15-2004, 08:55 PM
Claws said:
Ultimately both HL2 and D3 are quite generic FPS games with one or two new gimmicks and beautiful graphics. HL2 got the physics and D3 got the lighting, I feel they both didn't utilise these new gimmicks in meaningful ways.



ask santa to bring you a big tub of pig fat for christmas...when he calls and asks why you would demand such a peculiar present, proudly tell him you deserve no more for making stupid comments of sheer idiocy

Drazula
12-15-2004, 09:15 PM
Beelze said:
Also, he said linear gameplay. Whereas Half-Life 2 is linear regarding the levels, Doom 3 has linear (as in monotonous) gameplay and linear levels.


How so? The gameplay in Doom 3 changes based on the increased difficulty of the enemies and weaponry.

There are times in HL2 when it appears to be nothing more than a gravity gun demo. And the gravity gun is the same throughout the entire game.

The funneling effect of both games linearity (more so in HL2, with its "GO HERE" level design) is just not acceptable after playing more open level designs.

I can see where people see HL2 and Doom 3 are similar.

Doppelgofer
12-15-2004, 09:20 PM
Drazula said:I can see where people see HL2 and Doom 3 are similar.



get out of my house this instance

DudeMiester
12-15-2004, 09:36 PM
Doppelgofer said:
get out of my house this instance



Draz isn't a whore? lol http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

HL2 and Doom 3 were totally different styles of play. There's no doubt HL2 was FAR more varied, not just in gameplay but in visual style. I like variation. Still Doom 3 is very good, but I'm afraid it's only for a niche market. HL2 is more general, on account of it's variation.

Mountain Man
12-15-2004, 10:58 PM
Drazula said:
The gameplay in Doom 3 changes based on the increased difficulty of the enemies and weaponry.


No, not really. Doom 3 is little more than a shooting gallery from beginning to end. Half-Life 2, on the other hand, has temendous gameplay variety.


There are times in HL2 when it appears to be nothing more than a gravity gun demo. And the gravity gun is the same throughout the entire game.


This is possibly the most bizarre thing you've ever said.


The funneling effect of both games linearity (more so in HL2, with its "GO HERE" level design) is just not acceptable after playing more open level designs.


What a strange thing to say considering Half-Life 2's levels are considerably more interesting, varied, and open than anything in Doom 3. Doom 3 allowed for virtually no exploration.

laffer
12-15-2004, 11:03 PM
I really don't think the HL2 levels allowed for much exploration, either. You were most of the time confined to one path with few secrets.

Also, I don't think the game has all that much variety. I agree that the grav gun is cool and the vehicles aren't bad either, but that doesn't give the game tremendous variety.

Don't get me wrong, though, I really love HL2. That one and Doom 3 are my current favourite FPS games.

IwantMORE
12-15-2004, 11:13 PM
Now who would have thought this thread would turn into yet another HL2 v D3 debate

Hudson
12-16-2004, 12:02 AM
Hey don't look at me I agree with the topic http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Mountain Man
12-16-2004, 08:17 AM
IwantMORE said:
Now who would have thought this thread would turn into yet another HL2 v D3 debate


Well, it's really not much of a debate since any objective thinker can clearly see that Half-Life 2 is the superior game. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Another Duke Fan
12-16-2004, 08:43 AM
Mountain Man said:

IwantMORE said:
Now who would have thought this thread would turn into yet another HL2 v D3 debate


Well, it's really not much of a debate since any objective thinker can clearly see that Half-Life 2 is the superior game. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif



No, they are both very different games and both are great in the way they are. I do enjoy playing both of them a lot and see no way of "cock comparisons" here. Naturally, the HL2 fan boy community desires to "blow the competition away", which is funny, as both games are not competing with each other. Objectively, being fond of one game and one brand only is infact narrow minded, one sided and subjective. http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Mountain Man
12-16-2004, 09:17 AM
I like both games, actually. I just prefer Half-Life 2 for a number of reasons.

Orochi Avlis
12-16-2004, 09:23 AM
Claws said:
Now Halo2 on the other hand is a true innovative game... jk.


For a minute there I thought I might have to slap you. Although Halo 2 is good game, certainly not the best one out there nor truly innovative (It does some cool improvements).
Poor, poor, ignorant console players.

P.S. I liked the first Halo BTW. So no flaming.

FireFly
12-16-2004, 09:29 AM
The funneling effect of both games linearity (more so in HL2, with its "GO HERE" level design)


What "go here" level design? The player has to make his way through the levels, there's no straight path from A to B. Navigation is always handled in extremely novel and interesting ways. For example, the car trap that you have to hitch a ride on in Ravenholm, or the water system you have to flood in Route Canal.


And the gravity gun is the same throughout the entire game.


Wrong.

IHerman
12-16-2004, 09:35 AM
We are all so incredibly spoiled.

Whining about little details while a few years back simple a-to-b level design was a normal thing and everybody enjoyed it.

Beelze
12-16-2004, 09:50 AM
Drazula said:
How so? The gameplay in Doom 3 changes based on the increased difficulty of the enemies and weaponry.


Within any chosen difficulty it is unvaried, even though the health/damage varies between difficulties.

Seeing as the arsenal is unvaried, it doesn't really help to make the gameplay more varied. Seeing as the enemy encounters are always the same (regarding spawning, locations, "tactics") they don't really help to make the game more varied.

In fact, its arsenal and enemy encounters are two of the things that make Doom 3 repetetive.


There are times in HL2 when it appears to be nothing more than a gravity gun demo.


First, regarding this matter, the game is the way you play it. Second, I don't know how you even dare to make such a comment. Do I even have to say my next line? Probably not, but I'll do it anyway: if Half-Life 2 is a Gravity Gun/physics demo then Doom 3 is nothing more than a shadow demo.


And the gravity gun is the same throughout the entire game.


The type-writer, along with everything else in Doom 3, was the same throughout the entire tech demo. Also, why should they change the Gravity Gun in the game? It was great as it was.


The funneling effect of both games linearity (more so in HL2, with its "GO HERE" level design) is just not acceptable after playing more open level designs.


It's your opinion that it is not acceptable, but obviously it is. Please explain how Half-Life 2's "GO HERE" level design is worse than Doom 3's shadow design.


IHerman said:
We are all so incredibly spoiled.


Yes we are, but realising that fact won't make things better.


Whining about little details while a few years back simple a-to-b level design was a normal thing and everybody enjoyed it.


When all the "little details" are added together they sometimes become big flaws that you'd rather not experience. Also, I still enjoy a-to-b level design, as long as the levels are varied.

Damien_Azreal
12-16-2004, 12:33 PM
IHerman said:
We are all so incredibly spoiled.

Whining about little details while a few years back simple a-to-b level design was a normal thing and everybody enjoyed it.



You are so right.

Kev_Boy
12-16-2004, 02:37 PM
The time the game was released helped with the fact it was an awesome game for me and it'll remain an experience I won't forget for years to come. I definantly think it was worth its 50$.

Even though after 3 weeks I had almost never played it again, I do intend to play it again fully when I have my new computer next year or so http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif (Or the expansion that's coming?)

I just would've liked it to be a little scarier still, it always had me on the edge of my seat but almost never actually scared me to death, so to speak.

Joe Siegler
12-20-2004, 02:25 PM
Inanimate Carbon Rod said:
Thanks for your advice.




:no one cares:



He at least gave concrete reasons for his disliking the game. Quite frankly, his post was good. Yours was not, as it was just yet another in a long line if Internet slams. Knock it off.

Bludd
12-23-2004, 11:19 AM
I'm kinda inclined to agree with Imfamous. Doom3 was a disappointment as a game, even though it had some very nice things. The graphics are good, but dark, the panels with UI that are littered around are great and the animated textures that show little video clips are also great. The voice acting is good, but the weapon sounds aren't very good. They don't pack any punch and are too generic.

Also, the game isn't scary in a "ooh, this is freaking creepy, I can't play any more, gotta save and have a drink" atmosphere kind of way. It's more like "look behind you.. boo! haha, scared you!" ad nauseam. The scariest part of the game was before you had even seen any monsters. id has something to learn from Troika; The Haunted Hotel in Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines is so creepy it's not even funny, and from Monolith (or whoever made AvP2); the human missions where you have to go into some Alien hive thing is awesomely creepy.

Jblade
12-23-2004, 11:33 AM
For me the scariest part of the game was the entrance to Delta labs (I think it was Delta? Well the labs with the teleports) where it's almost silent and there's no enemies around. It was such a change from the rest of the game that I thought it was gonna throw some new awful enemy at me.

FireFly
12-23-2004, 12:03 PM
Strangely enough, I found Far Cry to be scarier than Doom 3. Trigens really are nasty.

NutWrench
12-23-2004, 01:09 PM
Jblade said:
For me the scariest part of the game was the entrance to Delta labs (I think it was Delta? Well the labs with the teleports) where it's almost silent and there's no enemies around. It was such a change from the rest of the game that I thought it was gonna throw some new awful enemy at me.



Same here. A change of scenery is vital to keeping the player interested. Doom 3 had about 80% identical corridoors, 10% actual rooms and 10% genuinely cool stuff like the Monorail, Hell and Ruins.

Phait
03-18-2005, 01:00 PM
I've decided to redownload the demo, to test on a friend's upcoming new system.

Unfortunately I haven't really been able to find a server that supports segmented downloading (I use GetRight). Know of any?

NutWrench
03-18-2005, 02:07 PM
All you need to do is find two or more servers that support resume and make sure you have the download segment option in GetRight enabled.

Phait
03-18-2005, 02:36 PM
Well, I typically get the aborted error, not supported or something similiar.

NutWrench
03-18-2005, 04:16 PM
Some sites like FileFront use one-time-only codes in the download URLs to prevent leeching. So you can download from the URL once, but you can't pause and resume the download later on.

Poltergeist
03-18-2005, 05:12 PM
Alright, guys, this is pretty stupid. Both of you just STFU! Half Life 2 is a scary game. Boo. Hoo.

Doom 3 is also scary. That does not make it better or worse than Half Life 2, so please spare your breaths and shut the hell up.

Polter.

ZuljinRaynor
03-18-2005, 07:30 PM
I download the demo the day the demo was released. Only pissy thing for me, my GeForce 2 GFX card. I've seen it on my brother's FX5200. Lovely game.

John
03-19-2005, 11:42 PM
I agree that Chronicles of Riddick:DX is better than Doom 3.



Riddick is not the "run of the mill" movie game port. It's an amazing FPS with great gameplay. It's visuals are better than Doom 3's and it actually gives you stuff to do! \o/ Yay for gameplay!

Cerberus_e
03-20-2005, 09:56 AM
I liked doom 3 a lot better than CoR, gameplay-wise,, story-wise, enemy-wise, etc...
but CoR deserved the mature title more than doom 3

Merlijn
03-21-2005, 05:44 AM
What "go here" level design? The player has to make his way through the levels, there's no straight path from A to B



No offense, but I felt HL2 was really linear, often there's only one specific path, or one obvious puzzle to continue (such as placing bricks on a piece of wood to continue - was that made for 5-year olds? :P).
Often places are locked with those ever-present fences everywhere on all sides - exept for one passage of course. That's the definition of "go here" design lol.

Not to say Doom3 isn't linear - both are very linear games.

Michelangelo
03-22-2005, 10:50 PM
the tech is good but I found hl2 to be a little boring
Doom 3 on the other hand ... http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
Maybe the add-ons and the mods will be good
Still waiting for duke

FireFly
03-23-2005, 12:09 PM
Merlijn said:
Often places are locked with those ever-present fences everywhere on all sides - exept for one passage of course. That's the definition of "go here" design lol.



I don't see how that sort of thing can be avoided in a linear game. I would say a game has "go here" design when there's no attempt to disguise the linearity, but that isn't the case with HL2.

Route Kanal is a really good example of how to make level navigation interesting.

Cerberus_e
03-23-2005, 12:58 PM
the linearity was disguised in HL2? but not on Doom 3?
guy, you can't disguise linearity.

FireFly
03-23-2005, 01:15 PM
You can disguise linearity. Even if there are many paths the player can still only take one. So you make the single path seem like just another option, "Oh I can jump on this train here and get behind this fence".

Doom 3's complex-like layout helped (and that was something HL2 could have done more), but it the player didn't move through the levels in an interesting enough way.

Merlijn
03-24-2005, 09:24 AM
FireFly said:

I don't see how that sort of thing can be avoided in a linear game.



By making it less linear :P Nah j/k. I didn't mind the fences outside most of the time, but the fact that even inside locations (route Kanal) are full of them was a bit.. odd I tought. Of course the city is taken over and all, but some of them seemed rather pointless and seemed to serve no real function (other then to block you).
So they could have used some more natural looking ways to keep you on one path or give you more possibilities to stray from your path. Oh well http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif




Route Kanal is a really good example of how to make level navigation interesting.



It was a bit too similar to the way HL1-navigation was designed IMO. The part with the trains was very well done though.

Cerberus_e
03-24-2005, 10:00 AM
Merlijn said:
So they could have used some more natural looking ways to keep you on one path or give you more possibilities to stray from your path. Oh well http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif



"errrr, I suggest you don't go to deep sea, their radar systems will easily spot you" is more frustrating than a fence http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Claws
03-26-2005, 12:50 PM
Neptune said:
I meant like post shit in their forums. I mean, yeah, I've posted in there too. But never anything negative about HL2. But it's funny how a single day can't go by without one of those little HL2 fanboys running over here and say "Doom 3 sucks". You know what? ***** you! Besides that, it would be different if we had one solid thread dedicated to bashing doom. But it seems like everyone and there brother enjoys stating that Doom 3 is a bad game (Which is a complete opinion. I think Doom 3 is FAR better than the shit HL2 turned out to be!) in nearly every thread in here. I mean look at the "Doom 3 expansion" thread. It was a perfectly fine and innocent topic about the new expansion. You morons turned it into a "HL2 is better/ doom 3 sucks" thread.



FANBOY TO THE MAXXXXXXX, watch out people! http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif http://forums.3drealms.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif