In defense of Doom 3

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
Post Reply
feedback
Posts: 7449
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 8:00 am

In defense of Doom 3

Post by feedback »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn0IMQIlUMQ

I quite enjoyed this video. :up: An interesting perspective just before the release of Doom 4
I love quake!
AmIdYfReAk
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by AmIdYfReAk »

That had to be the longest winded, pompus, whiney "leave my favourite game alone!" In history...

*golf clap* well f*cking done.
feedback
Posts: 7449
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by feedback »

It was nothing like that, but ok
I love quake!
User avatar
seremtan
Posts: 36013
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by seremtan »

Doom 3 sucked dude, just let it go
xer0s
Posts: 12446
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by xer0s »

Rage sucked too.

What are the odds the new Doom will suck?
User avatar
Captain
Posts: 20410
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:50 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by Captain »

Doom 3 was excellent.
Don Carlos
Posts: 17509
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by Don Carlos »

I enjoyed the video - cheers Feedback :up:
User avatar
Whiskey 7
Posts: 9709
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 7:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by Whiskey 7 »

Don Carlos wrote:I enjoyed the video - cheers Feedback :up:
Me too. Thanks Feedback.

I still remember playing and how dark & scary it was and yes, even frustrating at times trying to find something. I might even reload and run about just for old times sake :)
[color=#FFBF00]Physicist [/color][color=#FF4000]of[/color] [color=#0000FF]Q3W[/color]
User avatar
DooMer
Posts: 3068
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 1999 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by DooMer »

It's not bad, it's just not great. Some of the things he says are debatable. By the time the game came out it didn't look as good as when they first showed it off, that shit was in development forever. Rose colored glasses. Boring monster design, and lazy level design. There should never be a moment in a game where you stand next to a monster spawner shooting enemies as they come out 1 by 1, and the fact that Id didn't know any better was pretty fucked up
User avatar
Eraser
Posts: 19175
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by Eraser »

DooMer wrote:By the time the game came out it didn't look as good as when they first showed it off, that shit was in development forever.
Sure, but I think that idea mainly stems from the fact that when Doom 3 was released, Epic were already showing off technology preview videos of Unreal Engine 3, which wouldn't see a release until 2006.
feedback
Posts: 7449
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by feedback »

I enjoyed it at the time. Found it very atmospheric and scary, but the atmosphere alone could only take it so far.
I love quake!
User avatar
Eraser
Posts: 19175
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by Eraser »

Part of the problem was also perspective. The expectations of Doom 3 were so incredibly high that the criticism was unfairly harsh. People have talked each other into believing Doom 3 was a shit game, while when you give it a fair chance, it's not a bad game at all. It may not reach the heights or be as revolutionary as the original Doom or Quake, but calling it a bad game is completely unfair.
Mogul
Posts: 1635
Joined: Wed May 23, 1973 12:48 pm

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by Mogul »

I enjoyed the fuck out of this game, as well as Rage. Both have issues, but both are also amazing when they do what they do best, respectively.

As for the odds of Doom 2016 sucking, I'd say pretty low. Everything they've said publicly about the game gives me the impression that they mechanically understand what made the first games so good, and how they're trying to bring that to the new game. I'm talking about the mechanics of making decisions about movement and weapon usage in response to enemy behavior. Some of this made its way into the third game, but I think this next time around, they're really trying to copy it.

I'd never say they could live up to the greatness of the original, because the circumstances then are not reproducible and they never will be. But I get the sense that they still understand what was good about that old gameplay and they're intelligently bringing it back.

I really hope I'm not wrong about that and that I'm not reading too much into it.
This line only remake is total rubbish I've ever seen!!! Fuck off!!! --CZghost
AmIdYfReAk
Posts: 6926
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:00 am

Re: In defense of Doom 3

Post by AmIdYfReAk »

DooMer wrote:It's not bad, it's just not great. Some of the things he says are debatable. By the time the game came out it didn't look as good as when they first showed it off, that shit was in development forever. Rose colored glasses. Boring monster design, and lazy level design. There should never be a moment in a game where you stand next to a monster spawner shooting enemies as they come out 1 by 1, and the fact that Id didn't know any better was pretty fucked up

Quoted for truth.

The fast hardcore game element that made the previous titles what they where was gone, instead it was a slow paced horror style shooter with one hell of an impressive game engine behind it... And that's why i usually agree when people just call it a tech demo.

Cant wait for the new doom, it seem they've nailed down the ( updated ) recipe of the classic games where your required to keep going and think SO far ahead to plan your route/attack.
Post Reply