Doom 4 in Motion, id Is Hiring

So, what you're saying is that Doom3 was visually better in every area... only Halo 2 had a few more polies spent on last minute details, and as such Doom3 looked horrible?

Halo 2 looks like shit, even the Halo 2 Vista one looks like shit. Back in 2004 when I had my old 6600GT, Doom 3 on high (I could only run it on high with 30+ fps) looked absolutely stunning. Now playing it with 2 8800GTX's, 8xAA, 16x AF, and Ultra High quality the game has aged quite well.

Also the first half of Crysis was extremely non-linear, and I concur that Stalker was very non-linear...however I thought Bioshock felt very linear and almost Doom3 like.

As for the news about Doom4, I will definitely buy it and can't wait for more information on it in the future. I would really like a Doom II remake. Hopefully by the time of its release we have good enough hardware to have more than 3 enemies on the screen at once. That is the biggest thing I miss about the old doom's.

Fusion said:

Where did i say 6 months? It's been 4 years since Doom3 was released.

And today I still have basically the same computer I had 4 years ago.

Do you expect the player to play the role of a monster, no longer of a human? The artifact from RoE could be a sign that some people had tried to demonize the protagonist.

Bloodshedder said:

And today I still have basically the same computer I had 4 years ago.

My current computer can't run Doom 3.

My current computer can run Doom 3 but it runs at all of 8fps on ultra low quality.

Halflife 2 runs like a dream

printz said:

Do you expect the player to play the role of a monster, no longer of a human? The artifact from RoE could be a sign that some people had tried to demonize the protagonist.

Doom 4: Rampage Edition?

definitely not in the mood for a D4:RE.

ID should either

A) actually have a really good story incorporated into a non-linear fps with decent graphics (but no crysis bullshit) and actually make sense, story could change depending on your actions etc.

-or-

B) the story so far: you are alone and motherfuckers are coming to get you. kill them.

Butts said:

(B) the story so far: you are alone and motherfuckers are coming to get you. kill them.

Powered by Doom2.exe!

ID is gonna cross out the 2 and write a 4 right above it.

.

Scragadelic said:

Yes! Someone who actually has standards! Just for the curiosity I tried Doom 3 on ultra-high quality and you can still see JPEG artifacts

TGA files don't have JPG artifacts.

Scragadelic said:

and texture stretchmarks around some doors and some models, like they just didn't care.

I don't know how much you know about 3d modeling and such. But I can tell you that not getting any streched textures ever, is very very hard. And fixing and polishing the UV maps takes forever if you are dead set on not getting any. This is in particular with Low poly models such as those in Doom3.

Scragadelic said:

Also let's not forget that weird 'developers room' just before you walk out to meet the cyberdemon. That totally just ruined any ambience the game had built up to that point and was just unprofessional.

Since when did easter eggs become taboo? This one might not have been of the humorous kind. But if you don't want to break immersion. Don't press on a brick with the id logo on it.

Scragadelic said:
Ways that Doom 4 can be redeeming:
- Having an option to hide statistics. Doom 1.9 had that, just plus-plus-plus and the game world would fill the screen with nothing obstructing it. It felt raw that way.[/B]

You mean like in Doom3, where you go into options and turn "show HUD" to "No"?

Cyberpunk meets hellspawn invasion. Urban warfare between lone space marine and hordes of hell. That is what I want.

insertwackynamehere said:
Urban warfare between lone space marine and hordes of hell.

If they make a large scale thing a multiplayer focus would be more epic.

Ralphis said:

My current computer can run Doom 3 but it runs at all of 8fps on ultra low quality.

Halflife 2 runs like a dream

Thats funny, its the other way for me...But with Halflife 2 I suspect steam is slowing that game down abit.

I'll play it. Doom3 was enjoyable, at least the first time through.

Off topic, what advantage does Ultra Quality provide over High? I've never tried it myself, still don't think my card is powerful enough for it.

Chu said:

Off topic, what advantage does Ultra Quality provide over High? I've never tried it myself, still don't think my card is powerful enough for it.

Anti-Aliasing. I turn the shit off, it's unneeded.

Csonicgo said:

Anti-Aliasing. I turn the shit off, it's unneeded.

No.

Ultra Quality mode gives you the benefit of all the textures being in lossless TGA format. A larger variety of sounds are used, and some extra special effects I believe.

There's a few things that don't pop up in lower modes compared to the higher. In hell, there's a hazmat suit guy flying around in hi quality mode that isn't there in lower quality modes. Not sure about what exactly is the difference between high and ultra, other than those relating to resources.

what happened with that RAGE thing?

Skeletor said:

what happened with that RAGE thing?

Awhile back they mentioned setting up a second internal team within id, to make more than one game at a time. They haven't given up on RAGE.

kristus said:

So, what you're saying is that Doom3 was visually better in every area... only Halo 2 had a few more polies spent on last minute details, and as such Doom3 looked horrible?

No, Halo 2 was better in model and texture quality.
Another 2004 game that looks fuckloads better than Doom 3: Half Life 2. Everything is nice and smooth, and the graphics system is far more efficient, allowing a much better framerate at higher quality modes. Hell, in HL2, I got ~30 fps at 640x480 on full quality, and that was back when I was still running only 1 gig of memory.

kristus said:

Not sure about what exactly is the difference between high and ultra, other than those relating to resources.

I remember a quote from one of the id guys (maybe Robert Duffy?) that said the technical differences between the high and ultra version where the passes the rendering engine made through the video card to build the graphics to the screen. If something has a new shader engine, then maybe there would be a quality reflection..i think.

Jim Rainer said:

No, Halo 2 was better in model and texture quality.
Another 2004 game that looks fuckloads better than Doom 3: Half Life 2. Everything is nice and smooth, and the graphics system is far more efficient, allowing a much better framerate at higher quality modes. Hell, in HL2, I got ~30 fps at 640x480 on full quality, and that was back when I was still running only 1 gig of memory.

I'm guessing your game looked more like the one on the right? http://www.stageselect.com/images/articles/doom3comparison/directcompare.jpg

If your system can't even properly handle doom3 today, can you stop making comparisons to, I'll say it, a graphically inferior game like halo2.

Doom3 won a ton of awards for best graphics when it was released. Honestly, even if I was a Halo2 fan I wouldn't even try to make that comparison; it's clear that Microsoft is no John Carmack. I remember Microsoft only making a few good titles.. oh wait.. that was their office suite nevermind.

Remember, this is 'DOOM'world, not 'HALO2'world.

Yeah Halo2 was just hampered by consolitis. There are certain titles that are meant for certain platforms: just because Halo 2 isn't as graphically advanced doesn't mean it's not fun.

But Doom3 is better anyway. ;)

Fusion said:

I'm guessing your game looked more like the one on the right? http://www.stageselect.com/images/articles/doom3comparison/directcompare.jpg

If your system can't even properly handle doom3 today, can you stop making comparisons to, I'll say it, a graphically inferior game like halo2.

Doom3 won a ton of awards for best graphics when it was released. Honestly, even if I was a Halo2 fan I wouldn't even try to make that comparison; it's clear that Microsoft is no John Carmack. I remember Microsoft only making a few good titles.. oh wait.. that was their office suite nevermind.

Remember, this is 'DOOM'world, not 'HALO2'world.

Uh, no. Mine looked like the image on the left. It's not the lighting effects I'm downrating, it's the model quality. Low poly-count objects. Halo 2 is inferior in lighting and bump-mapping due to it being a console game, but in all my years of playing it, I have yet to see a spherical object in Halo 2 represented by a octagonal object. Also, Microsoft didn't make Halo. Bungie did, Microsoft just published it.

Also, just because this is Doomworld doesn't mean everyone is going to go "fuk u doom 3s grafix r teh bestest! all other 2004 era gamez sux in teh grafix".

In additon, I already stated I'm on a budget computer from shitmart. I don't know how you managed to miss that. Oh wait, that's right, you were too busy being a Carmack fanboy and pretending Microsoft made halo 2.

Well, Microsoft owned Bungie when they made the Halo games, so...

What bothers me though is that you judge the visual aspect of a game on how many polies they spend on a soda can. As opposed to the actual design. And in Doom3, a few more polies do a lot more difference than it would in Halo 2, for more reasons than one. Actually, in "Doom3 Phobos". We started making all fingers for all characters we made. But then eventually, we just reverted back to making "mitts" like in Doom3. Cause it were actually a lot less troublesome, and it didn't feel significant enough to warrant the work.

Also, don't excuse Halo2 for being a X-box game. Doom3 were on the X-box too. Although I have no idea how it actually looked there.

And I disagree with Myk. I think it is "beautiful". I've been wandering through the halls of Doom3 many times, studying and admiring the clever usage of textures, and brushes. It's really not easy to spot when you're blazing through it for the first time. And everything tends to blur and you think all you see is grey bases.

Jim Rainer said:

Uh, no. Mine looked like the image on the left. It's not the lighting effects I'm downrating, it's the model quality. Low poly-count objects. Halo 2 is inferior in lighting and bump-mapping due to it being a console game, but in all my years of playing it, I have yet to see a spherical object in Halo 2 represented by a octagonal object. Also, Microsoft didn't make Halo. Bungie did, Microsoft just published it.

Also, just because this is Doomworld doesn't mean everyone is going to go "fuk u doom 3s grafix r teh bestest! all other 2004 era gamez sux in teh grafix".

In additon, I already stated I'm on a budget computer from shitmart. I don't know how you managed to miss that. Oh wait, that's right, you were too busy being a Carmack fanboy and pretending Microsoft made halo 2.

Your opinion IS THE MINORITY, this is Doomworld. It's like going to
a war torn country wearing a t-shirt that says "let god sort em out".
Your opinion is going to be unpopular to the masses.

And I'll say it again, you're wrong. Doom3 as a graphics engine is superior. Many new games are based on the Doom3 engine such as:

Games based on the Doom3 Engine
o Doom 3: Resurrection of Evil – Nerve Software
* Quake 4 – Raven Software
* Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles – Capcom
* Prey – Human Head Studios
* Enemy Territory: Quake Wars – Splash Damage
* Return to Castle Wolfenstein II – Raven Software

Games based on Halo2 Engine
* None released

And yes i am a Carmack Fanboy, he created Doom! Microsoft/Bungie didn't.

I played Doom 3 on the X-box and it looks like medium/high on the PC version, there also was alot cut out like the outside lvls and some other parts. Since this dude is on a shitmart computer, he has probably never experienced Doom at Ultra Quality (please correct me if I'm wrong) and obviously is comparing Halo 2 screenshots vs. Doom 3 screenshots. Pathetic.

Have you even played Halo 2 Vista on the PC? No? Yes? The game looks like shit, and it has somewhat better models, textures in the PC version than the original does, (Better resolutions, and AA help) yet it still can't hold a candle against Doom on high or Ultra. I mainly bought it for the MP because I was such a huge Halo PC/CE fan. Boy was that the biggest waste of 50 bucks I have ever made in regards to games.

/rant.

I think DOOM 3 has a great engine, but its aesthetics don't move me much, especially the creatures.

Fusion said:
Your opinion IS THE MINORITY, this is Doomworld. It's like going to
a war torn country wearing a t-shirt that says "let god sort em out".
Your opinion is going to be unpopular to the masses.

Wrong forums; try Doom3world.com for that environment, perhaps. Personally I don't care for Halo, but this is a "classic" DOOM site mainly, with only some attention to DOOM 3, but the usual user here loves the DOOM games from the 90s for some reason, and may or may not like DOOM 3. Some like is as much as DOOM, others don't care about it, or and others just dislike it. Many have stated on these forums that they prefer Half-life 2 over DOOM 3, for example.

It's weird to dislike DOOM or DOOM II here, but DOOM 3... not necessarily.