Doom 64 is Doom 3?

Has it ever occurred to you that Doom 64's atmosphere was supposed to be a horror shooter on the id Tech engine?

Doom 3 seems like a different approach of a horror shooter for a 3D Doom, bit still horror.

What do you think?

Voros said:

Has it ever occurred to you that Doom 64's atmosphere was supposed to be a horror shooter on the id Tech engine?

Doom 64 utilizes the Build engine, not the ID Tech engine.

Avoozl said:

Doom 64 utilizes the Build engine, not the ID Tech engine.

Srsly?

Avoozl said:

Doom 64 utilizes the Build engine, not the ID Tech engine.

You should do some researches first before say something like that... :p

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_64

Engine | id Tech 1 (modified)

http://doomwiki.org/wiki/Doom_64

Doom 64, ... is a sequel to Doom II. The game has all new graphics and runs on a modified Doom engine,...

I remember a while ago that people here in a certain thread were speaking of it actually being on a modified Build engine and depending on the person mentioning it I think I assumed that they were correct.

But the question is why is there no sources to that particular information in the wiki, who ever confirmed that it used a modified Id Tech engine?

Just as much as a lobster could be considered a modified spider.

Obviously, the rendering part is very different, but the game logic didn't change a whole lot from classic Doom. I don't see a compelling reason to borrow anything from the Build engine.

In any case, when in doubt - ask Kaiser.

The only obvious extension it has on the mapping side is that RoR feature used in some levels. Rendering-wise, it just bangs more on the hardware, just like PSX Doom did. But it's still Doom through-and-through.

Mixing Build and Doom that early in history? That would be like mixing Unix and Windows ;-)

Doom 64 looked too simillar to PC Doom, the only differences might be the new sounds, graphics, and the slightly better quality, If you're saying it's based on Build engine' then why weren't slopes, 3D floors ... etc possible ?

DMGUYDZ64 said:

Doom 64 looked too simillar to PC Doom

Too similar? They look way different.

Wait, your user title suggests something.

Doom 64 is Doom 3?

No, Doom 64 is just that... Doom 64. At least that's what I always believed in...

Doom 64 probably inspired Doom 3's creepier atmosphere but Doom 64 can't be Doom 3, know why? Because you can actually see where you're going.

MetroidJunkie said:

Because you can actually see where you're going.

Not all contemporary players would agree.

Well, you can see where you're going far more easily than Vanilla Doom 3 outside of your flashlight.

Were there even any other Build engine games ported at the time of Doom 64's release? Doom 64's release date was April 1st, 1997, while Duke Nukem 64's was October 1997. Now, it would be quite the irony if Doom's "archnemesis" not only was released later, but also got its engine stolen by the its #1 rival.

Plus, Doom 64 has been broken down and "ported" to PC (twice), and the analysis concluded that it was using Doom's WAD and resource format, not Build's. They must have had some pretty wicked tools or awesome programmers to create such a hybrid in such a short time, and with a pretty much one-shot use.

Da Werecat said:

In any case, when in doubt - ask Kaiser.

He's always busy. I wish he'd release the next version of Doom64EX. I don't expect many new features, just slopes, true 3D floor over floor, dynamic lights, a ZDoom style decorate feature, support for multiple music formats, 3D models and the moon on a stick. Is that really too much to ask for?

Actually, I'd happily just settle for a feature in Doom Builder 64 that could copy coloured lights from one sector to multiple other sectors without any fuss.

Maes said:

Doom 64's release date was April 1st, 1997, while Duke Nukem 64's was October 1997. Now, it would be quite the irony if Doom's "archnemesis" not only was released later, but also got its engine stolen by the its #1 rival.

Uh no, Duke Nukem 3D was released January 29th 1996, the Mac release of shadow Warrior was in October of 1997, and Doom 64 doesn't use the build engine at all, it uses a modified version of id tech 1.

Doominator2 said:

Uh no, Duke Nukem 3D was released January 29th 1996

I was referring to Duke Nukem 64, on the Nintendo 64.

Actually MobyGames gives its release date even later: November 1997, and most other sources simply round it to "1998".

Edit: well, in the end it will turn out that Duke Nukem 64 also uses the idtech 1 engine (that'd actually make more sense, since it was already made...), and that then The Duke was a zombie ;-)

Maybe they used a cheap trick to get ROR. Given 3D floors date back to DOSDoom, you never know.

Maes said:

Edit: well, in the end it will turn out that Duke Nukem 64 also uses the idtech 1 engine (that'd actually make more sense, since it was already made...), and that then The Duke was a zombie ;-)

No, that's impossible. Duke 64 uses moving sectors, which IDTech 1 is incapable of. Are you sure you don't mean IDTech 2?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsyMluOkX28#t=01m37s

The sarcasm is totally lost on you, guys :-/

MetroidJunkie said:

Maybe they used a cheap trick to get ROR.

More or less.

Maes said:

The sarcasm is totally lost on you, guys :-/

[sarcasm]This is why we need sarcasm tags![/sarcasm]

Cyanosis said:

Too similar? They look way different..

Hello ? Read the whole post before saying something like this .

Avoozl said:

But the question is why is there no sources to that particular information in the wiki, who ever confirmed that it used a modified Id Tech engine?

Kaiser reverse-engineered the console executable.

He wrote a whole tech bible explaining how it works and the differences from the PC version. It's quite clear that it's based on the PC version. The laser effect of the unmaker uses the BSP tree for rendering.

Doom64 is Doom 3 in the sense that it takes place after the events of Doom II, whereas the actual Doom 3 is a reboot.

Other than that, it's Doom, and it's the Doom engine. The only port that didn't use idTech1 in any capacity was the SNES version.

Gez said:

Kaiser reverse-engineered the console executable.

He wrote a whole tech bible explaining how it works and the differences from the PC version. It's quite clear that it's based on the PC version. The laser effect of the unmaker uses the BSP tree for rendering.

Not quite true. It's based on the PlayStation version, which is based on the Jag version. Which while very similar to and at some point based on the PC version, it also has some serious architectural differences too (most of which manifest themselves as bugs or quirks in various ways). The biggest one is the multistage rendering architecture, which even though PSX and D64 have hardware renderers, they still retain to a large degree for scene generation.

I have been working on porting Jag back to PC, and in the process I have found that the gamesim code in 3DO, PSX, and even Doom 64 is about 99% the same. Of all those, Doom 64 makes the most additional changes and tweaks, but they're all minor ones.

scalliano said:

The only port that didn't use idTech1 in any capacity was the SNES version.

Aha! That's where you're wrong, the GBA Doom 2 used the Southpaw Engine!

I can read the wiki!

The weird thing is that, despite using its own engine, GBA Doom 2 actually had visual glitches from IDTech 1 like tutti frutti textures.

Quasar said:

I have been working on porting Jag back to PC

Really? I love the Atari Jaguar version. It started me on the Doom path all those years ago. Are you still working on it?

Quasar said:

Not quite true. It's based on the PlayStation version, which is based on the Jag version.

That there are intermediaries doesn't change that the N64 version is still ultimately derived from the PC version -- and not from, say, Duke Nukem 3D, or from scratch.