What if id software didn't make Quake and instead made a different game that is called "Doom 3"?

What if id software, in 1995-1996, were not working on Quake, and instead, were working on a game called "Doom 3"? (Not to be confused with the 2004 game called "Doom 3")

Imagine if the world got a third classic Doom game around 1995-1996 instead of Quake? The idea is of a third classic Doom game with lots of new enemies, weapons, and items. And, of course, also including the enemies, weapons, and items from Doom 1+2, being released instead of Quake.

Now, the development process would go either one of two ways:

1. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "id tech 1" that powered Doom 1+2.

2. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "Build" engine that powered Duke Nukem 3D.

Now, you may be wondering: "Does it really matter what engine is being used?" Yes, yes it does. Around this time, was when the id tech 1 engine started to look old (or at least, that's what I've been told from reading a lot about the history of FPS games).

So basically, id software has an ultimatum. id software could either keep doing what they've been doing with the old engine, or they could try to get a license to use the "Build" engine from Ken Silverman and try to basically port Doom onto the Build engine.

What do you guys think? I'm very curious.

Midway did, and it's called Doom 64.

Doom dark edition

4 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

Now, the development process would go either one of two ways:

 

1. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "id tech 1" that powered Doom 1+2.

2. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "Build" engine that powered Duke Nukem 3D.

Why wouldn't they develop a true 3D engine (id Tech 2)? Think Doom running on the Quake engine.

There is no way id wasn't going to develop the Quake engine, whether or not the game on it would actually be called Quake.

And in many ways, Quake got derision for basically being Doom again.

32 minutes ago, chungy said:

There is no way id wasn't going to develop the Quake engine, whether or not the game on it would actually be called Quake.

 

And in many ways, Quake got derision for basically being Doom again.

Seriously, John Carmack would have gone INSANE without making a true 3D engine.

4 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

1. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "id tech 1" that powered Doom 1+2.

2. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "Build" engine that powered Duke Nukem 3D.

I would imagine it being neither of these scenarios. id would never utilize a competitors engine to make a game, and certainly not the id of the 90's where Carmack was cranking out a new engine with nearly every major title they released. By the mid-90's Carmack had every intention of going true 3D and was cracking away at what would become the Quake engine. What we know as the Quake engine still would've been utilized, even if they were making another Doom sequel. There's no way they were going to utilize the Doom engine for a third time at that point.

15 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

the 2004 game called "Doom 3"

FTFY.

There was an article that speculated what a Doom 3 would look like in 1998.

Quake 1 forever changed the fps genre. Another Doom would've had similar neglect-able influence to Plutonia\TNT outside the modding community, not to mention it'd have to compete with Plutonia and TNT which might make it brick even harder. 3D Realms would've been the biggest winner as Duke3D manages to replace Quake 1 as the big fps of the year. A lot of games with Quake influences wouldn't exist or be completely different (Bye bye Team Fortress and half-life). 

OpenGL and Direct X were already around by then and there isn't a reason for most games that don't copy Quake's gameplay to not exist. Halo would've been an even bigger shockwave to the genre.

A  Doom game instead of Quake 1 in 97 would basically... have been Quake 1. Heck, aesthetically Doom 3 itself draws way more from Quake 1 than the original Doom's. For that matter, so does Doom 64 in some ways. 

Whatever was going to happen, it was going to -look- like Quake at the very least. 

And yeah... iD, ESPECIALLY under Carmack, would -never- have used the Build Engine. A) They were already rendering it obsolete with their own tech at the time, and B) iD, to my knowledge, has never used an engine they did not develop themselves. It's about as preposterous an idea as Epic suddenly deciding to use Source to build games instead of their own Unreal Engines. 

For his Quake retrospective, Ahoy dug up a number of fan reactions on usenet and other places at the time about quake's release, and one of them was something to the tune of "is it just me, or could this game be called Doom 3?" There's a bunch of examples in that video of what chungy has mentioned, so in a sense they really did make Doom 3, I guess.

id wasn't too keen on simply repeating the same thing over and over in the early 90s (repeating quake and eventually doom did become a sore point in the company in the later 90s and early 2000s...), so it's not really that surprising they decided to try to go with something else, even if Romero's extremely elaborate design didn't work out.

7 minutes ago, Taurus Daggerknight said:

aesthetically Doom 3 itself draws way more from Quake 1 than the original Doom's.

What? Quake 1 looks way less sci-fi than Doom 3 because you're constantly being thrown at strange and gothic dimensions as opposed to space and futuristic tech bases.

5 minutes ago, tempdecal.wad said:

What? Quake 1 looks way less sci-fi than Doom 3 because you're constantly being thrown at strange and gothic dimensions as opposed to space and futuristic tech bases.

Monster aesthetics was what I was primarily referring to. BUt even with environments; Hell in Doom 3, to me, appeared more akin to the dark castles of Quake than anything we faced in Doom (apart from House of Pain maybe). Doom 3 also had a bigger emphasis on darkness as a visual element that classic Doom didn't (Classic Doom had a lot of dark elements, but it was still a largely colorful world at the end of the day). 

Quake's chapters all still start off in the tech base scenes, and it's expansions bring us back some cyborg beasties IIRC. 

In any case, I'm not saying you can confuse Doom 3 for Quake, just that it's closer to Quake than classic Doom visually speaking. 

iSN't quAKe JuSt DoOm 3?

1 hour ago, MFG38 said:

FTFY.

Thank you very much, I didn't really like Doom 3 so I must have forgotten when it was released.

16 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

Now, the development process would go either one of two ways:

Not really. If they wanted to create Doom 3 as dark horror-styled shooter - they'll do it just with Quake 1 graphics (downscaled quality). Alternate timelines doesn't work the way you imagined. If Doom 3 happened - it will happen in any way. Only small details will be changed.

Next:

16 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

1. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "id tech 1" that powered Doom 1+2.

As @Nevander said - Midway actually used the first way and they've created Doom 64.

16 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

2. id software would develop Doom 3 using the "Build" engine that powered Duke Nukem 3D.

With alive John Carmack? Nonsense. Build engine is the competitor engine from competitor corporation. 

OKAY I GET IT THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE I JUST REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT DOOM WOULD LOOK LIKE ON THE BUILD ENGINE!

22 minutes ago, Đeⓧiaz said:

Build engine is the competitor engine from competitor corporation. 

Not necessarily that, but it's extremely unlikely they would've ever chosen an engine that was not designed by them, especially with Carmack around.

59 minutes ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

OKAY I GET IT THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE I JUST REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT DOOM WOULD LOOK LIKE ON THE BUILD ENGINE!

Did you heard about the Google Search?

https://www.moddb.com/mods/hellduke-tc

Actually I just rememberd how much Carmack disliked the Build Engine. He would probably hang himself before using an engine "hold together by bubblegum".

2 hours ago, Đeⓧiaz said:

 

Did you heard about the Google Search?

 

I'm not sure you have room for smartassery when all you've done is repeat points that have already been made.

3 hours ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

OKAY I GET IT THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE I JUST REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT DOOM WOULD LOOK LIKE ON THE BUILD ENGINE!

According to the article that Marn posted a link to (see https://www.doomworld.com/forum/topic/105245-the-egos-at-id-wired-article-from-1996/), by 1994 or 1995, John Carmack had started working on a true 3D engine that we now call id tech 2.

The only way I could see id not pursuing true 3D was if the original team (the Carmacks, Romero, Petersen, Cloud, etc.) had all left. I recall hearing a comment made by Romero that id's philosophy was that levels in whatever their new game was had to be such that they couldn't be made in the last game. Given that philosophy, there's no way I could see the original team churning out a Doom 3 that used the same engine as the first two.

Therefore, had Doom developed a Doom 3 instead of Quake, it would not have utilized the same engine as Doom 1 and 2, but would have been a true 3D game. Depending on how much influence Sandy had, this hypothetical Doom 3 may have had more gothic, Cthulu-esque elements (like Quake 1 had). So, this hypothetical Doom 3 would probably have looked very much like Quake, but with Doomguy, no axe, the original monsters included with new ones, and a different color palette.

@Pegleg I really want to see this as a Quake TC now. Just a sort of "what if" mod to translate Doom characters and settings into Quake's grungy tone and aesthetic.

28 minutes ago, Jaxxoon R said:

@Pegleg I really want to see this as a Quake TC now. Just a sort of "what if" mod to translate Doom characters and settings into Quake's grungy tone and aesthetic.

There IS something like that, except without that last part:

Your Path of Destruction