DoomIV

As much as I hate the sound of that.. becuase I hate when games get dragged on THAT far.. but what im getting at, is being that Doom3 is based on a remake of .. Doom.. there should also be a remake of DoomII.

If you dont like the sound of Doom4, then, the DoomII remake can always be an expantion pack for Doom3.

Just thinking of how lovely the Doom3 engine could render a city. And how "Sin" the final "boss" could actually be a boss and not a picture pasted on a wall with a hole in it.. where you shoot rockets off an elevator that is infront of it {for some odd reason} into his "exposed brain", which is really just John Romeros head on a stick. Grr.

So, what do you say? First Doom3 expantion?

Yeah, id should do two expansions, one for a new SP mission (Doom II remake thing) and one for MP additions and stuff.

Doom III isn´t exactly a remake of Doom, it´s more like the basic concepts of Doom taken into a new story. A new story containing some typical Doom elements, like: UAC, hell demons, a base on Mars, and a Space Marine.

It could be nice to have a SP mission pack for Doom III that takes places on earth and go on with the Hell on Earth concept. But not a whole new "Doom IV" game. It´s not enough new content to make a whole new game out of it.

Yeah, I'd like to see a Hell On Earth expansion. But not a new fully fledged game.

I don't think another sequel would do well either, although I would love a remake of Hell on Earth. You might get that Nightmare on Elmstreet 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. effect. The more sequels, the lesser the interest of the majority, I think. But an expension with wartorn citymaps would absolutely kick ass, no doubt about that. Just thinking about it gets me excited. Imagine doing coop against Hell's forces in a map full of destroyed buildings and cars. Smoke, dead bodies and fire everywhere, yum!

I already brought this subject up in my (Question?....)post ways back. Look in search forums under "tsareppsun"

i would absolutely love a hell on earth expansion. that would go over very well imo

Goat said:

i would absolutely love a hell on earth expansion. that would go over very well imo

Yeah, but only if they figure out a way to render outdoor buildings that don't look like blurry miniatures.

Fredrik said:

Yeah, but only if they figure out a way to render outdoor buildings that don't look like blurry miniatures.

Outdoor structures in DOOM 3 look nothing like "blurry miniatures as you've mentioned. Have you watched the E3 trailer? Or even seen the "throught the window" outdoor screenshot in PCGamer December 2002?

Only in the alpha do the buildings look that way. Even then, they still have better detail that those in Halo 2.

Ya, and those building are only meant as extraneous detail, not as things that you can walk up to. So they're not gonna be terribly detailed.

Zoorado said:

Have you watched the E3 trailer? Or even seen the "throught the window" outdoor screenshot in PCGamer December 2002?

Yeah, and they look much, much better than in the alpha. They are just single buildings though, the last pic I saw that contained what you could actually call a landscape (or cityscape) was still bad.

I doubt you'll see much of a cityscape in DOOM 3, since it's on barren Mars. But with a decent LOD system, it could be done, and done well.

There was a cityscape in the alpha (though as I said not very good looking), and I like the idea of seeing one. But I'm not sure if the Total Recall-like design is appropriate, it would be better if most buildings were more industrial-looking and windowless (much like in the outdoor shot at the opening of the last E3 trailer).

Zoorado said:

I doubt you'll see much of a cityscape in DOOM 3, since it's on barren Mars. But with a decent LOD system, it could be done, and done well.

LOD tends to break polygon silhouette calculations and might result in shadows popping in and out.

How much change would be necessary to let Doom 3's engine render citymaps as you would expect to see in a Hell on Eart remake?

BNA! said:

LOD tends to break polygon silhouette calculations and might result in shadows popping in and out.

Might not be too noticeable from afar.

Disorder said:

How much change would be necessary to let Doom 3's engine render citymaps as you would expect to see in a Hell on Eart remake?

One thing I believe that id won't spend another few years to work on a new engine for Doom II's remake, and it's very unlikely that there'll be a sequel to Doom's original concept for Doom IV. Even if there would ever be Doom IV, hopefully it won't be the same as Doom II.

Disorder said:

How much change would be necessary to let Doom 3's engine render citymaps as you would expect to see in a Hell on Eart remake?

IMHO only better hardware.

Zoorado said:

Might not be too noticeable from afar.

But the shadows may float across the whole map...

:)

doom 4 fuck that just make a expansion, I dont wanna be 60 and see doom 4 has just gone gold.

I would favour a full-sized sequel to an expansion pack for 'Doom IV'.

In a gamespy preview they talked about ..a marscavern level..a hell level(of course ,how could they forget )..and yes a mars town like level as other levels to expect but these we've already seen in the trailers..but that' ll be probably mostly indoor gameplay i think that mars town level

GS-1719 said:

I would favour a full-sized sequel to an expansion pack for 'Doom IV'.

I agree...

They should do what they did with the RTCW expansion. which wasn't really an expansion, it was a whole new game, and best of all, it's free.

I don't wanna wait +5 years for the retelling of Doom 2. Let's see them do an add-on based on Doom 2 (Doom 2 was basically like an add-on for Doom - only it didn't require Doom 1 and it was larger than your typical expansion pack nowadays).

The ideal thing would be for them to make the add-on so original and interesting as possible with new gameplay features not present in the original Doom 3, so that it's almost like a whole new game, while still being Doom 3.

I think an 18 level add-on would be sufficient for a retelling of Doom 2 - it's not like Doom 2 had much actual storyline and the bit there was was barely present - even compared to Doom 1's.

I think the D3 engine would be perfectly fine for doing city maps - Hell, we've seen less advanced engines do nice city maps, so why wouldn't the D3 engine be capable enough? Plus, if the add-on takes one year in development time, it'll be time enough for hardware to get so good that the D3 engine could render more than twice the amount of enemies on-screen allowing for a more action-packed set of levels for D3.

I agree with your comment on the length of the add-on. I mean, Doom was 27 maps, not counting episode 4, right? This was because 3 episodes, each with a different setting. Doom 2 was one setting, I never saw what they needed 32 maps for.

Just for the record, I'm not bashing Doom 2, I like it, I'm just sayin that to fit the storyline for the add-on, it doesn't need to be really long.

Well, Doom2 had to be long, seing as that it was a sequel rather than an add-on.

IT will be indeed no problem to render city or town maps with the Doom3 engine... maybe in a few years the gf fx10000 or radeon 10000 pro :-) can render some larger environments with more bad guys onscreen ... town maps like we see in RTCW will be just to hard for current hardware on the Doom3 engine i think ...

Yeah, like when all that discussion was going on about the limitations of the engine. Alot of people had it wrong. It wasn't so much the limitations of the engine as it was the limitations of today's hardware to be able to render everything the engine can produce.

It wasn't so much the limitations of the engine as it was the limitations of today's hardware

Or the way the engine is used. Obviously you're going to get a lot more polygons out of it if you disable bumpmaps, shadows, etc (although there's little point in doing so).