Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Zoost

New screen and article

Recommended Posts

Fredrik said:

Nah, the NPCs will scream that each time you disappear from their line of sight :P


Hehe, just from the start, after you signed in and received your objectives from the security chief, you salute and turn arround when he suddenly shreeks "don't you leave me, motherfucker!!!" After a time you are so used to everyone saying "don't you leave me, motherfucker!!!" that you use it as a goodbye by yourself...

Has anyone played Gore: Ultimate Soldier ? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Lectrix said:

Oh yeah the hell knight is lacking soo much personality, i mean atleast hes not a complete copy of the baron now (well i hope not). And the reventant, that things almost spot on perfect imo.

I think some of us are just expecting way too much out of the character designs and the general look of the game, just be glad ID are doing it in the first place.

You find it unreasonable to want a game to have original and imaginative monster designs? Never mind the fact that this is the continuation of what is probably the most legendary FPS series there is.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think that Doom1/Doom2 were over the top at all. The only thing controversial about them was the level of detail, and this was due to the introduction of 3D gaming. Doom 3 has introduced nothing except a lame attempt at shock factor. By the way, what I found silly about the bathroom scene was not the quantity of blood, but the demon choosing to eat the corpse for no reason other than the fact that Doomguy was standing there.

Having monsters blast through walls for no reason than the fact that you just entered the room is extremely lame.

Share this post


Link to post
ToXiCFLUFF said:

You find it unreasonable to want a game to have original and imaginative monster designs? Never mind the fact that this is the continuation of what is probably the most legendary FPS series there is.

Whew, I thought that you were calling Doom 3's monsters original and imaginative. While sequels should retain familiar elements from the prequels, they should not twist them beyond recognition for the sake of trying to be different.

Share this post


Link to post
AndrewB said:

I don't think that Doom1/Doom2 were over the top at all. The only thing controversial about them was the level of detail, and this was due to the introduction of 3D gaming. Doom 3 has introduced nothing except a lame attempt at shock factor. By the way, what I found silly about the bathroom scene was not the quantity of blood, but the demon choosing to eat the corpse for no reason other than the fact that Doomguy was standing there.

There is no way a game could be as revolutionary as doom was then. Did you really expect, just because its the 3rd doom game, that it would revolutionize the gaming industry again? Did Doom 2?
Okay, the demon chooses to eat the zombie when the marine walks in. Sure its improbable as a coinincidence ("Improbable, but not impossible") but Doom 3's cut scenes are geared dramaticly. Would you prefer movies/games that are so realistic that they are only as exciting or probable as daily life? Considering your love of Doom, I can't imagine that to be the case. But I can see why you think its lame (I'd rather call it convienent to show off the engine, but once again, after doing as much work on it, why shouldn't they?) but I think otherwise.

Having monsters blast through walls for no reason than the fact that you just entered the room is extremely lame. [/B]

What other reason would it have and/or need? Got afraid of the dark *chuckles*

Good point Fredrik, I disagree with everything Scabbed Angel said too. Well thought out. EDIT: (LOL-Scabby... haven't heard that on these boards yet.)

AndrewB said:

Whew, I thought that you were calling Doom 3's monsters original and imaginative. While sequels should retain familiar elements from the prequels, they should not twist them beyond recognition for the sake of trying to be different.

How would they create a frightening game with tacky monsters? I love Doom as much as the next doomer, but take it for what it is. I enjoy it for its silliness qualities, so don't take me like I'm knocking it. Perhaps I really love what they did with the monsters because of how impressed I was qith Quake, and see more similarities to Q1 than D1.

Share this post


Link to post

I did stop to wonder today, if there's ever likely to be an FPS as revolutionary as Doom again. It isn't long before the game industry goes the way of the music/film industry and begins almost solely pumping out predictable, regurgitated and risk-free crap. Once this happens, a major shake up in the genre will be even less likely.

Share this post


Link to post

But there are changes in technology that make the possiblity more viable than that of the film industry. Not huge changes, no, but consider when openGl first came out and how it revolutionized games' graphic quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Scabbed Angel said:

But there are changes in technology that make the possiblity more viable than that of the film industry. Not huge changes, no, but consider when openGl first came out and how it revolutionized games' graphic quality.

Don't you mean 3DFX's GLIDE? Use of it in games was widespread before OpenGL if I recall correctly.

But anyway gameplay is where innovation is needed more in my opinion, thus my mention of genre. Really though, I just can't see such an incredible step up from what came before happening in games for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Ct_red_pants said:

My comments are just as constrictive as yours.

Then let us both agree to stop constricting people.

Share this post


Link to post
Scabbed Angel said:

LOL, yeah. I can agree that the screenshot is a very busy, but its better than than Wolenstein 3d right? : )

So true LOL.
I like the over kill on detail, makes me think that the artist is doing a better job than i hoped. Plus it makes corridors/rooms stand out rather than being continously the same (but thats just my opinion).

Share this post


Link to post
ToXiCFLUFF said:

Don't you mean 3DFX's GLIDE? Use of it in games was widespread before OpenGL if I recall correctly.

But anyway gameplay is where innovation is needed more in my opinion, thus my mention of genre. Really though, I just can't see such an incredible step up from what came before happening in games for a while.

Yes, you are correct. You can see how technical I am : ) As far as gameplay, its hard to imagine what else there really could be. I think that the only other games to take the indutry further were resident evil, half-life and GTA3. They weren't revolutionary and I agree that it isn't possible to revolutionize the industry the way the early FPSs did.

Share this post


Link to post
ToXiCFLUFF said:

Do
But anyway gameplay is where innovation is needed more in my opinion, thus my mention of genre.


gameplay is what its all about. as a console gamer, thats all i've ever had. what we need is a wider variety of engines for better gameplay. instead of having every other game made use the quake3 engine, have games like GTA and halo (as i mentioned in the other topic)
have a custom built engine, and you get truely different, interesting, and intense gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post

That revenent is trash, Its rich vibrant colors looks like it just jumped shiped from world of warcraft. WoW being a good game, yes, but its style has no business in the doom world.

Share this post


Link to post

The root of the problem is that developers don't have the time nor the resources to gamble on researching new gameplay and new formulas of fun. All the energy is spent on graphics, and nobody can escape that pattern. You can't market a good game. You can only market a pretty game. The graphics bubble will eventually burst. We can only hope that it happens as soon as possible.

Graphics aren't a bad thing. The lack of everything else is definitely a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Black Hand said:

That revenent is trash, Its rich vibrant colors looks like it just jumped shipped from world of warcraf.

yeah fuck rich vibrant colors

Share this post


Link to post

The graphics bubble will eventually burst. We can only hope that it happens as soon as possible.

SOE is five spoiled games counting and judging from Everquest two I don't think that graphics bubble is going to burst any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
AndrewB said:

The root of the problem is that developers don't have the time nor the resources to gamble on researching new gameplay and new formulas of fun. All the energy is spent on graphics, and nobody can escape that pattern. You can't market a good game. You can only market a pretty game. The graphics bubble will eventually burst. We can only hope that it happens as soon as possible.

Graphics aren't a bad thing. The lack of everything else is definitely a bad thing.

Agrred. But you'd think in the amount of time its taking nowadays to make a game, there would be plenty to invest in formulating something new. I can't be the only one to find the list of features as important as the pictures on the box. GTA3/VC do not have great graphics, but the gameplay was new and innovative (at least I think so) and it still did amazingly well. Are you moreorless talking computer games, Mr. B? As far as Doom, however, part of the revolutionary quality the game had was graphics.

Linguica said:

yeah fuck rich vibrant colors

The reason I hated Quake 2. When did they decide to go with the neon Dick Tracy atmosphere? In regards to the reverent, I've always hated it, thought it was silly and didn't even fit in Doom 2, so I'm not all that suprised at how they made it. I think its really faithful to the original. But can anyone argue that the pinkie is badass?!

Share this post


Link to post

Rich Vibrant colors ala Warcraft III indeed suck. Stale, pukey colors AKA Quake and Quake II also suck terribly. The only thing that blows sweet chunks is a healthy, rich variety.

Share this post


Link to post
AndrewB said:

Sweet chunks

Uhhh? Thanks for an impossible, yet disturbing mental image. I thought that Q2 had way too many colors to be considered stale and/or pukey, but perhaps its just me. What do you think of the screenies of the trites outside? The pinkish/orangish color?

Share this post


Link to post
ToXiCFLUFF said:

It isn't long before the game industry goes the way of the music/film industry and begins almost solely pumping out predictable, regurgitated and risk-free crap.


Well, there is still a growing number of new game developers, especially from eastern Europe, who dont follow the mainstream trend.

AndrewB said:

All the energy is spent on graphics, and nobody can escape that pattern. You can't market a good game. You can only market a pretty game. The graphics bubble will eventually burst. We can only hope that it happens as soon as possible.

Graphics aren't a bad thing. The lack of everything else is definitely a bad thing.


I definitely agree to the last sentence, but in reality it isn t that bad IMO. Look at Unreal2, its a prime example of having beautiful graphics and incredibly cheap and unexciting gameplay that was added as an afterthought to the game. And Unreal2 didn t sell well, it s a budget title since quite a time. People don t want only graphics.

Share this post


Link to post
Tetzlaff said:

Well, there is still a growing number of new game developers, especially from eastern Europe, who dont follow the mainstream trend.

There will always be these new developers who conform less to the current climate. And for now it's even possible to put out a game with a similar amount of polish to one made by a much larger, better established development studio. But it's taking longer and longer to create game content as technology improves - eventually it'll be harder for these smaler developers to breach the mainstream since they won't be able to put out a game as polished as the huge development studios. I suppose a good analogy would be the American movie industry.

Scabbed Angel said:

Agrred. But you'd think in the amount of time its taking nowadays to make a game, there would be plenty to invest in formulating something new. I can't be the only one to find the list of features as important as the pictures on the box. GTA3/VC do not have great graphics, but the gameplay was new and innovative (at least I think so) and it still did amazingly well.

It's precisely because of the amount of time it takes to make a game that they are less willing to take the risk. And besides, it's an industry driven by money like any other - so there isn't much of an incentive to make something new when bland rehashes of other games and Established Brand Name (x) will still sell in the bucketload. Also, I didn't think GTA3's graphics were bad at all, at the time.

Scabbed Angel said:

But can anyone argue that the pinkie is badass?!

I certainly can't, anyway.

TH-555 said:

gameplay is what its all about. as a console gamer, thats all i've ever had. what we need is a wider variety of engines for better gameplay. instead of having every other game made use the quake3 engine, have games like GTA and halo (as i mentioned in the other topic)
have a custom built engine, and you get truely different, interesting, and intense gameplay.

Developing an in-house engine hardly guarantees better gameplay. Engine requirements may vary according to type of game, but apart from this I don't see why licensing an engine should ever harm or stunt gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
ToXiCFLUFF said:

But it's taking longer and longer to create game content as technology improves - eventually it'll be harder for these smaller developers to breach the mainstream since they won't be able to put out a game as polished as the huge development studios. I suppose a good analogy would be the American movie industry.


Well, I see Id as a privately owned, financial stable, no pressure from their shareholders, independent game developer. Whith a fantastic track record. Even if nobody likes their games, everybody still will love their engine. So if they dont take the risk and experiment, who will?

Share this post


Link to post

Holy shit people, whats this turned into 'Bitch about ID games'

Firstly AndrewB: The reason pinky eats the dead zombie is because if you recall, in the scene right before it you catch him draggin the corpse into the bathroom through a door in a hallway. Whats he going to do in there? Take a dump? No he's going to eat the damn thing.
You as the marine simply walk in on him and he then hides in the cubicle an pounces on you. What is illogical or unrealistic about that.

And for pukey colours?
For f**k sake, what came before Quake1 , yes the answer is Doom2.
There was an order of magnitude increase in gameplay and graphics used between these 2 games. Can nobody remember the dark cold blue castle hallways in Quake??

Quake2 from Quake 1...another order of magnitude... hardware acceleration made this game totally cool. Yes the colours were vibrant but 'Dick Tracy"

And then we have Quake3....massive step from Q2...nothing to be added there...games are still being made using this engine....and you can forget about RTCW 'cos in my opinion it wasn't a pure id game.

Some of you are just getting bitchy 'cos the wait is killing you.
If you saw that revenant screenshot 2 months after the macworld demo you would have been "Oh my christ....have you seen that new screen,,,,IT Fucking absolutely ROCKS"

Share this post


Link to post

Dubh said:If you saw that revenant screenshot 2 months after the macworld demo you would have been "Oh my christ....have you seen that new screen,,,,IT Fucking absolutely ROCKS" [/B]

I doubt it. The main qualm people have here is with the revenant's design and the way it fits into Doom3's environment.

Share this post


Link to post

The Quakes were perhaps large steps forward in technology, but not in design and hence not in final appearance.

Share this post


Link to post

I respectfully disagree to both......

I think the Rev fits fine into the Doom3 environment, after all, this is hellspawn on a human base. I would think it will fit right into the hellish levels we are to expect. Also, not seeing this creature in motion doesn't do it justice.

As for the Quakes being large steps forward in Technology and not in design:

Quake1 became fully 3-dimensional adding depth previously not explored in previous titles (doom) Obviously this affected design. They were bound to a certain colour pallette I agree but made fantastic use of it and in Final Appearance I do believe Quake1 looked fantastic. You had dynamic skies, Full modelled characters as opposed to sprites, light-mapping etc..
Quake2 looked spectacular when first booted up using a voodoo2 etc...
Colour pallette increased, models more detailed in animation and skins, larger open spaces, Quake2 LOOKED alot different to Quake 1,
And quake 3, Bezier Curves ->Design change -> appearance change.
Higher poly models and worlds, richer textures......Hardware acceleration only.....definitely design and final appearance changes.

But as I say, thats my opinion...and I do respect yours at the same time

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post

Jeez, can anybody _like_ this screenshot?

Don't compare the D3 monsters with the original ones. If the new Lost Souls are part machine, so be it. They aren't meant to be the original-sprites-turned-3d-models. As for the huge use of 'unflat surfaces and holes everywhere' argument, think about the setting of the screenshot. It's probably doubtful that this hallway is in a regular building. Maybe it's on a ship, where clean asthetics don't matter? Have you seen the inside of any transport vessel lined with clean, flat, unbusy walls? As for the revenant, I think it's an almost perfect update of the original, except the hands are a little too big.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×