Doom 3 Review

We'll be getting a lot of these I'm sure, but I just spotted the first Doom 3 review that I know of, and it happens to be over on our old buddy and host TeleFragged. OK so it's not really the first review, but I'm not counting PC Gamer and whatever other publications got their hands on a pre-gold version so they could pump out a review in a timely manner. Here's a bit:

DOOM 3 promises jaw-dropping visuals, moments that'll scare you right out of your seat, and intense close-combat action against evil that only the artists at id could have ever dreamed up. After years of massive hype, though, many games wind up being just plain not worth all that effort. I'm happy to say that DOOM 3 does not fall into this pile; it's an excellent game with a style that few can even rival.

Yeah I think he likes it.

omfg fp!

I might buy Doom 3.

sp
the review was okay..

A sweet pic of a soldier getting gibbed, brain and everything. The screenshots are really nice on Telefragged.

There was a 6 page review in PC Powerplay (Australia) in this month's issue. I bought it at the newsagent about 5 days ago. It got 96 out of a 100 "a frighteningly intense experience and an absolute masterpiece of fps design"

I read that issue. I also liked how ignorant that person who wrote the first letter regarding JDoom and graphics.

Telefragged's review said:

Some say that the monsters in DOOM 3 look too shiny or that they've been covered in glaze like a donut...

insert Homer Simpson drool

Mmm...glazed monster..arhrhrhrh!!!!

94% eh? Not bad...

Hmmmppphhh, am I the only one who's disappointed in the reviews found around on the net?
What surprised me (in a bad way) about this review was that, completely opposite of what most previews and other reviews, this review emphasized that the technical performance was lacking even on a high-end system.

That high-end system described in this review is better than what I have now, except for the GPU (and I've just completed my upgrade), and STILL the game doesn't run smoothly.

Sure, the reviews praise the game, but it sure doesn't come off as being the "perfect game" (or perhaps I should say: "ground breaking game") I hoped it to be (even though I did not expect it to be up to par with classic Doom) :-/

This stinks like RtCW.

Of course it wasn't going to be. You forget, this game was ALREADY MADE. Doom 3 is just a reworking of the original. I was wincing when I was heading to the last page to read the overall, expecting an 88%. 94 is VERY good. It's about what Half-Life got. I expect to see about all of the reviews to be like this. This will certaintly give HL2 and Halo 2 a run for their money.

dsm said:

What surprised me (in a bad way) about this review was that, completely opposite of what most previews and other reviews, this review emphasized that the technical performance was lacking even on a high-end system.

The computer I reviewed the game on is no longer high-end. It's pretty much middle-of-the-road now. I'd consider high-end to be an Athlon 64 or a P4 at 3.2GHz or more, and with a video card that costs a little more than $160-190 now. Plus, I did run the game at 1024x768 with high detail and 2xAA on. If I wanted a higher frame rate, I certainly could have turned down the detail - although the screenshots would have suffered.

Overall, DOOM 3 runs better than Far Cry on my machine.

Maybe games should be ranked out of 1. 1 means "it's good", 0 means "it's bad". Then people wouldn't complain about a couple of percent and how that couple of percent is the difference between Big Rigs Over the Road Racing and the digital manifestation of Jesus Christ.

Seriously, these reviews are just peoples' opinions. They aren't the people who decide how good the game is. If the game looks good (and it does) and the reviews are positive (that is, the actual reviews, not the percent at the end of the article) then buy it. Does it matter how it compares to some other arbitrary game in the opinion of someone whose gaming tastes are no doubt different from yours?

The PC Gamer review that I read said "PC Gamer was the only publication in the world to review Doom 3 a split-second after id declared it 'done.'" PC Gamer did review the gold version of the game, so THEY were the first to review it. If you want to see it, go buy the magazine.

edit: thanks for the advice, didn't know it was illegal.

chucky3456 you should remove those links. Scans of magazine are illegal.

chucky3456 said:

The PC Gamer review that I read said "PC Gamer was the only publication in the world to review Doom 3 a split-second after id declared it 'done.'" PC Gamer did review the gold version of the game, so THEY were the first to review it.

Smells like shit to me, how long before the magazine hit shelves was that article written? I remember people seeing it in early July and I am sure it had to have been written in June sometime, long before Doom 3 went gold.

its the September issue, so my guess is Sept. 1, but there are scans of it all over the net (I removed mine becuase I was told it is illegal). If you REALLY want to find it before Sept., google it.

I saw the September issue, including the article, back around mid-July, not three days after the announcement that Doom 3 went gold. I heard someone say that the September issue was released early because of Doom 3, so there's no way that the article was written and all of those screenshots taken (some were undoubtedly rejected, and that process also takes time) in such a short time.

DOOM 3 Review
Warning: mysql_connect(): Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/tmp/mysql.sock' (2) in /usr/local/etc/httpd/htdocs/lgadmin/includes/connect.php3 on line 6
Unable to connect to database

BEST REVIEW EVAR!!!!!111

Pity, I wanted to read that.

dsm said:

That high-end system described in this review is better than what I have now, except for the GPU (and I've just completed my upgrade), and STILL the game doesn't run smoothly.

heh, as far as I remember, when Doom 1 came out it was not runningly so smoothly on the average high-end machine :)
A 486 Dx2/66 was fairly decent but it was not always smooth.