A Note On Doom 3

[sweatlaserxp]

There are stretches of the game that are a bit monotonous, and there are <i>wayyy</i> too many imps (which are easy to kill). Occasionally the gameplay can be a little, errr, "Quake-ey", almost like I've played this game before. Dealing with the PDA- listening to audio logs, sifting through e-mails- is a bummer, since all you really want are those 3-digit codes. Despite what was said, the voice acting is only decent and not truly theatrical, but who cares, it's Doom. There are also a lot of graphics and sound issues, but, as usual, the patch(es) should fix them.

Those things aside, Doom succeeds so magnificently in so many ways that one can't really complain; there's only so much flexibility a developer can squeeze out of the classic-style, first-person shooter. You can sit down and just play it, and the game takes you for a ride every time. Doom is about as perfect as a production can get; sure, there are common complaints about the game, but there is no developer out there who could have done a better job.

Every five minutes, this game shows something off that just blows me away- the levels are numerous and HUGE, they can take quite a while to beat, and the quality of map design is unparalleled in every aspect, it's pure genius. Playing the "Enpro" level for the first time is like an excursion through a CG film in real-time. If you aren't amazed then you are either blind or totally ignorant, and you should sell yer little GeForce card and find another hobby. Interacting with the enemies is pretty conventional, but the detail and, especially, the <i>animation</i>, is awesome. The sound and atmosphere in each level is utterly immersive, and it's going to be a model that other developers will aspire to.

The framework of the first-person shooter has changed a lot over the last five years. The key issue is that FPSs have evolved into several different categories, and depending on which camp you come from you may not like Doom. If you're big on stealth or strategy, i.e. <i>all about gameplay</i>, then you may not find it of much interest. For me, all of the amazing elements fuse together into a mind-blowing experience.

People had a lot of <i>expectations</i> about what it was going to be like, and I was guilty myself, but they were just that- <i>expectations</i>. Now that I've played through the better part of it I am awe-struck, and I have "disremembered" my initial, unjustified vision. The game can't be all things to all people, it can't be Counterstrike and Splinter Cell and Doom all wrapped into one, and if they had tried to refine it to a higher degree, they never would have been able to <i>finish</i> it. Most of the hype surrounding the game was generated from the outside, from the community, the magazines, the websites, but not from id or Activision. They never projected unrealistic release dates, unlike certain other developers, and id was famously cool about the whole thing. Those who were expecting a revelation were fools, it's just a videogame, but those who can remember playing the original Doom are now feeling warm and fuzzy inside.

I am also detecting a bit of cynicism here and there, that "it's cool to not like Doom 3", which is, of course, normal. Everybody has the right to their own opinion, and some really just don't like it, but for some it's just an initial rejection, a desire to not belong to the hype. This will pass- the game just came out, and some are crying because it wasn't exactly what <i>they</i> wanted. In the wake of post-release madness, there will be plenty
of fond memories and life-long fans.

Doom 3 is a hero for the PC gaming industry, which has needed a prodigious kick in the a$$ for years. We've had plenty of good games, but nothing <i>big</i>- that feeling that we are at the beginning of a major transitional period. id Software has blown down barriers and conventions like a CyberDemon on methamphetamines, and their contribution to the gaming world will resound for years.

 

[Wolfy]

perhaps... seems like u downplay all the reasons others hate it. "Interacting with the enemies is pretty conventional" ah yes a first person shooter with conventional interaction... my personal feeling is that the interaction with the enemies is what its all about otherwise whats the point... from what ive read in terms of gameplay the enemies are stupid, do scripted things and become predictable eventually and its all close combat. next u go on about animation and the scenery... well we all knew d3 was gonna look good but like farcry prettiness does not a good game make... as for the sound..... ive also read plenty about the weapons etc sounding a bit gay but the atmosphere is supposedly great...

the gameplay itself is also nice and rudimentary... get code and progress and so on

but hell i havent even played the game so my opinion doesnt count. but i will notice that alot of ppl seem to be justifying the way the game plays by saying things like... well its doom what do u expect and oh i suppose u havent played the original..... and i say original doom is how old and how more advanced have game mechanics not just graphics advanced since old hold down shift to strafe doom??? nowdays developers need to think outside of the box to make a good game... not just make it look all pretty.... saying that ill still buy doom and im sure ill enjoy it

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"

 

[sweatlaserxp]

The enemy behavior (or lack of) is going to be a dividing issue for gamers. Some people will get bored with it very quickly, and for others it won't be much of an issue. Sometimes I get tired of fighting imps, but overall the game is still incredibly playable, and I almost always want to press on and see what's around the next corner.

 

[CorpusBiscuit]

ive also read plenty about the weapons etc sounding a bit gay

What exactly does a gay weapon sound like???

 

[dhlucke]

It goes weeee!

</font color=red><i><font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS </font color=blue><font color=red>AMERICA

 

[sweatlaserxp]

I believe that Half-Life 2 will have the upper hand in terms of enemy AI and interactivity, but Doom has the graphics and atmosphere to die for. Valve is most concerned about the single-player integrity and CounterStrike 2, while id is more caught up in the underlying technology and licensing their engine. If you look at id's track record, there has never been an emphasis on storyline and single player experience, it's really all about multiplayer Quake and 3D engines.

My problem is that I'm just not that great at playing FPSs. I gave up on Far Cry because of the "Regulator" level- fifty tries and still stuck. I play games very sporadically- I will play some new one for a week or two, and then I won't play anything for four months, repeat process. I don't play CounterStrike for 40 hours a week. For me, there is too much to pay attention to at one time in a frantic battle, between sidestrafeing and jumping and throwing a grenade and switching between some number of weapons, it's too much to think about at once. I grew up on NES and Commodore.

With the exception of stealth and strategy shooters(Splinter Cell, Thief, Rogue Spear), there isn't <i>that</i> much you can do with the core gameplay. In the end it comes down to blowing away some guy or ugly demon with a bad-ass weapon and feeling good about it. Doom 3 may not have a very dynamic fighting scheme, but it keeps me entertained for the duration of my session. Perhaps id Software became a victim of their own creation, in their autocracy they were didn't realize that they were neglecting something that could have made the game that much better. I stand by my opinion that it's spectacular, but I can understand how its shortcomings are a major bummer for devotees of the genre.

 

[WingDing]

And shoots out bubbles of oily cum.

I'm the good time that was had by all