-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Official Doom 3 Topic. (ALL POSTS ON THE GAME HERE)
- Thread starter Slo
- Start date
- Status
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
John Carmack said it himself best:Apharmd Battler said:
John Carmack on G4 said:
The video can be found here: http://www.3dgamers.com/dl/games/doom3/g4_icons_doom3-hi.zip.html
EDIT: Sorry I have that video split into three different files so I can't give you an accurate time of when it starts. For me it starts at 2:29, so you would have to add 2:29 after the third commercial break ends.
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
Here's an interest Time article about id and Doom 3. While nothing noteworthy they did have a few funny comments about Carmack:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040809-674778-1,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040809-674778-1,00.html
Time said:
Yeah the shadowing does kinda suck. I did notice that "ghosting" effect that items get when you apply a light source. It's like it almost has two shadows, except one is suspended in mid air with no ligh-source precision. Feels more like a hack to me.border said:
Though I don't notice it while blowing up monsters, it is a flaw in an otherwise awesome system. At least it's not as noticeable as the Unreal-engine's light flares bleeding through walls.
Boogie9IGN
Member
Fuck, I run it at 640x480 and it's max is about 15fps. It dips to 3fps frequently 
yeah, i think the shadowing from the flashlight is probably faked in some way, using a different set of rules than the rest of the lighting... at least it runs better than DXIW and T3 i suppose. The player shadow also adds alot to the game, i dont know why they disabled it by default, its a cool effect.
Just got done with a nice 4 hour session...
First of all, tech...
Doom 3 is the most polished PC game I have ever played. THIS is what I've been wanting from the PC industry and FINALLY someone answered the call. Incredible animation, virtually flawless transitions between everything, a beautiful interface, and tons of nice touches. The game really stands up to top console offerings in terms of solidity...which isn't something I expected. Loading is handled in a very polished way as well (which falls under transitions) and is VERY quick. The FIRST time you boot the game and load a level, it takes 20-22 seconds. After that, each level takes ~10 seconds with save reloads hitting about 3 seconds (so fast that the action just fades out and the saved point fades in).
Framerate is very impressive on my machine. I had to use V-sync, as the tearing was just too much to take, but now the game literally switches between a solid 60 fps and a solid 30 fps depending on the scene. I have not seen it drop lower and only occasionally have I seen something in between. I'm suprised that it hangs out at 60 fps so often, but it really does. I am running at 800x600 with high detail on a P4-2.4 GHz + 1gb PC3200 ram + 9700 Pro.
Sadly, Far Cry spoiled me (visually). Doom 3 looks incredible and moves so much smoother than FC ever did...but it is clearly lacking a lot of the more advanced tech. I thought cybamerc was full of it when he first claimed Doom 3 to be a DX7 level game...but it is now very obvious. The tech just can't stand up to the CryTek engine from a pure feature standpoint. Of course, Doom 3 performs much better than FC. I'd also expect Half-Life 2 to outperform Doom 3. Oddly enough, the shadows haven't really impressed. I believe that Thief 3 actually does a much better job of using shadows and bumpmaps in the environment...even though the engine runs slower.
OK, but the game was what I was most interested in and so far, it's a mixed bag with a lean towards the positive. Many of the flaws mentioned here certainly hold true, but the game still manages to be a lot of fun. The level of polish combined with the most intense enemies I've ever encountered in an FPS combine to create a compelling experience. Sadly, the areas you visit really don't seem to stand out from one another due to the intense darkness surrounding them. Still, the game is enjoyable to play and I can't wait to continue.
It's basically a very solid game that does very little new. It focuses on polishing up an existing formula to perfection rather than attempting to re-create the genre...but hey, we all know this by now.
Oh, and thus far, it hasn't really been all that scary. It can't handle a candle to System Shock 2 or Silent Hill.
One final note...
Due to complaints of the game being too "easy", I started my game on the hardest available difficulty. It has actually been a very solid challenge. Nothing too much, but the enemies can really own you quickly and there isn't really tons of health lying around. I believe that the difficulty level is actually aiding the gameplay for me, as messing up an encounter could cost you nearly an entire life bar!
First of all, tech...
Doom 3 is the most polished PC game I have ever played. THIS is what I've been wanting from the PC industry and FINALLY someone answered the call. Incredible animation, virtually flawless transitions between everything, a beautiful interface, and tons of nice touches. The game really stands up to top console offerings in terms of solidity...which isn't something I expected. Loading is handled in a very polished way as well (which falls under transitions) and is VERY quick. The FIRST time you boot the game and load a level, it takes 20-22 seconds. After that, each level takes ~10 seconds with save reloads hitting about 3 seconds (so fast that the action just fades out and the saved point fades in).
Framerate is very impressive on my machine. I had to use V-sync, as the tearing was just too much to take, but now the game literally switches between a solid 60 fps and a solid 30 fps depending on the scene. I have not seen it drop lower and only occasionally have I seen something in between. I'm suprised that it hangs out at 60 fps so often, but it really does. I am running at 800x600 with high detail on a P4-2.4 GHz + 1gb PC3200 ram + 9700 Pro.
Sadly, Far Cry spoiled me (visually). Doom 3 looks incredible and moves so much smoother than FC ever did...but it is clearly lacking a lot of the more advanced tech. I thought cybamerc was full of it when he first claimed Doom 3 to be a DX7 level game...but it is now very obvious. The tech just can't stand up to the CryTek engine from a pure feature standpoint. Of course, Doom 3 performs much better than FC. I'd also expect Half-Life 2 to outperform Doom 3. Oddly enough, the shadows haven't really impressed. I believe that Thief 3 actually does a much better job of using shadows and bumpmaps in the environment...even though the engine runs slower.
OK, but the game was what I was most interested in and so far, it's a mixed bag with a lean towards the positive. Many of the flaws mentioned here certainly hold true, but the game still manages to be a lot of fun. The level of polish combined with the most intense enemies I've ever encountered in an FPS combine to create a compelling experience. Sadly, the areas you visit really don't seem to stand out from one another due to the intense darkness surrounding them. Still, the game is enjoyable to play and I can't wait to continue.
It's basically a very solid game that does very little new. It focuses on polishing up an existing formula to perfection rather than attempting to re-create the genre...but hey, we all know this by now.
Oh, and thus far, it hasn't really been all that scary. It can't handle a candle to System Shock 2 or Silent Hill.
One final note...
Due to complaints of the game being too "easy", I started my game on the hardest available difficulty. It has actually been a very solid challenge. Nothing too much, but the enemies can really own you quickly and there isn't really tons of health lying around. I believe that the difficulty level is actually aiding the gameplay for me, as messing up an encounter could cost you nearly an entire life bar!
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
For your amusement:
NO BUMP MAPPING
BUMP MAPPING
EDIT: Thief III most definitely does not do bump mapping on the quality or complexity of Doom 3. Real time shadowing it does eclipse Doom 3 but static shadowing it unfortunately doesn't compare. The Lighting is also far more complex and better executed in Doom 3. I am a massive fan of Thief III so this is no way a slam on the game, I'm just comparing tech sheets and visual execution.
EDIT2: Oh I see, you weren't comparing technical prowress but asthetic acheivements. That is of course up to personal opinion, in some cases I was heavily impressed with the Thief III enviroments and the use of shadows to barely illuminate the enviroment to perfection but in other cases Doom 3 just blew me away with it's unbridled use of bump mapping and lighting to really bring life to flat polygons. Thief III uses a heavily modified UT2003 engine, so modified that Ion Storm actually called it by a different name. The engine itself is also an enhanced version of what was used in DE: IW, with heavy modifications to the lighting and shadowing routines (gee I wonder why?).
NO BUMP MAPPING
BUMP MAPPING
EDIT: Thief III most definitely does not do bump mapping on the quality or complexity of Doom 3. Real time shadowing it does eclipse Doom 3 but static shadowing it unfortunately doesn't compare. The Lighting is also far more complex and better executed in Doom 3. I am a massive fan of Thief III so this is no way a slam on the game, I'm just comparing tech sheets and visual execution.
EDIT2: Oh I see, you weren't comparing technical prowress but asthetic acheivements. That is of course up to personal opinion, in some cases I was heavily impressed with the Thief III enviroments and the use of shadows to barely illuminate the enviroment to perfection but in other cases Doom 3 just blew me away with it's unbridled use of bump mapping and lighting to really bring life to flat polygons. Thief III uses a heavily modified UT2003 engine, so modified that Ion Storm actually called it by a different name. The engine itself is also an enhanced version of what was used in DE: IW, with heavy modifications to the lighting and shadowing routines (gee I wonder why?).
First of all, I just finished the game and I have to correct something that was kind of wrong about my earlier impressions (very minor spoilers for those that haven't read any of the reviews):
That's a part of the "problem", I guess. Most of the first 15-17 stages don't have anything distinctive about them. Remembering back on playing them, it's all just a blur. I couldn't really tell you anything about what happened where or how things progressed because the settings are just as repetitive and interchangeable as the mission objectives. There are a handful of nice highlights like the hospital, the UAC's peculiar "museum", and the brief excursions onto the surface of Mars, though. I certainly perked up whenever there was a significant change in scenery. There is a lack of major setpieces, to be sure.
You have a better eye for these things than I do.....but do you really think that Doom 3 runs more smoothly than FarCry? I would say they are about even in terms of framerate (though perhaps you mean animation as well).
The second half of the game does not take place in Hell. I don't know exactly what led me to believe this -- either the PC Gamer review or my own preconceptions. Hell is basically just one level, and as soon as you are done with it they send you right back to Mars for more "Find the PDA/item" missions. It's kind of a shame since Hell is the most visually striking and imaginative level, and it briefly allows the game to break out of somewhat boring conventions and give you the more pure combat experience. Eventually the research station starts to turn into Hell so at least the later sections have a more varied and warped look.
Don't blame the darkness. The first 2/3 of the game feel same-y because they are the same. It is all gloomy, grey industrial corridors with the same design scheme and a heavily shared set of textures. Light or dark, the stages are not really going to stand out from one another.dark10x said:
That's a part of the "problem", I guess. Most of the first 15-17 stages don't have anything distinctive about them. Remembering back on playing them, it's all just a blur. I couldn't really tell you anything about what happened where or how things progressed because the settings are just as repetitive and interchangeable as the mission objectives. There are a handful of nice highlights like the hospital, the UAC's peculiar "museum", and the brief excursions onto the surface of Mars, though. I certainly perked up whenever there was a significant change in scenery. There is a lack of major setpieces, to be sure.
You have a better eye for these things than I do.....but do you really think that Doom 3 runs more smoothly than FarCry? I would say they are about even in terms of framerate (though perhaps you mean animation as well).
Doom 3 absolutely runs better the Far Cry. I was even play FC this past Saturday, and while it runs decently, it RARELY runs at 60 fps...and sometimes drops below 30 fps (not very often, though). Doom 3 pushes 60 fps a good 50% of the time (maybe even more), which is very impressive.
Of course, I played FC with the highest possible settings (including stuff like Ultra quality water). It ran fine, of course...but Doom 3 is a lot smoother. When I first played FC, the indoor segments ran quite poorly whereas the outdoor areas were smooth. This past weekend, however, I found that the indoor areas run very well now (though still far from Doom 3 performance). Oh yes, as noted above, I play Doom 3 with V-sync enabled...but playing FC with V-sync is just a bit too sluggish at times.
Is there a way to turn of AF when using the high quality mode, though? AF hurts the performance enough that I'd rather just turn it off. I'd pull off a better framerate without it as well...even though it is already very smooth.
Oh, and I am still enjoying it despite the repetition in backgrounds...afterall, Halo is one of my favorite FPS titles of all time AND I enjoyed Breakdown (and THAT is saying a lot). Breakdown has some of the most boring locations ever seen in an FPS (well, a semi-FPS), yet it was still a good time...
Of course, I played FC with the highest possible settings (including stuff like Ultra quality water). It ran fine, of course...but Doom 3 is a lot smoother. When I first played FC, the indoor segments ran quite poorly whereas the outdoor areas were smooth. This past weekend, however, I found that the indoor areas run very well now (though still far from Doom 3 performance). Oh yes, as noted above, I play Doom 3 with V-sync enabled...but playing FC with V-sync is just a bit too sluggish at times.
Is there a way to turn of AF when using the high quality mode, though? AF hurts the performance enough that I'd rather just turn it off. I'd pull off a better framerate without it as well...even though it is already very smooth.
Oh, and I am still enjoying it despite the repetition in backgrounds...afterall, Halo is one of my favorite FPS titles of all time AND I enjoyed Breakdown (and THAT is saying a lot). Breakdown has some of the most boring locations ever seen in an FPS (well, a semi-FPS), yet it was still a good time...
ZombieSupaStar
Member
I dont have my "demo" anymore but didnt it have better lighting?
I know farcry has this (in the first level you can knock that hanging lamp around and see true shadowing whereas dooms shadowing seems to be "faking" it?)
That kinda let me down, because I could have swore the lighting in the demo was more accurate than in the final. (maybe it was just too costly?)
I know farcry has this (in the first level you can knock that hanging lamp around and see true shadowing whereas dooms shadowing seems to be "faking" it?)
That kinda let me down, because I could have swore the lighting in the demo was more accurate than in the final. (maybe it was just too costly?)
Playing on decent specs... 2.3 ghz; ti4600 510 RAM
I actually tried it on High Qual and 1048... Choppy at parts (where a lot is happening on screen) but certainly playable... more playable on medium, however
And I'm also playing with headphones... and it makes the game so much more intense... I'm jumping all over the place and I NEVER jump.
Great feeling... really enjoying the game in these early stages.
I actually tried it on High Qual and 1048... Choppy at parts (where a lot is happening on screen) but certainly playable... more playable on medium, however
And I'm also playing with headphones... and it makes the game so much more intense... I'm jumping all over the place and I NEVER jump.
Great feeling... really enjoying the game in these early stages.
I have to agree that Far Cry has the superior engine (and from what I've played so far of Doom 3, the better game). I think it's a matter of scope, in Far Cry you have similar, albeit more varied interiors with the Doom 3 esque lighting, not to mention an engine capable of drawing huge, detailed outdoor areas with large amounts of foliage. Also lacking is the extensive shader effects of Far Cry (Turns out I was right here, Doom 3 is pretty much devoid of pixel shader effects which makes sense since the game looks roughly the same from a DirectX7 class GF4MX all the way up to a modern 6800 Ultra). Doom 3 is certainly not bad looking, it is probably one of the best looking games made so far. Some lighting effects are very nice and there is some significant detail in the characters and environment (some Martian landscape scenes look gorgeous). What hurts it is lack of variety, some really iffy flashlight shadow projection effects and a lack of pixel shader effects (only few I know of is heat haze and maybe refractive glass) comparable to the Crytek or Source engines.
Doom 3 has these hanging light effects too. Looks cool, but since it's already been done by Far Cry (and Splinter Cell and probably other games I'm unaware of), it's nothing particularly original.
Doom 3 has these hanging light effects too. Looks cool, but since it's already been done by Far Cry (and Splinter Cell and probably other games I'm unaware of), it's nothing particularly original.
ZombieSupaStar
Member
less talk more piccies!
The only lighting in doom 3 that is really in err seems to be the flashlight. But just get in a pitch black room with some imps and you can see the lighting is insane for the most part. I did notice when you step off the ship, first thing in the game, the ship itself is lit per poly. Very weird, because the shadows it casts are even per pixel.
The gameplay is pretty cheap for the most part. If you see a fully lit room, expect it to go pitch black the moment you step into it. Enemies that teleport in 1 ft in front of you when you open a door, and a door that slides open when you walk past it to reveal an imp. But it really doesn't matter. It just makes you more paranoid. Even realizing the simple gameplay and cheap scare tactics, I still like the gameplay, and it still scares the fuck out of me. A+ on the ambience.
I'm wearing headphones, which does make it more intense, I hear.
And the only times I have been able to play the game is after midnight, that doesn't help my sanity much.
The gameplay is pretty cheap for the most part. If you see a fully lit room, expect it to go pitch black the moment you step into it. Enemies that teleport in 1 ft in front of you when you open a door, and a door that slides open when you walk past it to reveal an imp. But it really doesn't matter. It just makes you more paranoid. Even realizing the simple gameplay and cheap scare tactics, I still like the gameplay, and it still scares the fuck out of me. A+ on the ambience.
I'm wearing headphones, which does make it more intense, I hear.
And the only times I have been able to play the game is after midnight, that doesn't help my sanity much.
Yeah, Farcry had everything, except animation. If they worked on that more it would be pretty much perfect, graphically.teepo said:
I feel that the reaction of fans and critics will be very much the same as with Halo. They are very polarizing experiences.....where a significant majority will say "It's the best thing ever" and a very vocal minority will say "It sucks" or "It's average and overrated".
Halo and Doom 3 share the same obvious flaw -- a lack of visual variety and a fairly repetitive structure. Where they differ is that Halo appeals to gameplay junkies while Doom 3 appeals to atmosphere/graphics junkies. In the eyes of some, the intensity and depth of Halo's combat helps overcome the repetition just as the mood and feel of Doom 3 helps overcome the same issue in the eyes of a very different crowd.
So far critics have completely overlooked Doom 3's problems. They don't even mention the problems for the sake of dismissing them. It's a testament to the combination of atmosphere, nostalgia, graphics, and production values......though at the same time I wonder how much "Give it a great review" pressure has been put on them by the likes of id, Activision, ATI, nVidia and other various interests that are relying on the game to help them rake in dollars. It seems a little hokey that PC Gamer got this huge early, exclusive review almost for the sake of providing a blurb that went right on the box art. All the while the media have been hyping this title for years, and in some sense it would be egg on their faces to admit to mediocrity in something that they have devoted so much content to.
Now for the counterbalance to all that cynicism...
I can't really abide giving ridiculously high marks to a game that is so conventional and unambitious, but at the same time I can understand why someone might give it a superlative review. Similarly, I'm a staunch Halo lover but can still understand why someone might have been fairly bored with it. Gamers that can stomach both the atmosphere-oriented titles and the gameplay-oriented titles are the real winners here, as they will get a huge kick out of Doom or Halo.
Halo and Doom 3 share the same obvious flaw -- a lack of visual variety and a fairly repetitive structure. Where they differ is that Halo appeals to gameplay junkies while Doom 3 appeals to atmosphere/graphics junkies. In the eyes of some, the intensity and depth of Halo's combat helps overcome the repetition just as the mood and feel of Doom 3 helps overcome the same issue in the eyes of a very different crowd.
So far critics have completely overlooked Doom 3's problems. They don't even mention the problems for the sake of dismissing them. It's a testament to the combination of atmosphere, nostalgia, graphics, and production values......though at the same time I wonder how much "Give it a great review" pressure has been put on them by the likes of id, Activision, ATI, nVidia and other various interests that are relying on the game to help them rake in dollars. It seems a little hokey that PC Gamer got this huge early, exclusive review almost for the sake of providing a blurb that went right on the box art. All the while the media have been hyping this title for years, and in some sense it would be egg on their faces to admit to mediocrity in something that they have devoted so much content to.
Now for the counterbalance to all that cynicism...
I can't really abide giving ridiculously high marks to a game that is so conventional and unambitious, but at the same time I can understand why someone might give it a superlative review. Similarly, I'm a staunch Halo lover but can still understand why someone might have been fairly bored with it. Gamers that can stomach both the atmosphere-oriented titles and the gameplay-oriented titles are the real winners here, as they will get a huge kick out of Doom or Halo.
Well I'm about 5 hours in, early in the game so I'm still forming a lot of opinions.
The whole beginning of the game has a real half-life feel to it (seems to tred on the legal line a few times). The initial setup was pretty damn awesome. Everything going to shit was mindblowing and the first hour or so had me on my toes. I jumped a few times in this initial hour as the game showed clever ways of freaking you out with demons coming out from all sorts of odd places.
The problem is that the designers seemed to have blown every good idea they had on that first hour. After that, things begin to level off. I still feel creepy in certain areas and there are still some "oh shit" moments --- but nothing like that first hour. The game seems to get lazy; for example, instead of having creatures pop up in certain places cleverly like they did early in the game, they just spawn them in behind you or something. You just start to get numb to the whole thing and it's killing the suspence.
The PDA sequences remind me of System Shock 2, Unreal, and Metroid Prime. I know most people hate this style of story telling, but I love it. Instead of disconnecting the player with tons of cutscenes, you let the player unfold things on their own -- with a feeling that they are in control and are apart of the world they are gaming in. Doom 3 seems to do a real good job of this, and I love the neat little things like spam, chatty emails, etc, etc. It really builds the world in my mind.
You begin to realize real quick that any resemblance to real AI is actually scripted events. That marine ducking behind the box is doing that because he was scripted to, not because he's responding to anything you're doing. It's really a shame, because you could really create some awesome scare-moments if the AI was smarter. The AI's stupidity is even killing the suspense. For instance --- the lights go off and you KNOW there are monsters in the room. All you have to do is run to the well-lighted room and wait for them to follow you there. Scary?
The saving grace of Doom 3 is its presentation and atmosphere. The damn game is SLICK. I haven't played a game this polished since Metroid Prime. The interfaces, the menu systems, etc etc ALL are easy to use and just ooze polish. It's clear Id took great care in this area of the game. The sound of course is amazing and really needs to be heard in 5.1. The graphics are badass and really envelop you. I still love seeing those fireballs whiz past my face with that burning glow lighting up my screen.
SO FAR, the game seems to suffer from Id's famous weaknesses. Generic gameplay and levels that run all together. Yes, even with these amazing graphics, everything STILL looks the same (much like all their other games). I guess you can say it's because of the setting, but really how is this setting any different from past Id games? I think it's time Id explore something other than industrial corridors for a change.
5 hours in though, and I'm still going. I really do like it -- it's a GOOD game, I just hope it gets better.
I can't help but feel that this game is just 2 years too late.
The whole beginning of the game has a real half-life feel to it (seems to tred on the legal line a few times). The initial setup was pretty damn awesome. Everything going to shit was mindblowing and the first hour or so had me on my toes. I jumped a few times in this initial hour as the game showed clever ways of freaking you out with demons coming out from all sorts of odd places.
The problem is that the designers seemed to have blown every good idea they had on that first hour. After that, things begin to level off. I still feel creepy in certain areas and there are still some "oh shit" moments --- but nothing like that first hour. The game seems to get lazy; for example, instead of having creatures pop up in certain places cleverly like they did early in the game, they just spawn them in behind you or something. You just start to get numb to the whole thing and it's killing the suspence.
The PDA sequences remind me of System Shock 2, Unreal, and Metroid Prime. I know most people hate this style of story telling, but I love it. Instead of disconnecting the player with tons of cutscenes, you let the player unfold things on their own -- with a feeling that they are in control and are apart of the world they are gaming in. Doom 3 seems to do a real good job of this, and I love the neat little things like spam, chatty emails, etc, etc. It really builds the world in my mind.
You begin to realize real quick that any resemblance to real AI is actually scripted events. That marine ducking behind the box is doing that because he was scripted to, not because he's responding to anything you're doing. It's really a shame, because you could really create some awesome scare-moments if the AI was smarter. The AI's stupidity is even killing the suspense. For instance --- the lights go off and you KNOW there are monsters in the room. All you have to do is run to the well-lighted room and wait for them to follow you there. Scary?
The saving grace of Doom 3 is its presentation and atmosphere. The damn game is SLICK. I haven't played a game this polished since Metroid Prime. The interfaces, the menu systems, etc etc ALL are easy to use and just ooze polish. It's clear Id took great care in this area of the game. The sound of course is amazing and really needs to be heard in 5.1. The graphics are badass and really envelop you. I still love seeing those fireballs whiz past my face with that burning glow lighting up my screen.
SO FAR, the game seems to suffer from Id's famous weaknesses. Generic gameplay and levels that run all together. Yes, even with these amazing graphics, everything STILL looks the same (much like all their other games). I guess you can say it's because of the setting, but really how is this setting any different from past Id games? I think it's time Id explore something other than industrial corridors for a change.
5 hours in though, and I'm still going. I really do like it -- it's a GOOD game, I just hope it gets better.
I can't help but feel that this game is just 2 years too late.
Boogie9IGN
Member
Need some help on this part:
WHERE IS THAT DAMNED PERSONNEL ELEVATOR IN THE ALPHA LABS? IVE BEEN SEARCHING FOR 2 HOURS AND I CANNOT FIND THE DAMN THING
WHERE IS THAT DAMNED PERSONNEL ELEVATOR IN THE ALPHA LABS? IVE BEEN SEARCHING FOR 2 HOURS AND I CANNOT FIND THE DAMN THING
One additional thing to say about Doom 3 -- this is a game that you pretty much have to play at night, in an unlit room. I tried playing during the day, but the glare from the light coming into the room makes it difficult to see a lot of things (even with the in-game brightness settings at maximum). If your PC is in a room with no windows this obviously doesn't apply, but some of the "It's too dark" complaints might be coming from people that are playing in less-than-optimal settings.
And if you don't have a 5.1 setup, you should definitely hook up some headphones because a pair of generic speakers really won't do that game any justice.
And if you don't have a 5.1 setup, you should definitely hook up some headphones because a pair of generic speakers really won't do that game any justice.
Late Stage Marxist
Member
:lol
deadhorse32
Bad Art
I pretty much agree with Dark10 about the whole FC Vs Doom 3 engine.
Another thing that bother me is the lack of interactive object in Doom3 compare to FC ( HL2 should be pretty interactive too ).
You can't even shoot the damn TV with the infomercial.
Another thing that bother me is the lack of interactive object in Doom3 compare to FC ( HL2 should be pretty interactive too ).
You can't even shoot the damn TV with the infomercial.
One question...
I'm using a set of Klipsch ProMedia 4.1 speakers (since 1999!!!) and I would like to use the surround sound. The problem is that, obviously, I lack a center channel. Has anyone successfully managed to pull off 4.1 audio instead of 5.1? Depending on my windows settings, it either informs me that it can not find my rear speakers or accepts my change and tries to use a center channel that doesn't exist. I've tried changing the number of speakers to "5" in the cfg file, and it always seems to reset itself to "2" speakers as a result. Any suggestions?
On another note...
Having compared it to Far Cry earlier, I'd also say that Riddick's engine on XBOX is more impressive in many aspects. To be quite honest, Riddick had some nice shader usage and a seemingly more robust shadowing engine. Not only that, I actually think the models used for characters are higher quality in Riddick. The difference between the two is in the environments, however. Riddick has fairly simple environments all around and certainly doesn't even begin to display anywhere near the same amount of "stuff" per room that Doom 3 does. Lots of flat surfaces spiced up with nice textures and texture effects. I'm still very impressed with what Star Breeze pulled off on XBOX...now more so than ever.
Also, as hinted at earlier, I gotta given ION Storm a little credit now. While Thief III certainly didn't perform all that well (though not too bad), the actual lighting engine is better than Doom 3's IMO. Better usage of bump maps and shadows all around. When a guard walks through a detailed room with tons of objects while carrying a torch, all of those items cast beautiful shadows perfectly as he strolls on by. They just put shadows to much better use in T3...
I'm using a set of Klipsch ProMedia 4.1 speakers (since 1999!!!) and I would like to use the surround sound. The problem is that, obviously, I lack a center channel. Has anyone successfully managed to pull off 4.1 audio instead of 5.1? Depending on my windows settings, it either informs me that it can not find my rear speakers or accepts my change and tries to use a center channel that doesn't exist. I've tried changing the number of speakers to "5" in the cfg file, and it always seems to reset itself to "2" speakers as a result. Any suggestions?
On another note...
Having compared it to Far Cry earlier, I'd also say that Riddick's engine on XBOX is more impressive in many aspects. To be quite honest, Riddick had some nice shader usage and a seemingly more robust shadowing engine. Not only that, I actually think the models used for characters are higher quality in Riddick. The difference between the two is in the environments, however. Riddick has fairly simple environments all around and certainly doesn't even begin to display anywhere near the same amount of "stuff" per room that Doom 3 does. Lots of flat surfaces spiced up with nice textures and texture effects. I'm still very impressed with what Star Breeze pulled off on XBOX...now more so than ever.
Also, as hinted at earlier, I gotta given ION Storm a little credit now. While Thief III certainly didn't perform all that well (though not too bad), the actual lighting engine is better than Doom 3's IMO. Better usage of bump maps and shadows all around. When a guard walks through a detailed room with tons of objects while carrying a torch, all of those items cast beautiful shadows perfectly as he strolls on by. They just put shadows to much better use in T3...
Ive played about 6 hours now.
Im VERY impressed with the overall visual presentation, the shadows and mapping look crisper and cleaner than T3, FC or Riddick to me. Im running high @ 800x600 vsync/2x aa and its smooth as butter. FYI I got a huge boost going from 1024 to 800 and almost cant tell the difference.
Im not sure how I would rate this though, I think ID did what they set out to do, make a polished atmoshpheric and scary game. With that said the combat stinks, but I cant complain too much cause I knew it was going to be like this, Im not really disappointed.
Tell me this though, is the cacodemon and baron of hell in this?
Im VERY impressed with the overall visual presentation, the shadows and mapping look crisper and cleaner than T3, FC or Riddick to me. Im running high @ 800x600 vsync/2x aa and its smooth as butter. FYI I got a huge boost going from 1024 to 800 and almost cant tell the difference.
Im not sure how I would rate this though, I think ID did what they set out to do, make a polished atmoshpheric and scary game. With that said the combat stinks, but I cant complain too much cause I knew it was going to be like this, Im not really disappointed.
Tell me this though, is the cacodemon and baron of hell in this?
DaCocoBrova
Finally bought a new PSP, but then pushed the demon onto someone else. Jesus.
Those are my specs as well.
I find that w/ Doom3 and most games, if you have a high-end card, lower resolutions make the game perform much worse. For me, the higher the resolution, the better the refresh...up 'til a point, than it's the opposite.
I also turn off shadows in most games. They don't add much visually IMO ('cept for screen capstures), and they hinder performance greatly.
I'm enjoying the game a great deal. My only nit pick other than a graphics engine that's a lil' to complex for its own good, is that the sound lacks 'umph'. Especially compared to other recent FPS'.
Wait a minute dark10x. Can't say I agree w/ that. Because Far Cry renders indoor environs as nice as Doom3, in addition to having massive, foliage-laced outdoor environments, how could you think Doom3 is the better performer?
I achieve 60fps much more consistanly w/ Far Cry than w/ Doom3. Doom3 seems to hit and stick w/ 60fps when background geometry is shallow, like walking down a hall or anything really enclosed. When a door is opened and the engine has to render two rooms, the frame rate plummets. Far Cry doesn't have that on/off smoothness. It's more consistant.
evilromero
Member
Well this is good for me since I'll only be playing it on my Xbox.
Can someone please tell me what the name of the menu theme on Doom 3 is? I've been looking for about an hour where to find it and all I found was that Chris Vrenna did it.
Anyone got a name... or perhaps something more concrete? It's pretty awesome.
Side Note: I play in my finished basement where most of my computing equipment is (sans my Mac). Really gives me the shits expecially since I have an oscillating fan on (coupled with the sound... I'm getting the chills in certain parts of the game). I know I looked around me a few times when playing the game too...
...and seriously... I don't spoke easily... but I've never actually played an FPS like this with headphones on before (I have a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz sound card, BTW). Just completely engrosses me and I really do think you need sound like this in order to truly appreciate this game.
11:00 pm can't come soon enough
Anyone got a name... or perhaps something more concrete? It's pretty awesome.
Side Note: I play in my finished basement where most of my computing equipment is (sans my Mac). Really gives me the shits expecially since I have an oscillating fan on (coupled with the sound... I'm getting the chills in certain parts of the game). I know I looked around me a few times when playing the game too...
...and seriously... I don't spoke easily... but I've never actually played an FPS like this with headphones on before (I have a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz sound card, BTW). Just completely engrosses me and I really do think you need sound like this in order to truly appreciate this game.
11:00 pm can't come soon enough
MrPing1000
Member
Xp2000+
512mb pc2700
9800pro 128meg
Runs decent at 800x600 with medium detail, the odd bit of slow down and very rarely super slowdown
Still there is a question that i must ask. Why does the marine you are playing have loose change in his pocket?
512mb pc2700
9800pro 128meg
Runs decent at 800x600 with medium detail, the odd bit of slow down and very rarely super slowdown
Still there is a question that i must ask. Why does the marine you are playing have loose change in his pocket?
Apple Jax said:Can someone please tell me what the name of the menu theme on Doom 3 is? I've been looking for about an hour where to find it and all I found was that Chris Vrenna did it.
Anyone got a name... or perhaps something more concrete? It's pretty awesome.
Side Note: I play in my finished basement where most of my computing equipment is (sans my Mac). Really gives me the shits expecially since I have an oscillating fan on (coupled with the sound... I'm getting the chills in certain parts of the game). I know I looked around me a few times when playing the game too...
...and seriously... I don't spoke easily... but I've never actually played an FPS like this with headphones on before (I have a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz sound card, BTW). Just completely engrosses me and I really do think you need sound like this in order to truly appreciate this game.
11:00 pm can't come soon enough
I have a pm for you, if you want to download the theme. Chris Vrenna = Tweaker http://www.tweaker.net/ much like Trent Reznor = NIN
Apharmd Battler
Member
DaCocoBrova said:
Kudos to your setup!!
Just curious what you're getting in terms of framerate. I'm getting 40-60 range I'd say it's usually around 47-50 (not that I give a damn, because for the most part the game is smooth). I'm not a clock watching, framerate tweaking, graphic pandering PC elitist, like some of my pals. I haven't tried to get a frame rate in FarCry, but I noticed a huge difference when I went from 512MB to 1GB of DDR RAM. When I built my rig earlier this year everyone was saying that 512MB would be enough. Then UT2K4 and Far Cry dropped and the rules changed.
UT2004 was OK with 512mb or ram...but Far Cry really needs 1gb. When I went up to 1gb of ram, FC saw some massive performance boosts AND I could run with the highest texture detail.
Which is another thing I've noticed with Doom 3...the textures aren't that great. Far Cry absolutely destroys it in terms of texture detail...though I suppose Doom 3 has more texture variety (that is, it doesn't rely as heavily on LARGE repeating patterns).
Which is another thing I've noticed with Doom 3...the textures aren't that great. Far Cry absolutely destroys it in terms of texture detail...though I suppose Doom 3 has more texture variety (that is, it doesn't rely as heavily on LARGE repeating patterns).
Teknopathetic
Member
UT will live with 512mb of ram, but even on normal settings, it's pretty much filling all of the RAM. High and up totally kill 512mb machines.
I'm not gonna ramble on with the techbabble, other than comment how this game runs about equally as well as Farcry does on my setup. Meaning it putters along very nicely even on the highest settings. (Damn well better given my hardware! Actually Farcry does get slightly better framerates)
Athlon 64 3200+
1 gig RAM
Radeon 9800 Pro
1024x768
High Detail
~45 fps average
Strangely though, autoscanning my hardware gets Low quality at 640x480...WTF??! Gotta be broken...
I really dig the game so far, but the game is FAR from the most 'splendiferous' FPS I've touched.
Like dark10x, I immediately jumped into the -Hard- difficulty and it has been QUITE a tough ride for the few hours put in. The imps/zombies are easilly avoided, but those god-damned marine zombies with the shotguns and pistols and such have FAR too accurate shooting ability. They can peck off serious health at the greatest distances before you are even aware of their presence. Add in the extremely claustrophobic environments and the total lack of a lean function and you have a real attrition based shooter that is in NEED of a tuneup.
On the otherhand, I really do like the sense of urgency that goes along with this difficulty setting. All those hidden health caches and supply lockers are ALWAYS useful. It becomes worthwhile to search those silly PDA files and websites to get some medicine, I am constantly teetering on the verge of death which can be occasionally frustrating, but it only supports the tension which is pretty much all this shooter has going for it...besides fancy aesthetics.
But what is up with the armor? I often find myself averaging 100+ on the armor levels yet my health seem unnaffected. When I die I notice armor levels still in the range of 80+ on most occasions. Are those zombies just THAT good with headshots?
Finally, I REALLY dig the feel of the gunplay, particularly the way your own character is affected by damage. Taking a shotgun blast at close range from a zombie can really knock you on your ass. Though I often don't get that same sensation from shooting my enemies unfortunately. Wielding the shotgun feels mighty, but the same knockback 'effect' just isn't there when I nail Mr. Zombie with a non-lethal blow compared to when he hits me...
Athlon 64 3200+
1 gig RAM
Radeon 9800 Pro
1024x768
High Detail
~45 fps average
Strangely though, autoscanning my hardware gets Low quality at 640x480...WTF??! Gotta be broken...
I really dig the game so far, but the game is FAR from the most 'splendiferous' FPS I've touched.
Like dark10x, I immediately jumped into the -Hard- difficulty and it has been QUITE a tough ride for the few hours put in. The imps/zombies are easilly avoided, but those god-damned marine zombies with the shotguns and pistols and such have FAR too accurate shooting ability. They can peck off serious health at the greatest distances before you are even aware of their presence. Add in the extremely claustrophobic environments and the total lack of a lean function and you have a real attrition based shooter that is in NEED of a tuneup.
On the otherhand, I really do like the sense of urgency that goes along with this difficulty setting. All those hidden health caches and supply lockers are ALWAYS useful. It becomes worthwhile to search those silly PDA files and websites to get some medicine, I am constantly teetering on the verge of death which can be occasionally frustrating, but it only supports the tension which is pretty much all this shooter has going for it...besides fancy aesthetics.
But what is up with the armor? I often find myself averaging 100+ on the armor levels yet my health seem unnaffected. When I die I notice armor levels still in the range of 80+ on most occasions. Are those zombies just THAT good with headshots?
Finally, I REALLY dig the feel of the gunplay, particularly the way your own character is affected by damage. Taking a shotgun blast at close range from a zombie can really knock you on your ass. Though I often don't get that same sensation from shooting my enemies unfortunately. Wielding the shotgun feels mighty, but the same knockback 'effect' just isn't there when I nail Mr. Zombie with a non-lethal blow compared to when he hits me...
- Status