Doom 4....

[ST Dragon]

It was announced as in production on May 7, 2008,[1] following speculation by John Carmack at QuakeCon on August 3, 2007.[2] In Issue 184 of Game Informer, Doom 4 was speculated to be due for release alongside Rage, late in the third quarter of 2009

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_4

Interview, Carmack Talks Rage, id Tech 5:
http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/ ... htm?Page=1

It's a good thing the new id Tech 5 engine will be based on OpenGL rather than that joke DX10 Vista thing...

http://www.e3.net/images/games/37.jpg
http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?story=52560
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_i ... tory=18544
http://pc.ign.com/articles/872/872097p1.html

Personally, I greatly enjoyed the previous Doom3, it was an awesome FPS!
It's funny how people wanted to bash Doom3 all they had to say were the same comments 1,000,000 times over about the flashlight and the darkness, but completely overlooked the fact that it was simply an excellent old-school FPS.

I'm really looking forward in playing Doom 4 but somehow I doubt that it will be ready by the 3rd quarter of 2009

[P_HAT]

If Rage will come in 2011 (!)
Then, i think, Doom4 will come in like... q4 of 2012.


And yes, Doom 3 are kick ass game.

[Ed Oscuro]

DOOM III sux because it has horrible map designs

not being able to see enemies much of the time was just an added bonus

[P_HAT]

DOOM III sux because it has horrible map designs

lol wut? Doom III has great map design.

[ST Dragon]

Seeing as Doom3 was a re-telling of the original Doom, one can only wonder if Doom 4 will be a remake of Doom II - Hell on Earth?

[PROMETHEUS]

DOOM III sux because it has horrible map designs

Wow, that's like the main thing that's awesome about Doom 3. Or maybe you're talking about multiplayer ? Doom 3 is not a multiplayer focused game at all.

[moozooh]

Doom 1 & 2:
• large open arenas with hundreds of enemies and shit coming at you;
• nonlinear stages;
• average-to-good visibility of everything;
• smooth and fast;
• nicely designed, at least for its time.

Doom 3:
• wandering in tight, severely restricted pathways fighting 1-2 enemies at a time;
• absolute linearity and scriptedness of every event in every stage (you like rail shooters?);
• bad-to-nonexistent visibility (apparently, the shadow casting engine was so good there nothing but shadows cast by everything onto everything);
• slow and clunky;
• everything looks like it's made of plastic (including the enemies), except the metal surfaces with insane amount of specular light added onto them.

Guess which one has been less popular than the others.

[P_HAT]

Doom 3 are best selling ID Games ever(for now, lol.), so stfu

[moozooh]

I'm talking about popularity, not revenues. The difference is in about an order of magnitude, I'm afraid, just like with Quake 4 compared to Quake 3.

[ST Dragon]

If Rage will come in 2011 (!)
Then, i think, Doom4 will come in like... q4 of 2012.

Interesting... that long?! sources, links?

[Nuke]

Doom 3 are best selling ID Games ever(for now, lol.), so stfu

Fastest selling, not the best selling. They are still selling copies of Doom 1 & 2, and it's been 15 years since the first came out!

[Herr Schatten]

Seeing as Doom3 was a re-telling of the original Doom, one can only wonder if Doom 4 will be a remake of Doom II - Hell on Earth?

If so, they are moving in circles fast for sure.

[kengou]

I tried playing Doom 3 recently and it was just really annoying. It was sort of fun for a while but then I went back and played Doom 2 and promptly uninstalled Doom 3. The difference in design quality between the two games is astronomical.

For my more in-depth impressions of Doom 3:
http://gruegaming.blogspot.com/2008/07/doom-3.html

[PROMETHEUS]

I tried playing Doom 3 recently and it was just really annoying. It was sort of fun for a while but then I went back and played Doom 2 and promptly uninstalled Doom 3. The difference in design quality between the two games is astronomical.

I really don't get that kind of comment. Doom 3 is the game with the highest design value I know. Everything is incredibly detailed and made to make the player feel threatened and pressured in many awesome, different ways throughout the game.

Stupid comments like the flashlight thing only reveal failure for some people to understand that what's important is how the game feels, not just how realistic or coherent it is. Sometimes it's good to give up some realism to make the gameplay feel better in some way : the flashlight is a GREAT idea to add pressure and feeling to the game.

Just what do you not like about Doom 3's design in comparison to that old, surpassed prequel ?

[lgb]

Doom III sounds like Half Life to me.

[P_HAT]

I really don't get that kind of comment. Doom 3 is the game with the highest design value I know. Everything is incredibly detailed and made to make the player feel threatened and pressured in many awesome, different ways throughout the game.

Stupid comments like the flashlight thing only reveal failure for some people to understand that what's important is how the game feels, not just how realistic or coherent it is. Sometimes it's good to give up some realism to make the gameplay feel better in some way : the flashlight is a GREAT idea to add pressure and feeling to the game.

Just what do you not like about Doom 3's design in comparison to that old, surpassed prequel ?

Cuz my english is shit, i can only fully agree with Prometheus.

[nekich]

So let me get this straight - people basically complain that iD didn't make a verbatim remake of classic DOOM (thus, possibly, avoiding the fate of becoming a copy of its own clone - Serious Sam) and instead turned everything upside down?

[Lawfer]

ID has got me more interested in RAGE, never was interested in the Doom games...

[lgb]

So let me get this straight - people basically complain that iD didn't make a verbatim remake of classic DOOM (thus, possibly, avoiding the fate of becoming a copy of its own clone - Serious Sam) and instead turned everything upside down?

Yep. People want the old-school, but they also want the new-school at the same time. A hard battle to win.

[Acid King]

So let me get this straight - people basically complain that iD didn't make a verbatim remake of classic DOOM (thus, possibly, avoiding the fate of becoming a copy of its own clone - Serious Sam) and instead turned everything upside down?

I think peoples objections stem from the design decision to make it more atmospheric and less arcade-like which made it play much differently compared to the first two games. Personally, I think it's a good thing we got games like Painkiller and Serious Sam to carry on the tradition of the originals. The first two Serious Sam games are fucking great.

[moozooh]

made to make the player feel threatened and pressured in many awesome, different ways throughout the game.

You mean "1-2 obvious ways", right? Because that's how many and how different they are. And neither are the least bit original.

I've seen stuff appear and leap out at me from behind back in Serious Sam, and I considered it more annoying than scary there, so why would I treat it otherwise in Doom 3?

the flashlight is a GREAT idea to add pressure and feeling to the game.

Yes, it adds the feeling of frustration to the game, and does so really GREAT.

You are talking as if the player should bear whatever ridiculous crap is poured at them if they don't consider it clever, challenging, engaging, genuinely scary, or just plain unentertaining. This is RHE logic.

Just what do you not like about Doom 3's design in comparison to that old, surpassed prequel ?

How many times have you played through Doom 3? How many people you know have played through it more than twice?

A fun value of basically any given game is determined by how fun and varied the gameplay process is. Apart from the difficulty selection and imposing artificial challenges on yourself like playing with the soul cube only, Doom 3's gameplay is one hundred percent linear, scripted, and slow-paced to boot. It's about as boring as an FPS can be.

So let me get this straight - people basically complain that iD didn't make a verbatim remake of classic DOOM (thus, possibly, avoiding the fate of becoming a copy of its own clone - Serious Sam) and instead turned everything upside down?

Yes and no. Read my first post to see where they went wrong.

I was not particularly happy with Doom 3 having become a survival horror more than an FPS, but it didn't end there. The game was worse than other games that were already out (some of them for several years by that moment) on basically every single account, and wasn't entertaining as a whole, either, so I never understood if it was so overrated as to become the game of the year because of all the graphic gimmicks, the brand fame, or the "horror" that wasn't.

Let me point out that I've never been big on sequels as a whole, I prefer something new that doesn't bear the rights and wrong of the past.

[Nuke]

I think many people disliked doom because ID forgot the -fun- that came with blasting away 20+ demons on screen in a semi-open environment.
Well, here's hoping that this time around they'll focus less on the cinematic side of things and more on the gameplay.

[ST Dragon]

Why not both in one game? I loved the cinematic scenes and story depth of Doom3 as much as I enjoyed the endless battles with the hordes of Demons in Doom 1 & 2.

I hope in Doom 4 we’ll have both!

[Ruldra]

I have to agree with moozooh here. I'm a huge fan of the Doom series but I can't stand playing Doom III. Why?

Doom 3's gameplay is one hundred percent linear, scripted, and slow-paced to boot.

[nekich]

I'm a huge fan of the Doom series too, but i enjoyed playing both D3 and RoE. Why?


I dunno. Probably because of the Mancubi.

[Nuke]

Why not both in one game? I loved the cinematic scenes and story depth of Doom3 as much as I enjoyed the endless battles with the hordes of Demons in Doom 1 & 2.

I hope in Doom 4 we’ll have both!

Me too actually, but gameplay should always come first -a motto that id themselfs followed up until Doom3. But then again it's not like they alone were the victim of what I call the return of the Interactive movie mentality; Where everything is so forced and on rails that you might as well be watching a movie or dusting of your old Sega CD.
I hope todays gamers and designers are getting tired of the trend, or that there'll be another crash so western games can finally become as diverse, creative and fun as they once were.
An emphasis on PC gaming might help, unlikely though while Microsoft are still in the console race/ doing their games for Vista thing -a huge part of the problem lies with the emphasis on the sofa gamer who just wants a cheep linear ride after a long day at work. Nothing wrong with that type of gamer, I myself am like that from time to time. But they should never be the driving force of the market for the same reason that Hollywood blockbusters should never be the only thing Hollywood pumps out since a crackdown on artistic values and desires (and in our case, pure gameplay) leads to stagnation/lack of interest on both side of the fence and ultimately decreased revenue/crash -rant over.

[moozooh]

Couldn't agree more with you, Nuke.

[kengou]

I tried playing Doom 3 recently and it was just really annoying. It was sort of fun for a while but then I went back and played Doom 2 and promptly uninstalled Doom 3. The difference in design quality between the two games is astronomical.

I really don't get that kind of comment. Doom 3 is the game with the highest design value I know. Everything is incredibly detailed and made to make the player feel threatened and pressured in many awesome, different ways throughout the game.

Stupid comments like the flashlight thing only reveal failure for some people to understand that what's important is how the game feels, not just how realistic or coherent it is. Sometimes it's good to give up some realism to make the gameplay feel better in some way : the flashlight is a GREAT idea to add pressure and feeling to the game.

Just what do you not like about Doom 3's design in comparison to that old, surpassed prequel ?

I detail the reasons in the link I posted. To sum up though, the game is just linear, scripted, and reliant on cheap jump-out-and-scare tactics to keep you engaged, which frankly doesn't work for me. The levels aren't designed that well, the monsters aren't that much fun to fight, and the puzzles are simplistic at best.

The original Doom games were masterfully designed no matter how old they are. Hordes of monsters, each of which required different strategies to deal with, interesting nonlinear level layouts and puzzles, and fun powerups and weapons. They relied on solid gameplay instead of wandering around dark, cramped corridors constantly switching between a flashlight and a gun and being unavoidably attacked from behind by a monster that wasn't there a second ago. It's a cheap and shallow experience in my opinion. It was fun for a few hours of mindless zombie shooting but I just couldn't stay interested after that.

I'm glad you found enjoyment in the game though.

[nekich]

Stop talking about classic Doom in past tense. It's still alive.

[Twiddle]

Even FEAR, a game widely known for the literally cut and paste level design, edges out Doom 3 because it was actually challenging at parts.

Stop talking about classic Doom in past tense. It's still alive.

this