Doom III Review - Gamespot - 8.5

Zombrex

Gamespot have a review of Doom III up

They say it is amazing graphics, but under it all it is a pretty old-school standard FPS, nothing particularly new or original, and will probably look very pale vs Half Life 2

But did anyone seriously expect a whole lot ... id Software aren't famous for their single player games ... Quake was crap single player, Quake 2 was over shadowed by Half Life and Quake 3 wasn't even single player

Zombrex

A link would probably be good

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/doom3/review.html

Stephen

I wouldn't call Quake single player crap, back in the day it was the best thing since sliced bread. I remember my poor 486 chugging hard with it in 320x200

It had a hyper-mega-l33t 1MB cirrus logic chipset with no 3d acceleration.

That first time you meet the shambler is unforgettable.

Giblet

They seem to be complaining about things that don't need to be complained about. The lighting is fantastic, complaining about not being able to use the gun and the flashlight at the same time is like complaining that the pistol doesn't kill everything in one shot or something. It's made like that for a reason. The guns aren't fun? I'm sorry theres no spring loaded fist weapon, but blasting zombies in the face is damn fun! . The sound also got marked down, what was he listening to it through, a paper cup!?

Zombrex

Stephen wrote:

I wouldn't call Quake single player crap, back in the day it was the best thing since sliced bread.

Compared to Duke Nukem it was. No over all structure or plot, it was really just a bunch or random levels throw together. True there were some cool parts, but it had none of the "wow" factor that Nukem had (the level design I mean, not the graphics)

Deadwing

Oh come ON! Duke was good but to say its better than quake?? Thats tantamount to sacrelige. Quake 1 had atmosphere, excellent (for the time) graphics, brilliant sound thanks to trent reznor, badass guns (nailgun is still one of the best guns ever in a game), and classic bad guys like the shambler, fiends etc. All duke really had was some crude gags.

RuggieBear

Have to say i totally agree with the review. Haven't got to the hell bit yet so maybe that will impress me....it's about the only thing that is keeping me playing the game....

Batbat

Deadwing wrote:

Oh come ON! Duke was good but to say its better than quake?? Thats tantamount to sacrelige. Quake 1 had atmosphere, excellent (for the time) graphics, brilliant sound thanks to trent reznor, badass guns (nailgun is still one of the best guns ever in a game), and classic bad guys like the shambler, fiends etc. All duke really had was some crude gags.

er , even at the time Duke was considered a much better game then Quake, Quake was just a technology showcase, not a good game at all

John

Wicknight wrote:

Compared to Duke Nukem it was. No over all structure or plot, it was really just a bunch or random levels throw together. True there were some cool parts, but it had none of the "wow" factor that Nukem had (the level design I mean, not the graphics)

Duke Nukem's single player was rubbish! I only played multiplayer with Duke 3d and even then it wasn't the best game. The original Quake had atmosphere and a kicking soundtrack. I don't think anyone bought Quake looking for plot, that's what Final Fantasy is for.

John

Batbat wrote:

er , even at the time Duke was considered a much better game then Quake, Quake was just a technology showcase, not a good game at all

Considered by who? I never met anyone who preferred Duke to Quake

RuggieBear

All my mates prefered quake and its multiplayer.....and my nintendo was better than SEGA...and my Atari ST was better than Amiga...and sliced bread is better than batch

BKtje

I prefered duke tbh (its time to kick ass and chew bubble gum ). Then again i never played eithr multiplayer.

jonski

pekelly wrote:

and sliced bread is better than batch

ahhh , now hold on there a minute .

TwoShedsJackson

Why is it bad for Doom III to be 'an old-school' fps? Every fps that comes out these days it seems has to take the genre in some new and amazing direction or it just doesn't cut it.

I think the retro-style wading through beasties and blowing their faces off with a shotgun provides a refreshing blast from the past myself With amazing graphics and sound of course, giving the sound an 8 because there's no background music is retarded, this game has some of the best sound ever.

amp

There's a lot of heavy blaspheeming going on in this thread but, damn it, there's nothing I can do about it.

bizmark

Cant wait to play this "old school" shooter that reviewer strikes me as being hard on the game just for the sake of it

CuLT

Just from the points highlighted in this thread:

Not being able to use the flashlight at the same time as a gun is pure genius, pure atmosphere generator (as I expanded on in the 'First Impressions' thread )

Who needs music when you have heavey breathing, evil laughter and moaning zombies?
I'm playing the game with surround sounds and it is dread inducing.

BadCharlie

Doom was one of the first FPS that i every played and i loved it from the start. Doom2 was just as good and playing it on lan was great fun. No matter what anyone says about the game i know i will go out and buy it due to the fact its a classic game giving a new face lift.
Does anyone know when the first doom was released on pc ?
Just trying to figure out on how young i was when i first played the game. It feels like it must be 15years ago but i dont think it was around then. Been playing games for the past 22years or more "time to stop at my age".

bizmark

1996 i think

Kevok

The review is wrong on many levels, but you can see where he was coming from. He was obviously looking for it to change FPS' forever. Although interactive consoles rather than just 'press E' I think are a nice new addition.

Probably the only thing that annoys me about the game are the secret imps. You walk into a room, relax that nothings there, collect a pda and then you're being mauled by an imp that came out of the wall.

jesus_thats_gre

Have not actually read the review yet but agree with most arguments presented here...


Not being able to use your flashlight and weapon at the same time is a genius idea.. It adds an incredible amount to the atmosphere..


As for Quake, the game was nothing but a graphical showcase. It did not come near Duke3d for gameplay.

orangerooster

I thought and think that Quake has a great single player mode.Think that reviews a bit off-think the review is trying to slate Doom 3 for the sake of it cause its a big hyped title-I certainly disagree with almost all of his points.

bizmark

Its funny that he still gave it a very high score

RicardoSmith

I have to say I much prefered Duke over Quake any day of the week. TBH I prefer Doom 1&2 over Quake even now. It was just more atmospheric. Quake was very bland, the colours were very drab, and the sound nothing special. Even the level design was boring. Duke was a bit slapstick, but there was genuine variety to the levels and weapons. On a lan it was brilliant crack. Nothing like laying a pipe bomb trap and detonating it remotely, while your mates watch.Whereas Quake was just the same thing as Doom again. I can remember levels in Duke and Doom. But Quake. Nah its all too samey. In fact theres a whole rake of games up to COD and MOHAA that are just Doom with increasingly better graphics. Which is why HL was so great. It was the first progression in FPS since Doom really. Theres been very little better than HL since either. Maybe H&D and OFP but they are both kinda a different genre.

Doom3 sounds much the same. I think I'll be giving it a miss aswell. I'm hoping HL2 will be great. I still have Doom on my PDA. Still a great game.

jesus_thats_gre

bizmark wrote:

Its funny that he still gave it a very high score

Some of the points were farely valid though.. Advanced weapons development and they dont offer helmets or night vision yet have a shiitt torch with an unlimited battery...

CuLT

Well Gamespot reviewers aren't retarded , but they have probably played so many games that clichés start to become glaring, which is a shame for them.

He makes accurate, but irrelevant points.

Why didn't he bring nightvision goggles?
I'll answer that with another question; do you use an RPG to get rid of cockroaches?

The goggles aren't necessary for your initial mission, the same reason he isn't equipped with all the weapons from the outset.

RicardoSmith

The lack of lighting is a kuldge for a poor game IMO.

bizmark

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Some of the points were farely valid though.. Advanced weapons development and they dont offer helmets or night vision yet have a shiitt torch with an unlimited battery...

As far as i know your mission at the start is to find some missing guy ? a soilder really doesnt have to be kitted out for war to find someone in a perfectly safe (at the time) base

CuLT

RicardoSmith wrote:

The lack of lighting is a kuldge for a poor game IMO.

Just as, say, an Airplane is a kludge for a poor aerial hijack movie, yes?

It's a horror game, darkness, shadows etc are a key feature in some of the best horror films of all time. The same goes for all visual media.

BKtje

While most troops these days would get some sort of light on their weapons putting that on the weapons in doom3 would have ruined the darkness of it as you could see what you were firing at the whole time. Kinda pointless when the idea is to almost shoot blindly at times.

Look past what would it wold be like to real life ( hell spawn on mars :rolleyes: ) and just see it as it works best for the game that it is.

RicardoSmith

CuLT wrote:

Just as, say, an Airplane is a kludge for a poor aerial hijack movie, yes?

It's a horror game, darkness, shadows etc are a key feature in some of the best horror films of all time. The same goes for all visual media.

No. As a movie its more like Rocky IX or Lethal Weapon 24. Very tired.

But hey if the punters want to lap it up. Go ahead.

It dark and theres something scary thats going to go boo! Enjoy.

Venom

RicardoSmith wrote:

No. As a movie its more like Rocky IX or Lethal Weapon 24. Very tired.

But hey if the punters want to lap it up. Go ahead.

It dark and theres something scary thats going to go boo! Enjoy.

Seeing as how you havent played the game your comments are not worth squat, at least wait for the demo to come out before posting stupid posts about how much it sucks. Why AMP hasnt banned your ass from these forums for trolling is beyond me.

Doom 3 is one of the best FPS games Iv played and Iv played them all. Amazing GFK, amazing sound and most importantly amazing gameplay. If your that stupid to take what some gamespot hack takes as the word of god then I really pity your future gamplay experences.

full forward

The gaamerankings website has loads of reviews of DOOM 3. THe current average is 93%.

Game Rankings

RicardoSmith

Venom wrote:

....
Doom 3 is one of the best FPS games Iv played and Iv played them all. Amazing GFK, amazing sound and most importantly amazing gameplay. ....

I've yet to read a review that says its gameplay is amazing. Most say it pretty limp. They all say its a visual fest, that will take about 2 days max to complete. It a simple run and shoot. Posting a opposing view is trolling? Jeez. As the reviews, yeah well, maybe I'm missing the point, expecting something other then a rehash of Doom1.

Venom wrote:

...Why AMP hasnt banned your ass from these forums for trolling is beyond me....If your that stupid to take what some gamespot hack takes as the word of god then I really pity your future gamplay experences.

In fairness this is thread ABOUT the gamespot review. The only other place I posted about Doom 3 is in the Rant about Doom3. Theres a bunch of other threads about Doom 3 for fans for the game. I reckon my comments are appropriate for the threads they are in.

Venom

RicardoSmith wrote:

I've yet to read a review that says its gameplay is amazing. Most say it pretty limp. They all say its a visual fest, that will take about 2 days max to complete. It a simple run and shoot. Posting a opposing view is trolling? Jeez. As the reviews, yeah well, maybe I'm missing the point, expecting something other then a rehash of Doom1.

Every fps boils down to moving through an area and killing everything you meet. Add in scripted sequences ala HL or upgrades to weapons ala SS2 or hacking terminals ala SS2 and it adds a veriation to the gameplay. Doom 3 adds suspence to a horror/sci fi storyline and does it very well. The game looks amazing and the levels are all designed very well and feel like you really are making your way through a base on Mars.

RE used limited save points and lack off ammo to increase tension and D3 takes this idea and knocks it up a notch by adding the light or weapon element to the mix and while it pissed me off at first it does get the heart racing. D3 is the first fps when Iv gone out of my way to check behind me alot along with checking out the roof and walls to make sure no nasty little buggers are lieing in wait for me. HL got praised as a wonderious game for what it added to the fps style of game but in all fairness the story turned ****e at the end when you get to Xen. D3 has a pretty cool story with great little touches like video and txt messages to be found near the dead bodies of there owners.

RicardoSmith wrote:

In fairness this is thread ABOUT the gamespot review. The only other place I posted about Doom 3 is in the Rant about Doom3. Theres a bunch of other threads about Doom 3 for fans for the game. I reckon my comments are appropriate for the threads they are in.

Posting the link to a game review is cool but your not just doing that. You honestly cant have an opinion on how good or bad a game is when you havent played it or even see it being played. You have posted non stop about the faults of Doom 3 basied on what some hack has written on a website. This to me is trolling.

RicardoSmith

Venom wrote:

...Posting the link to a game review is cool but your not just doing that. You honestly cant have an opinion on how good or bad a game is when you havent played it or even see it being played. You have posted non stop about the faults of Doom 3 basied on what some hack has written on a website. This to me is trolling.

You're saying in a thread about a Specific Gamespot - 8.5 Doom3 review I shouldn't discuss that review at all or the points raised in it???

Ponster

RicardoSmith wrote:

You're saying in a thread about a Specific Gamespot - 8.5 Doom3 review I shouldn't discuss that review at all???

I can't see how you can possible discuss a review, in the sense of agreeing or disagreeing with the reviewer, if you have never seen that movie, read that book or played that game?

You could probably talking about the reviewer, their style or whatever, but the actual subject, I don't think so unless someone can show me how.

RicardoSmith

Ponster wrote:

I can't see how you can possible discuss a review, in the sense of agreeing or disagreeing with the reviewer, if you have never seen that movie, read that book or played that game?

You could probably talking about the reviewer, their style or whatever, but the actual subject, I don't think so unless someone can show me how.

If for example the review said theres no save games, or that the game was a pitifully slow on a 10Ghz PC I couldn't have an opinion on that even though I hadn't played the game?

Ponster

Yeah, you could do that, but besides saying that a game that uses darkness as a feature is a kind of cop out, you haven't mentioned specifics such as save games or comp specs.

Not that I have a problem though. it seems that those who like it most and maybe a large % of those that preordered are people who had already played I and II and loved them both.

Venom

RicardoSmith wrote:

You're saying in a thread about a Specific Gamespot - 8.5 Doom3 review I shouldn't discuss that review at all or the points raised in it???

Your not so much discussing the review in question as claiming its both valid and correct. Now this is something you cant really do seeing as you havent played the game in question.

RicardoSmith

So if I read a review of a car and it says its dodgy handling, I can't discuss it till I buy the car then drive it. Its going to be completely different from every other car I've every driven. If they say its the exact same as the previous models and I've driven all of those that doesn't count.

CuLT

RicardoSmith wrote:

So if I read a review of a car and it says its dodgy handling, I can't discuss it till I buy the car then drive it. Its going to be completely different from every other car I've every driven. If they say its the exact same as the previous models and I've driven all of those that doesn't count.

You can't comment on it til you've taken a test drive no.

You can comment on what the reviewer has said, certainly, but if someone who has actually driven the car, or owns the car happens to tell you that the reviewer is incorrect or has some sort of bias against the car, there's not much you can say in retalation having never driven it.

po0k

Bow down and worship you bunch of plebs.

Count yourselves lucky you've lived to see the 3rd Coming of The Marine.



Whining bitching little bunch of maggots.

BKtje

They all say its a visual fest, that will take about 2 days max to complete. It a simple run and shoot.

Id agree its a viual fest and 2 days for todays games is actually quite long.
Its a simple run and shoot in the fact that u run around and shoot things. It gets more complicated when u add in the fact that you cant see what your shooting at half the time. Doom3 doesnt try to be something its not. Its a dark, atmospheric make your way through countless baddasses and ambushes to a final finalle of (aint gotten there yet so wont go further ).... . So far ive not been disappointed. Its absically what i thought it would be and im enjoying it immensely.

I can see a problem tho if someones blown it up so much thats its the best game ever would be disappointed. The only ground breaking things are the graphics really. The lighting has been done superbly (best i've seen in a game) and the sound is awesome. Nice touch with the monitors being usable and readable without having to load a new section.

If you enjoy games with **** hot gfx, simple pick up a gun fight your way through a load of baddasses in a game that tries to scare the outta u (which it succeeds most of the time) then you'll love doom (ie if u liked the original dooms). Else you may find it of passing interest but dont be under the illusion this game is complicated in anyway .

RicardoSmith

SyxPak wrote:

....
Count yourselves lucky you've lived to see the 3rd Coming of The Marine...

Thats a good a postscript as any

bizmark

Wouldnt it be the 4th comeing ? Doom - doom 2 - final doom - Doom 3

Venom

bizmark wrote:

Wouldnt it be the 4th comeing ? Doom - doom 2 - final doom - Doom 3

Wasnt Final Doom just Doom 1+2 and some of the more popular mods?

bizmark

Dont remember tbh

pebble

TwoShedsJackson wrote:

Why is it bad for Doom III to be 'an old-school' fps? Every fps that comes out these days it seems has to take the genre in some new and amazing direction or it just doesn't cut it.

I think the retro-style wading through beasties and blowing their faces off with a shotgun provides a refreshing blast from the past myself With amazing graphics and sound of course, giving the sound an 8 because there's no background music is retarded, this game has some of the best sound ever.

Get your hands on Serious Sam 1 and 2.

Some serious old Skool shootin'!