Slashdot Mirror
Doom III Takes E3 Awards
Talinom writes "This has just simply gone too far. CNN has a story that tells how the video game Doom III by id Software has won the "Best Of Show" award at the E3 convention about one year before its release. Does this mean that Duke Nukem Forever is overdue for its "Game Of The Year" award?" The awards site is E3Awards.com. I don't see how they can give an award called "Best Action Game" to something that doesn't exist as a playable game, but then again looking at the past awards I see Neverwinter Nights won in 2000... in 2001... and in 2002.
Year after year, we've seen this happen. Games that either aren't released, or just don't live up to the hype. "Best of Show" at E3 seems to be no indication of whether or not a game will actually be much good. It shows that it's a game that's likely to push a few hardware envelopes, but what does it mean for actual gameplay?
I prefer getting my game news from sources that refuse to give a verdict on a game until they've had the final shipping version out of the box and played on it for a few days, at least.
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
The award is "best in show" and that says to me that it's not the best game of the year or even best game but the best thing at the show... that which most people talked about and wanted to see, which it probably was.
to quote:
"The buzz generated by this early show made Doom III the indisputable 'must see' of E3 2002"
of course, the stupid statement then does call it the best 'game of show' dammit... just ignore that bit.
I am a leaf on the wind
Didn't they give an award to Metal Gear Solid 2 a couple of years ago over the demo they showed of that? E3 is all about hype, not playable games, and Doom 3 was definately all that anyone could talk about, so it was the leader in hype. The video was just amazing, and coworkers that went to E3 said the demo there was just amazing as well. If it was the best looking and most interesting thing that people saw at E3, even if it wasn't playable, why shouldn't it win?
oh look the asshat karma whore moderators won't mod up the good posts because it's an AC and they hate AC's, and they need to save their mod points for their cut and paste post circle jerks later on!
+5 Funny!
E3 exists to allow publishers to show off upcoming titles - E3 gives awards to the people who generated the most positive attention and hype for their product.
What exactly is the problem here? I would understand this story if it was about Doom3 being awarded 'Game of the Year', but it's not; it's being honoured as having the most impressive preview out of all the thousands of games out there, and I don't see how anyone could find fault with that.
I *hate* hype - it ruins the actual experience because the end result never lives up to the hype. That's why I don't follow E3 or pay attention to movie trailers or otherwise be like a raving fanboy (ie/ Star Wars Ep 3 is gonna rock nads dewd yeah!).
It's actually kind of cool - like when Resident Evil came out for Gamecube, I had no idea that it was in development. Once I found out, I read some reviews and bought the game and it blew me away. I suspect that if I had been caught up in the hype (assuming there was hype for the game) it may not have lived up to my expectations.
Even worst is when you do get caught up in the hype and the end result not only doesn't live up to the hype, but totally blows. Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor did that to me. That's why I never buy a game or watch a movie until I see a few reviews for it anymore.
Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
Somebody really seems to have missed the point of E3. Wonder why the average fan isn't allowed in? Wonder why even kids with dodgie news websites aren't allowed in?
It's a show in which publishers show the games off to retailers, so that the retailers know which products to be buying and hyping in the next year.
Of course, the nature of the media and the net in particular means that gamers themselves are very interested in what goes on, but don't forget why the show is there.
You can't tell me that a buyer from a major retail outlet isn't going to look at those results and not think twice about ordering some more SKUs of product. Hype? Sure, but it does have a purpose, contrary to what the original poster and Michael might think.
OK, here is my humble opinion on this whole mess. Firstly, from what the Id guys said, The E3 Doom III footage was a demonstration of actual gameplay, YES you heard correctly. If you don't believe me, here is the proof. (This is assuming that you consider Gamespy a believable news source, If not, that's cool and I have no other real proof, but I am sidetracking...) Secondly the Doom III Legacy video is NOT what was shown inside the booth. Most of you already know this, but just in case... I and some of my friends asked if we could get video of the closed demo but they were not allowing it, (hence the whole wait in line for 3 trillion hours. It looks like they wanted control of the viewers and what intellectual property they captured on film.) Yes, as far as I can tell it is nowhere near done, (the console said version 0.01) yes, the engine technology is amazing, yes, the gameplay seems to be much more focused on surviving and making slow, calculated, fear driven moves. I would liken the gameplay I saw more to a combination FPS/Silent Hill style game than the old school "shoot the 10,000 creatures and flip a switch" system of Doom II and Doom. It looks like you as the player will have to occasionally hide and run from the enemy rather than haul out the BFG and let all die. I saw demons break out of walls behind you and from pipes in front of you. The player seemed more able to interact with his/her environment in a realistic way. This does A LOT for improving suspension of disbelief within the game. The rules you have come to expect to hold true from all FPS games, (hiding in corners where nobody will attack you from behind, inanimate objects always face one direction and can NEVER tip over) may not always apply anymore. Simply put, hiding in a corner is not going to save your sorry a-- now marine! The lighting engine goes a LONG way to enhance your perspective of where everything is. If you see a large daemon shaped shadow on the ground, it is probably a good idea to hide at this point, especially if the demon has not seen you yet. (As evidenced by it eating your head. :)
:) Id, however, has consistently released stable, fun, modable, and groundbreaking CROSS PLATFORM products that I and several thousand people have consistently enjoyed. So why does everybody want a groundbreaking, reliable, fun, and modable cross platform game RIGHT NOW?! Please, give the Id people some time to breathe. Note, I did not say praise Id for they are infallible, just don't bash them with less than all the facts.
My concern is simply this, I have seen A LOT of Id bashing these past few weeks since E3. Frankly, the PA guys aren't helping much with the whole "I wish they would make a game out of the engine sometime" attitude. They have that opinion, and although I tend to disagree with it, they are entitled to it. I am more concerned with the HORDES of end users who take this idea and treat it as biblical law rather than thinking on their own. I agree Id does not have a truly working full game out yet. H-ll, I am sure they are nowhere near done, but just because the graphics are amazing and it is an Id release, does not necessarily mean that this game will be plotless. Doom III is the first Id game I can think of where a WRITER (from 7th Guest and 11th Hour) was hired for the team.
I have a theory regarding successful companies and end users opinions regarding them. It seems fashionable to hold successful, established companies in low regard. While us readers of Slashdot bash Micro$oft, we at least have A LOT of material to work with. (I think of the hundreds of security loopholes, system crashes, and restarts over the past few years I had to deal with.
In closing, I would say that this demo deserved the award it got, does this mean the game will rule all when it is released? Not necessarily, I only saw less than 7 minutes of gameplay. When comparing this to the 29 hours I spent on RTCW, this seems trite indeed. However, this demo did give me a glimpse into the future of gaming technologies, something I hold dear to my heart. I want to know that through this recession, through this war on terrorism, through the Colombine tragedy, and in this post dot com world, that somebody has the ability to be creative, talented, and gutsy enough to push the envelope and change the industry for the better. Did Id give me a great game? We will find out when it is released. Did Id give me hope for a bright future for games? I would say a resounding yes.
Just a sec.
Did you ever play doom?
now, second point.
Do you code? If so, and the technological achievement of that engine doesn't impress you?
E3 is noisy, E3 is loud, E3 is hype. But this is doom3.
and you my friend, are no carmack.