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.
Doom III? You mean there was a Doom II?!
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
>>Does this mean that Duke Nukem Forever is
>>overdue for its "Game Of The Year" award?"
Who cares, Never Winter Nights is now in stores!
to all the major game sites.
... it'll be over by the time it's released.
This is idiotic. I am a huge Doom fan and cannot wait. I salivated over the 90 meg movie. I have promised myself a top of the line PC when it comes out.
Well, now I am safe
This is nuts.
"Watching programming legend John Carmack manipulate the lone marine through the claustrophobic corridors, it was easy to get caught up in the revolutionary steps embodied by the technology on display." I thought the whole idea behind games was so that PEOPLE could play them.
"Does this mean that Duke Nukem Forever is overdue for its 'Game Of The Year' award?"
Since every game that so much as hits the shelves gives itself a "game of the year" award, the answer is yes. Next question.
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?
"Does this mean that Duke Nukem Forever is overdue for its 'Game Of The Year' award?"
Are you on crack? Wasnt DNF supposed to be released back in -98 or something?
Just look at it, it represents a huge jump in technology, it's only rivaled by Unreal II, and that's still just a rebuild of the unreal engine. What else would you say desrves this award?! it's head and shoulders above the competition, so why not give it what it deserves. Bring on gold copy, and DoomTest :)
Does this mean that Duke Nukem Forever is overdue for its "Game Of The Year" award?"
"Duke Nukem Forever" is not the actual name of the game. It's the expected date of release.
It seems that all you have to do to win BOS is turn up with a non-playable demo and wow a few critics, Its like giving a goldern globe for a preview or teaser.
The point of E3 is to demo games which are going to be released this year, normally around september and not things still a good year away from going gold
Cheers thanks for letting me get that out of my system
BTW, I'm not dissing ID or DOOM just E3's brain dead award system
Pianist : Some jerk whos taught themselves how to type in rhythm
If you check it out, you'll notice they're not run by the IDSA (The happy people that bring us E3 yearly) or anyone of consequence...
It's just like every magazine having its own Best of E3 list. I mean come on, a game I made made it on one of the lists, so trust me it's not seen as a huge accomplishment.
At an expo, you expose products. E3's own website states that its intent is to showcase the bleeding-edge of interactive entertainment. And since the public can't attend, Joe Gamer isn't going to care that Game X isn't available for him to buy. Clearly, some game that made it through marketing, production, and shipping shouldn't win a "Best of Show" award at a developer's expo.
The buzz generated by this early show made Doom III the indisputable 'must see' of E3 2002.
Yeah, I see the logic here. Let's apply this to women.
The Olsen Twins are hot. Okay, they're 16, but hell, they're hot. Their buns might not yet be fully cooked, but they're due for release in two years, and I can already say that those puppies will be bouncy and full of fun.
So what if Doom isn't finished? It's like a barely underage girl. You just know they'll be even hotter in a year or two.
mogorific carpentry experiments
...they do matter, but maybe not to the public in a really direct way. When games win awards like this before they're even playable they generate more hype. More people and game websites and manages are talking about them. Ultimately, this buys the developers more time to get things done. After all, if people are caught up in talking about a game they won't forget that it exists, right?
:)
On the other hand, when people stop talking about a game, demos stop being shown, and awards stop being won everyone forgets that the game even exists. Anyone want to tell me where Team Fortress 2 is?
If you need to interpret my post, then you don't get it.
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.
a beta version was leaked similar to this story (first article). THEN we could judge it ourselves to see if it deserves the best of e3 award so we stop complaining =)
Doom III is just the same ugly girl with a lot more makeup.
The first one was only fun because it was new.
Please just let the series die.
I don't make my game purchasing decisions based on media awards, I decide on the basis of the game. Right now from what I've seen, Doom 3 will be sucking up disk space on my machine as soon as possible, but then the much much hyped Neverwinter Nights probably will not. I'm not into the click click clickity click dungeon crawl. It may be called Game of the century by every trade publication known to man, But I probably won't buy it. In order for this to be a less media controlled society, we need to stop letting our purchasing decisions influenced by tripe like this. But that of course would require common sense breaking out all over, and ain't gonna happen. Ignoring all that crap, this award basically is for the Best Demo. Not game. When it's finished, then we can call it game of the century, right now it's just a damn pretty demo.
Shift happens. Fire it up.
Here's another interesting thing to note about the awards this year. The Legend of Zelda took the award for best console game overall, but yet didn't even manage to finish 1st or 2nd in it's own category; adventure. How is that possible?
"Chances of RHIC-induced Armageddon are exceedingly rare, but... you never know." - MIT Physicist Bob Jaffe
..... as to what E3 is? It is NOT a software store, where titles that have already been released are shown. It _IS_ an expo where new, bleeding-edge games that people will see IN THE FUTURE are shown (to varying degrees).
Here's a hint -- you WON'T see Neverwinter Nights again as a candidate for "Best of Show" next year. Next time, be sure to think before you post..........
"Does this mean that Duke Nukem Forever is overdue for its "Game Of The Year" award?"
um, what about "game of the years" instead?
(from Penny Arcade)
We've already said what we were going to say regarding Doom III, but seeing it garner the accolades it has just makes me want to say it again louder. There's no game there. There's nothing to comment on from a play perspective, save a few minutes of visual and auditory presentation - like a Future Crew demo writ large. I'm not saying it's going to suck or rule. Maybe id will be the ones to make a real game with their technology again. What I'm saying is that there's nothing to actually know about it. Promising? Okay, you can have "promising." Here you go. Best of show? Not on my watch. What the hell show did you go to?
DOOM II stole my early drinking days (early twenties)
10 Swig of beer
20 puff of cig
30 click click click click
40 goto 10
:)
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.
Still.. at least Doom III hasn't won E9, the new, super elite trade show. Very few people got in, I hear.
"Oh no, 3 horny women and only 2 condoms...Thank god I read slashdot"
Id called in at 0300; they were working late and looking for a way to hornify potential doom3'ers. They made a deal with theirs truly: a good review for the price of (fill in respectable amount of dough here). Sorry gents, the world is a corrupt place. A few controllers run what you hear on the radio, what you play, what you eat, even what you feed your cat. And all /. polls are registered and stuffed together for an overall picture. Don't bitch about Big Brother being on the way - he's already camping in your back yard :)
Jynx
"What do you mean? Of COURSE I know everything!"
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it well worth the effort.
I'm seeing quite a few comments along to line of "What's the point of E3 any more? It's just hype."
Well, as a member of the gaming media (I'm an editor for RPGFan.com), I can tell you that E3 is and will continute to be a valuable assest for everyone in the business.
Really, "Best of Show" awards are just fluff. The real nitty-gritty of the show happens on the floor, when thousands of industry folks get to play and see every upcoming game for the next year (or three--depending on the publisher.)
Sure, people give awards as a way to highlight certain events, but that's NOT what E3 is about. I can assure you that people play more than the highlight titles, and it helps the gaming media--and industry as a whole--get better aquainted with upcoming product lineups and emerging publishers/developers.
As long as E3 continutes to be a place for the gaming trade to go and look at a pltehora of upcoming products, it serves its purpose well.
Just my 2 cents...
-Jayde
What's a sig?
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.
I see no one around here realizes that E3 is a TRADE SHOW. There might be a few games still in development being shown at a trade show.
Definition:
Trade Show : "An event at which goods and services in a specific industry are exhibited and demonstrated."
In this case, the industry is the gaming/entertainment industry and note that it mentions nothing about excluding products in development. Just because a game isn't finished doesn't mean it isn't better than most of the half-assed titles out there now.
Especially for OS X and Linux. Uh.. oh.. wait...never mind.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
we totally blocked off to the entrance to the xbox stand [and it was a big, wide, glowing green entry too.] you should have seen all the microsoft guys trying to swish us away :)
it was definitely one of the best games at the show.
Actually, Doom 3 was playable, but in a closed door presentation.
ID was approached by some of the people giving the awards during E3 concerning the awards ceremony. They were told that the game could not qualify unless it was in playable form during the show. ID saw this as a really good PR opportunity and DID let the game be shown in playable form... behind closed doors and your entry was based on a lottery system. Look on Kazaa, there's about a 10 minute video that someone took when they smuggled a camcorder into the room (against ID's wishes)
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
yeah, it's a bit premature to be handing out ribbons, but it should be tight.
anyway, i'm holding off any video card purchases until this beast is released.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
However, it is my understanding that 'Best of Show' literally has to do with presentation at E3. meaning that I could go there with a proof of concept, a few screen captures and wireframe models but win if I displayed my booth in a fantastic way. At least that is the way I have seen it in the past. Sort of like how there is 'Best Picture' and 'Best Actor/Actress' awards.
I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.
They gave it the best in show award. Not the best playable game award. They decided that their demonstration was the best. Its not that complicated. They didn't say it was the best playing game, they said it was in the best in show. As in a trade show, product DEMONSTRATION people.
That's about it. That's what E3 is for. Certaintly it has generated more buzz than any other game released at E3. There's more to games than buzz, of course.
Even so, Doom III is currently all about rendering. It looks really nice. The lighting and shadows are amazing. It's going to up the bar a couple of notches for everyone else. But is it a game? No one really knows yet. And we don't know if there's any innovation there besides the rendering engine. It takes a dozen or more people to make a modern game (50 or more for big titles), and there's usually one person writing the core rendering code. Everyone else works on the game side of things. So don't make the mistake of equating rendering with gameplay.
"... [Neverwinter Nights] is destined to be the more-addictive-than-crack game of 2001. - Aaron John Loeb Chairman, Game Critics Awards"
I miss out on all the good games. Oh well, I should be able to find it in the bargin bin by now.
I did that once -
Spent hours collecting pictures, trading shots and insider info - you wait and wait for that next tasty shot, showing a closeup, details you hadn't noticed before, trading little facts, sneaking in backdoors for preview pictures, leeching underground sites before the man shuts them down...
...and 3 years later you come out of jail just to find out the buns cooked, and came out stale. Not to mention your wife left you and you have to move to a new town. They were right, when I told them I was just thinking about their potential, it was a bunch of a useless crap.
I mean, when I say 'their', I mean 3DRealms and Duke. And Doom III. Right.
If I had a sig, this is where it would be.
*NOW* i know it's worth buying
"... Leave it to Trent Reznor, frontman for Nine Inch Nails, to meet and exceed that challenge. Reznor's richly textured 5.1 channel soundtrack literally rocked the theater, forming an important part of the ever-so-impressive multimedia assault that was DOOM III..."
you may recall trent from quake, he wouldn't put his seal on it if it was shit.. now i need to save for a gf4 i'm afraid
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.
Got an email with that URL and thought it was spam. Now that I look at the site I still think it is lackluster. it looks like a lazy high school student site that is trying to make some extra dollars outside their blockbuster job.
No screenshots, no videos, just a little blurb.
Well, maybe for you. Doom II was the first version available to play on the Mac, and therefore somewhat of a hit.
Marathon was a better game overall, but Doom II still grabbed some fans for this.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
That reminds me, I need to drink a blue potion and
push this rock over a little bit before I go up, up the mountain ahead!
?sp
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.
What's the big deal if Doom III wins best in show? The award "Best in show" means "the best-looking game at the show". They aren't pretending to give out "best game on the market" or "best game ever" awards.
& I wish I knew the password to your heart . . . &
Duke Nukem Forever
:)
hits the shelves
... and Satan rides to work on a snowplow?
deus does not exist but if he does
These awards are for the best things at the E3 trade show.
And Doom III was demoed at the show.
And, one might presume, the most interesting PC game there.
So how exactly is it odd for it to win? The award isn't for best thing you can buy in the shops, it's for best thing exhibited at the show.
I'd guess at least 60% of the stuff at E3 isn't out yet. That would be rather the point of E3, wouldn't it?
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
The sounds really made that game. The hoofed deamon really scared me, even though it was behind a wall in another room. If Doom III will be like people are saying, more creeping around scared shitless rather that running like mad around with a rocket launcher, well then I will be first in line for it!
Well, I have to try to plug it!
Hey dudes! The parent post got modded down as flamebait!
Isn't it amusing that some dumbfuck moderator thought that explaining what the slang term 'burn' means is hateful?
"Oh no!! People will get heated up over the turm 'burn'!! That's as bad as saying Microsoft 0WnZ!
Heh that cost me a karma point or two, but it was funny!
"Derp de derp."
Doom III was playable. The demo shown inside the booth was actual in-game footage, not a tech demo. I know that id let either GameSpy staff and/or IDSA staff (the people who give out the E3 awards) sit down at a computer in the back of the booth and actually play the game, to show that it was the game itself, in playable form, and not a tech demo. I believe that's why Doom III was eligible for the award in the first place.