New Doom III Preview Illuminates

Thanks to EuroGamer for their new preview of id's Doom III from an Activision press event in the UK, where id lead designer Tim Willits and CEO Todd Hollenshead were demonstrating the latest build of the long-awaited FPS sequel. Hollenshead confirmed of the game: "We have no plans to release it this year", a new "physics patch" was shown (the writer suggests "the physics implementation seems to be quite young, suggesting it was 'bolted on' after the capabilities of the Source engine became apparent"), and the writer argues that "...for all Valve's fancy physics and cunning AI, the eye candy in Doom III is still a cut above." Update: 08/14 15:39 GMT by S : In a related story, HomeLanFed have initial impressions of the multiplayer Doom III modes, currently being demonstrated at QuakeCon in Dallas.

Comments

not really the argument you should use

[sweeney37]

"...for all Valve's fancy physics and cunning AI, the eye candy in Doom III is still a cut above."

Yeah! Who needs real life physics and amazing AI when I can have amazing graphics!

I'm looking forward to both games, but as we all know great graphics doesn't make a great game. Good story and good AI are what makes a good game a great one.

What's the story behind Doom? Oh, demons on Mars, ....again?

Mike

Re:not really the argument you should use

[syle]

You might have a point if it's cheif competitor had bad graphics, or lack of immersion. However, anyone who's seen HL2's demo movies can tell you that's not the case. In fact, I'd argue that 10% better graphics is actually LESS immersive than realistic physics, and good AI.

I was one of those people who played HL1 on hard mode, and was scared shitless when I first realized how smart the marines were when they showed up. I didn't care for one second about the number of polygons they had, all I cared about was that there was a squad of marines 3 yards away, they were working as a team to kill me, and I had to think of something fast.

No scary monster who runs straight at you, no matter how well rendered, can make that kind of immersion.

What the hey...

[Lurch Kimded]

My view is this you need the Quakes, the Doom's and the Serious Sam's for that fun, "I'm bored and want five minutes of pick up and put down gaming" moments.

But also we need the Half Life's, DuesEx's and Thiefs for the long term evening of game play for the more in depth and absorbing game play.

Each (Doom3, Half life 2) each have their place, and each will be mine... HUZZAH!... ...after I get the 300 together for a new grpahic card ;-)

Re:What the hey...

[Have Blue]

The point of the article is that Doom III is *trying* to compete with Half-Life 2. It's not just a dumb shooter anymore, it's full of scripted events and sidekicks and so on. However, whether it can actually surpass HL2 in these areas is very much in doubt, and the changes tend to make it not as good a dumb shooter.

There they go again....

[saden1]

for all Valve's fancy physics and cunning AI, the eye candy in Doom III is still a cut above.

Valve has a ship date and they don't. I suggest they STFU and let the people decide. As always, the publisher is at it again, hyping a game that won't show up on the radar for many months.

So dark....

[AtariAmarok]

Getting a little tired of games like this in which just about everything is either gray, black, or brown with brightness ranging from dark to very dark. (and for that matter, shows like "Enterprise" that look similar).

We've come along way from "Yar's Revenge", but at least those games had a decent contrast and visibility that seems to have been lost along the way.

Did someone forget to pay the electric bill?

This whole saga has been interesting ...

[Anonymous Coward]

First, I'm glad to hear someone recognize that Doom III and HL will both have their place. However, I'd like to note that there are benefits of Doom III beyond being a quickie of sorts. Although graphics do not make a great game, improvements in graphics are always welcome, and I'm glad to see Id pushing the envelope, once again, with graphics. Someone needs to do it. There is always a need for better graphics.

And who knows? Maybe Doom III have more of a storyline than we think.

This whole saga of Doom III versus HL is fascinating to me. First everyone was drooling over Doom III, then over HL, and sometime since then there has been this reversal of opinion among some that HL is the game to look forward to, not Doom III.

The author of the article suggests that the delay in Doom III is due to the HL release--e.g., that the physics patch was added on in response to HL. I've never heard of this before. Does anyone who follows Doom III discussions know if this is the case? It seems reasonable, but also a bit silly in some ways. For example, the author admits that, even given the physics and AI in HL, the graphics are better in Doom III--so why would Id feel threatened? To be honest, that's the way I've always sort of seen it developing--Id develops awesome graphics, Valve does awesome AI. For this reason, there's a part of me that finds the idea of Id being threatened by HL a bit strange, if realistic nonetheless.

Finally--although this is more or less offtopic--I have to say that the game I'm looking forward to the most isn't Doom III or HL--it's the next Deus Ex. The gameplay in Deus Ex is far beyond either in my opinion, even if it doesn't have the graphics or AI.

Re:This whole saga has been interesting ...

[PainKilleR-CE]

The author of the article suggests that the delay in Doom III is due to the HL release--e.g., that the physics patch was added on in response to HL. I've never heard of this before. Does anyone who follows Doom III discussions know if this is the case? It seems reasonable, but also a bit silly in some ways.

For all of the things we have heard out of id about Doom 3, we never (afaik) heard anything about a new physics engine in the game, or any plans to move forward in physics from where id's previous games were.

For example, the author admits that, even given the physics and AI in HL, the graphics are better in Doom III--so why would Id feel threatened? To be honest, that's the way I've always sort of seen it developing--Id develops awesome graphics, Valve does awesome AI. For this reason, there's a part of me that finds the idea of Id being threatened by HL a bit strange, if realistic nonetheless.

There are a couple of things at play here. One is that Valve actually wrote this engine themselves. Before, companies (including Valve) took id's engine and improved the AI, graphics, maybe even physics, and that's all fine, because they still payed id (the exception being those that used Unreal or LithTech engines). Now you see people like Ion Storm ripping out the physics engines in their licensed graphics engines and inserting the physics engine that Valve is using (which is licensed from another company), and I'm sure Valve has a deal that allows them to sublicense the physics with the rest of their engine (so, for instance, the new Vampire game would be able to use the physics engine without buying that second license because they would get the license from Valve).

In other words, if companies are ripping the physics out of engines already to license this technology, they would be doing the same with id's engine, unless id had a comparable (or better) physics engine. If Valve's license is cheaper than id's and includes the physics they want, then it's quite possible a number of developers would take the graphics hit or enhance the graphics engine themselves (look at how many id licenses change the graphics engine, not a large percentage of them, but still a good number of the licensed games). I think id sees this as a requirement, both in terms of the game, and in terms of the licensing prospects of the engine.

To me it's all about immersiveness.

[2TecTom]

/I've heard all the trash talk about Id so many times. Seems to me that everybody just wants to defend the games they choose to play. Personally, I think it's simply great that there are so many games out there. Anyone who doesn't recognize that different games add to and enrich each other and our experiences, is, perhaps, not looking deeply enough into the matter. I would suggest that if people need to defend anything, it's because they don't believe it to be strong enough on it's own, or, perhaps, they aren't as self assured as they'd like to be./

Now, my point is that John Carmack and Id have created many hours of believable experiences for vast numbers of people. Furthermore, even if you've never played an Id game, ???!, the other games you've played owe something to the development of immersive, believable enviroments. The main influence on OpenGL was from Carmack, and the main influence on DirectX was OpenGL, at least as far as I can see.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to Doom 3 as I do to any Id game. Honestly, this isn't vapourware and I don't mind waiting for Id, as far as I'm concerned, they've earned the respect.

One key fact

[Rethcir]

There's one key thing to consider here people, when it comes to the doom vs half life BS I see every time Doom3 is mentioned anywhere:

IT'S NOT A FRICKING CONTEST.

Sure both of these engine are going to be licensed or whatever, but there is NO REASON why you can't just get and enjoy them both. I don't see either of these companies' fortunes depending on out-selling the other one's product. Both of these games look like they will be a spectacular diversion from the total dreck we have seen on PC for the past year or two. If it wasn't for these two games (and FFXI and LO:MAC) on the horizon, I would not have built a game-oriented computer, and just further built up my console collection. So I say wait and see, the better game will be judged by gaming history, and we will all be happy whether we play one or both of these excellent looking titles.