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

[fredrikj]

I'm looking forward to both games, but as we all know great graphics doesn't make a great game.

One word: immersion. Graphics do help a big deal in the case of a game like this.

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 ;-)

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.

New Doom III Preview Illuminates??

[Dr. Bent]

Illuminates nothing! I can't see anything but dark in those screenshots. Turn up the gamma, guys!

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.

Who's Following Who?

[Gefd]

From where I sit (and play), ever since Quake 1, or perhaps back as far as doom 1,
everybody else has been playing catch-up with Id. Most of the time falling short by
a long shot. With a few notable exceptions.

After reading the article, it seems now that Id is playing a little catch up themselves.

Quote;

Tellingly, the physics implementation seems to be quite young, suggesting
it was 'bolted on' after the capabilities of the Source engine became apparent.

Admittedly this is the opinion of the author of the article, but interesting none the less.

Though from what I've seen, everyone else is still playing catchup on the graphic's front.
But when you sit back and have a look at whats in store for the (hopefully) not too
distant future, you can't help looking forward to finally sitting down and playing these
games.

Scarier than Silent Hill? I think not.

[danro]

I saw the E3 demo and it puts the entire silent hill series to shame.

Except that in Doom 3 you'll be a serious, gun-slinging badass.

In Silent Hill 2 on the other hand you start out unarmed, unskilled, and when you get your first weapon it's not a gun, not even a knife.
...it's a friggin' piece of wood.
When you _finally_ get a gun you find out you shoot like a little girl.
Oh yeah, and there's almost no bullets.

That game is some of the scariest shit I ever played, and I rue the day I bought it.
I still haven't gotten very far, mostly due to the fact that I can't play alone at night (seriously).
It's scary almost to the point of unplayable.

The worst part is I can't even sell it and get my money back because ...it's too good.
So the box just sits there on it's shelf and sort of stares at me.
Actually even that is kind of creepy.