Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Single-Player Doom 3 Details Discussed

Posted by simoniker on from the delightful-dynastic-devilry dept.

MohitKhanna writes "GameSpy has posted a new preview of Doom 3, along with a couple of new screenshots from the game. The article gives an insight into what the single-player story mode of Doom 3 will be like, and also introduces a few new monsters." Blue's News has a good round-up of the other Doom 3 articles released today, also including a new Tim Willits and Todd Hollenshead interview at GameArena, and this 2004-due FPS is also previewed at Eurogamer and checked out via GameSpot.

47 comments

  1. What is it about Doom by rekkanoryo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    What I've always wondered about the Doom series is what is it about the series that appeals to so many people? I admit I haven't given the game a chance, but every time I see an article on Doom or Duke Nukem or several other titles, I always have to wonder what people see in the games. Are they really unique (as in different from other games in the genre instead of being cookie-cutter titles)? Or do they retain popularity because they were unique to begin with and just have a loyal fan base? Am I entirely missing the point?

    My intention is not to be a troll or to start a flame war--I am geniunely curious as to what makes a game/series like Doom so popular.

    1. Re:What is it about Doom by fredrikj · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For me, personally, it's really the atmosphere of the original Doom. Particularly Knee-Deep in the Dead (the first episode), with its brilliantly laid out levels, the suggestive misty sky (its impact is more important than you might think :), hunting for secret areas, and the awesome surreal design in general. Besides, the gameplay is top notch. And you can make levels for the game.

    2. Re:What is it about Doom by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      doom was 'really something else' when it came, the '3d' of it all was quite something. even though it was basically just a rehash of wolfenstein 3d, it had enough new things to be really cool(area lighting for example, blinking lights and stuff). also the gameplay was quite good, dodging fireballs and shooting demons, you could choose a tactic in most places too.

      (though, ultima underworld does have more elegant engine for most parts, doom is still so arcade in it's approach(no friendly npc's, no story to talk about, most levels being honest 'get 3 keys' missions) that it works for far bigger audience and is quite excellent for short gaming sessions as for longer sessions as well)

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:What is it about Doom by ziggles · · Score: 1

      Umm.. Killing stuff is fun. If a game is well made, it doesn't need to be unique to attract fans.. look at Halo.

    4. Re:What is it about Doom by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 1

      Doom was great. Loved it, completed it twice.

      I don't get the enthusiasm for Doom 3 though. The genre has moved on, and Id have shown with the last two Quake's that they're little more than a tech demonstration, being woefully short on gameplay, and certainly not offering anything other games like Unreal Tournament offer.

      I would love to be excited about Doom 3, I really would. But I just don't care. In fact the only game release I care about on the PC right now is Knights of the Old Republic.

    5. Re:What is it about Doom by Kwil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One thing both I and my wife agree on is that the original Doom is still, to this day, the most *satisfying* gameplay experience of any of the first person shooters. It's nowhere near as pretty, complex, scary, or even interesting as the newer ones when you get right down to it, but it's still the most satisfying.

      This is for a number of reasons. The first and most common one that we can recount is the "one shot, one kill" effect that you can get as soon as you pick up the shotgun. And in fact, the level design emphasized this effect as the first level had a place where you open a door to be confronted by an imp at close range. Your first reaction is to jump and pull the the trigger - BOOM! Imp flies backwards, dead. It's immensely satisfying..something just scared the bejeebers out of you and you killed it, just like that. Talk about your instant gratification. And you could do this with basically all of the lower class enemies.

      It seems most of the more recent FPS games require you to unload quite a few shots, even of some of the higher level weapons, before anything at all will fall down. Sure, they all have their one-shot, one-kill weapons, but typically these are specialized like a sniper rifle, which requires using a scope or aim-bot like abilities, or a rocket-launcher type of weapon, which you dare not use in close quarters because you'll likely take yourself out with it as well.

      A second reason, though less obvious, is that the first few weapons in Doom are all simply more powerful versions of the previous one. Even Quake messed this up somewhat, in that one of the early weapons you pick up is the nail gun. While more powerful, it's also more specialized -- it works better with some enemies than others. Doom didn't make you think about that until you got quite a few levels in and picked up your first rocket launcher.

      Together, these two things worked to make the game simple, satisfying, and gave it a great flow. You could run through the game and if you were good, you'd never have to stop to finish killing something. Your first shot was enough.

      The one shot, one kill effect also had other bonuses in that when you started running into guys that you couldn't do that with, you inherently understood that you were dealing with something nastier. It felt more like a difference in kind, rather than (as with most of the newer games) a difference merely in degree.

      The final thing about Doom was that the control was *smooth*. Unless you were playing on a bottom of the barrel computer, there was no question of what framerate you were getting, because you were getting enough.

      All in all, it combined to make Doom a classic.

      --

      That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

    6. Re:What is it about Doom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's what I don't get...what did Unreal Tournament bring to the table?

    7. Re:What is it about Doom by DarkZero · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What I've always wondered about the Doom series is what is it about the series that appeals to so many people? I admit I haven't given the game a chance, but every time I see an article on Doom or Duke Nukem or several other titles, I always have to wonder what people see in the games. Are they really unique (as in different from other games in the genre instead of being cookie-cutter titles)? Or do they retain popularity because they were unique to begin with and just have a loyal fan base? Am I entirely missing the point?

      Besides the nostalgia factor, there's also the fact that Doom is just... a pure gaming experience, I guess you could say. Just like many people prefer Super Metroid over Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow or Megaman Zero, or Time Crisis over Vampire Night or Ninja Assault, Doom just has a purer FPS core than most newer FPS games. Doom has no stealth levels, no plot, no puzzles, no platform jumping, no points where you're stripped of your weapons for the sake of the story... just guns, ammo, and targets that can really fuck you up if you're not careful.

      There are also things that Doom got right that have simply been lost in the genre since then. In recent FPS games, the enemies move in one of two distinct ways: they patrol an area or hunt you down. Doom chose neither of these. In Doom, the enemies just wander around wherever they want. Thus, the levels begin to change in structure as you open doors and/or run from enemies. Based on the order in which you open the doors, certainly areas could be relatively calm or complete death traps, and it's so random that you can't even catalogue it well in an FAQ. The result creates much tougher AI than most scripted games.

      And I don't know about anyone else, but I haven't seen an FPS in quite awhile with traps as effective or fun as Doom. Return to Castle Wolfenstein had nothing like the ambushes in Doom, which took place in total darkness with an army of zombies coming at you from the ground and imps sniping from above. Those were awesome.

    8. Re:What is it about Doom by _Sexy_Pants_ · · Score: 1

      How did you forget the sounds? The wheezing, the clicking of a far off imp - I challenge you to find a game with more atmospheric sounds. Even the "chugga" of changing the menu was memorable.

      --
      Look it's a joke about my sig IN MY SIG! LOL!
    9. Re:What is it about Doom by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bloody amazing bots for the time, and a big variety of game modes including the awesome Assault mode.

      Quake 3 did nothing new over Quake 2 (and the original). Unreal Tournament moved FPS beyond the boring as fuck deathmatch.

    10. Re:What is it about Doom by markh1967 · · Score: 1

      Back in 1993 (or was it 1994?), Doom probably sold as many PC systems as MS Office. Just about everyone I knew, myself included, took one look at Doom and revised their opinions of PCs as gaming machines.
      Before Doom PCs were seen as business-only machines by gamers. Both the Atari-ST and Amiga platforms were better looking and had better games.
      Gaming machines and consoles were optimised for fast sprite blitting and horizontal scrolling games were by far the most common. Doom was probably the first game to really make a convincing 3D environment ( I know there were others before Doom based on ray-casting engines, such as Castle Wolfenstein and Legends of Valour, but they still didn't look very good).
      I still remember Doom being reported as a phenomena on the BBC evening news (probably on a slow news day, but still).
      Now that good graphics and immersive environments are ubiquitous it's hard to see how Doom could have been such a quantum leap for gaming. I suppose you just had to have been there.
      If you want to see for yourself, simply search for 'abaondonware' and download a few games from 1993/1994 to see what the state of gaming was back then - Doom really was revolutionary.

      --
      Input error. Replace user and press any key to continue.
    11. Re:What is it about Doom by metamatic · · Score: 1
      There are also things that Doom got right that have simply been lost in the genre since then.


      Damn right. I'd turn the question around and ask "What the hell is it about Quake that makes people so keen on it?"

      Apart from the eye candy, Quake was a step backwards from Doom in every respect. Really dumb monster AI, dull single-player levels, less puzzling puzzles.
      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    12. Re:What is it about Doom by SyFryer · · Score: 1

      My first experience with Doom was when I saw one of the guys playing it on a PC at our Amiga user group. It wasn't until I happened to get a PC shortly after , and I played Doom at night, in the dark, on my own. Then of course Quake came along, that was an interesting moment in the dark when the first shambler I saw gated in. For me, Quake had the better atmosphere and should have been regarded as Doom 3, was it ever intended so?

    13. Re:What is it about Doom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno about you but I like makin the titties shake in duke nukem. I sat there for hours :D

    14. Re:What is it about Doom by F34nor · · Score: 1

      It was the Zombies pulling the rotten flesh from their own bodies and hurling at me.

    15. Re:What is it about Doom by TwistedGreen · · Score: 1

      I agree completely. I've recently played through both Doom and Doom 2 at ultraviolence difficulty and without cheating, and wow, that game is genius. I mean, it's almost 10 years old and it's still utterly fantastic.

      The thing about the levels is that they are designed very intelligently, so that it's not just a maze, or arena for killing demons, but an intricate puzzle. Once you factor in things like ammunition levels, it becomes all the more difficult.

      An example: During the middle of Doom 2, I really began to run low on ammunition. Because of that, I just couldn't get through by force: I would be continuously beaten down and forced to retreat. But, there was an easier way through, using some secret transporters and running really fast. This shows that the solution is not always to run in with your guns blaring, even though you can do that. It amazing that it caters to a number of different playing styles.

      If Doom 3 lives up to this beauty (and how can it not?) then I don't think I'll be leaving the house in a while... It gives me goosebumps just thinking about it.

  2. Borrowing a bit? by Bagels · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The game's description so far sounds like it borrows quite a bit from System Shock 2 (notably, on the pacing of the encounters and the bit about the PDA as a device to advance the storyline). Also, I must say that the physics engine tech demo described in the article simply doesn't sound as impressive as the tech demo for Half-Life 2 - stacks of boxes that collapse don't really match up to a "working" engine that reacts realistically.

    --
    --- Bwah?
    1. Re:Borrowing a bit? by mnemonic_ · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do realize that Half-Life's physics engine isn't actually Half-Life's, don't you? It is the HAVOK physics engine, long used in the 3ds max plugin known as reactor.

      As for whether it is more functional than the physics simulation contained within the Doom 3 engine; in my opinion, it is too soon to tell.

  3. clearly you weren't in college in the mid 90's by smoondog · · Score: 1

    Clearly you weren't in hs/college in the early/mid 90's. Wow, we used to play doom so much, at the time it was the only multiplayer 3d game available. It was so much fun... There weren't billions of games available at the time that could all do this, at the time it was either that or castle wolfenstein (no multiplayer, IIRC).

    -Sean

    1. Re:clearly you weren't in college in the mid 90's by gmhowell · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I was in college. Missed all that. Too busy drinking, smoking, fucking, and studying. Guess I missed out on all the fun.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    2. Re:clearly you weren't in college in the mid 90's by NihilSmurf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Both Doom and Doom 2 were released during reading periods for finals. That was mean.

    3. Re:clearly you weren't in college in the mid 90's by MentosPimp · · Score: 1

      You could have easily substituted Doom for the Studying... and still do the other activities. I know I did.

    4. Re:clearly you weren't in college in the mid 90's by WTFmonkey · · Score: 1

      Yup, that's how I got to enjoy an extra three years of all those activities!

  4. Unattributed rumors of Tool doing music for Doom 3 by waaka! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...according to IGN.

    Mentioned on the Blue's News link, but not here, since I imagine that not everyone will read all the articles. Seeing as they were all from Willits and Hollenshead's demonstrations at QuakeCon, I'm not surprised that most of the articles are similar, if not identical, in content.

  5. Re:Unattributed rumors of Tool doing music for Doo by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'd previously heard that Trent Reznor was lined up to do the music for Doom 3 and believe in the article there was a picture of Reznor in the studio. Of course, it was just a photo and he could have been working on anything but...well, you know.

    Ah, here we go, looks like he pulled out.

    --
    I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
  6. Also on Gamespot... by MMaestro · · Score: 2, Insightful
    http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/doom3/preview_60 75567.html

    If Doom 3 truely does succeed at delivering a really outstanding single player experience, then Doom 3 will shatter the expectations players have of PC FPS games. No longer will game developers be able to focus on primarily multiplayer experiences or cheap gimmicks to sell.

    1. Re:Also on Gamespot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      From a recent Q&A with Tim Willits and Todd Hollenshead:

      GameArena: Will we see extended support in the Doom 3 engine for multiplayer for mods and future titles?

      Tim Willits: The player limit is fully scalable. We picked four for a number of reasons but those can be scaled up. As far as mod development goes, we think that with the flexibility and the tools that will ship with Doom 3 - the editors included - and because we pulled out a lot of the game code and put it into scripting, we believe that it will be fairly easy for mod developers to make multiplayer versions of single player mods quite easily.

      Todd Hollenshead: The mod guys I think are really going to like it; and John Carmack has even said he's really excited to see what the amateur development community can come out with. Not even from a video game stand point, but from Machinima or what have you, Doom 3 is a tool for amateur developers to create stuff. Then the game as well; its really almost unprecedented in terms of the power it provides people to do things. Obviously we're doing a lot of cool stuff with Doom 3 the game, but now people are going to have something that approaches film quality in the level of visual presentation, on a real time basis. So if you're in film school and looking to make animated films, this is the cheapest package you're going to get when the game comes out - a lot cheaper than Maya.

      GameArena: One last question about the multiplayer and then we'll stop bugging you about it...

      Todd Hollenshead: We like talking about multiplayer! Its not going to be revolutionary but we never set out for it to be like that, but that doesn't mean we don't want it to kick ass.

      Tim Willits: One thing that we added to multiplayer which we haven't really talked much about but I think will be well received is the front end; the ability to connect to id.net and chat and open channels have clan talk; we have an IRC-type client built in to really bring the online community together. I think it should actually be pretty cool. We just got our id.net server at work, its a very cool looking rack machine, so we'll definitely have some fun with that.

      Just thought some people might be interested in this bit.

  7. Oh great - another $1000 game by EatenByAGrue · · Score: 2, Insightful

    About once every couple years, a game comes out that convinces me to go spend another $1000 on computer upgrades. So much for the GeForce Ti 4600 I bought for $400 a year ago - gotta have DirectX 9 support now. Between Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 this Xmas season is going to cost me a FORTUNE!

    1. Re:Oh great - another $1000 game by n3bulous · · Score: 2, Funny

      This christmas season it should cost those who love you a fortune.

      --
      "The area of penetration will no doubt be sensitive." ~ Spock
    2. Re:Oh great - another $1000 game by damiam · · Score: 1

      Doom 3 should run fine on any GeForce 4, as long as you're not going for 16x AA at 1600x1200.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  8. Re:Unattributed rumors of Tool doing music for Doo by Sevn · · Score: 2, Informative

    Some of the ID guys were on the EnterTheGame IRC server a few weeks ago and confirmed that the music is being produced by Trent Reznor. :)

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
  9. Its not so much the game by The+Analog+Kid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its where the game is coming from for some people, Id pretty much created the FPS and with that it has a reputation and many people buy based on the reputation of the company. You know what would be really cool, if Id just released Doom III for Linux, there would probably be quite a massive switch to Linux. Wishful thinking but maybe one day there will be commercial Linux only games, when Windows is all but dead.

    1. Re:Its not so much the game by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1

      or maybe all the windows users would just play HL2 through their crappy windows-only steam program.

      --

      Liberty.

  10. We're living in a post-iD world kids. by superultra · · Score: 1

    The original Half-Life marked the end of iD as a viable player in the content game. Don't get me wrong, the engines they create are used time and time again to create some fairly great stuff, and no doubt we'll see the same of Doom III.

    But in terms of viable single player pure *content*, I still don't see Doom III as being much more than a tech demo at worst, and at best a 3D Resident Evil wannabe. I've tried, I really have, but there just isn't much to like when we have potentially more creative work like Deus Ex 2, Half Life 2, XIII and the like on the horizon.

    I read in interviews with both Naughty Dog (of Jak and Daxter/Crash fame) and Warren Spector, and I liked what they said (seperately): we've reached a plateau of graphical improvement, and it's time to start working on gameplay. Why can't John Carmack dedicate his obvious talent to developing a fluid game conversational tool? What about increasing the number of on-screen AIs, so streets in games can actually be crowded (for once! and without being subpar State of Emergency)?

    How about stuff that I can't think of because I'm not as smart as these people? Why is Carmack working towards vertical development, better graphics, instead of horizontal development (non-graphical development). I understand there are certain advancements in Doom III in terms of physics, but the main thrust is graphics. Why?

    Oh, because that's where the money is (-cough- ATI/NVIDIA -cough-). I forgot.

    1. Re:We're living in a post-iD world kids. by littleghoti · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WTF? Doom was not just a revelation in graphics, it also had some truly kick-ass gameplay. If you are bored one afternoon I also recommend that you fire up quake- it is truly one of the best single player fps games ever. All of ID's titles have had good gameplay *as well as* good graphics. They have the pick up and play factor that means that the game is not too complex. But then I have simple tastes. I want a game, not a life simulator. I want to run around and shoot lots of things, not try to find keys or levers to pull. IMHO, that's what is wrong with gaming these days, if it doesn't use all the keys on the keyboard people think the game sucks. Actually the less keys you use, the purer the game can be.

    2. Re:We're living in a post-iD world kids. by superultra · · Score: 1

      No, I never said Doom I and II weren't decent; I'm more than willing to give credit where credit is due. The same with Quake (although I think it's stretching it to say it was one of the best FPS). However, I think we entered a post-iD world when Valve released Half Life. Of course, we had stuff like Blood and System Shock that well predated the story-focused scripted Half Life.

      I'm also not sure I'd agree with the less keys more pure game, otherwise that flash spank the monkey game is god's gift to humanity. I see your point, but I think what I'm getting at when I refer to Half Life 2, Deus Ex 2, etc is that these are predominately more story and content driven than Doom III looks. And don't get me wrong littlghoti, I think there's a place for Doom III. I'm not saying it's going to be the crappiest game of all time.

      But I don't think think we need to ejaculate every time a new screenshot is released, that's all.

    3. Re:We're living in a post-iD world kids. by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

      Because ID makes a load of cash licensing it's engine to 3rd parties.

      Think MOHAA etc..

    4. Re:We're living in a post-iD world kids. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But in terms of viable single player pure *content*, I still don't see Doom III as being much more than a tech demo at worst, and at best a 3D Resident Evil wannabe. I've tried, I really have, but there just isn't much to like when we have potentially more creative work like Deus Ex 2, Half Life 2, XIII and the like on the horizon."

      Resident evil sucked and had pre rendered graphix. iv played the alpha and the shit is scary and i have not been scared of any video game ever, if a game makes you jump and plays with your mind that is some good stuff. halflife made me jump once or twice but i had to stop playing the doom 3 alpha so i could go curl up in a ball in my closet.(and i didnt want to see any more of the game) its all about atmosphere and that hs alot more to do with sound, music, AI, and mood way more than just pretty graphics to sell an engine. yeah sure they will make money off the engine but i think doom 3 will be a good title, i mean just look at id's track record. mostly good some in the middle but none i would consider flops.

      "I read in interviews with both Naughty Dog (of Jak and Daxter/Crash fame) and Warren Spector, and I liked what they said (seperately): we've reached a plateau of graphical improvement, and it's time to start working on gameplay. Why can't John Carmack dedicate his obvious talent to developing a fluid game conversational tool? What about increasing the number of on-screen AIs, so streets in games can actually be crowded (for once! and without being subpar State of Emergency)?"

      first of all isnt Naughty Dog a console company? sure theyve reached graphical limits on a console, but being a pc gamer people tend to want to push their latest systems. once a console gets old there is nothing you can do about it. in pc standards (being a hobbyist and all) we put alot of money in our computers to make them more powerful we would be doing that in vain if there was nothing to push it. more power = better all around for pc users.

      anyway i gota end now because the screen savers is on, cant wait to play doom ]|[ on my linux box.

      http://www.bassdrive.com drum and bass 24/7

  11. Too much info? by identity0 · · Score: 1

    You know what, I'm going to stop looking at all these screenshots and reading the articles. One of the things that made Doom and Quake cool was when you ran into an enemy for the first time, you went, "What the -?" It looks like they're doing a lot of cool work on the monsters for this new release, so I will stop spoiling the suprises for myself. At least they're not giving away the boss designs...

  12. Carmack is Graphics by ChopsMIDI · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why is Carmack working towards vertical development, better graphics, instead of horizontal development (non-graphical development). I understand there are certain advancements in Doom III in terms of physics, but the main thrust is graphics. Why? Oh, because that's where the money is (-cough- ATI/NVIDIA -cough-). I forgot.

    Carmack has never claimed to be a content designer. He's a graphics programmer, arguably the best in the world. Why on Earth would you take the best graphics programmer in the world and ask him to work on design and concept or AI. He doesn't care about design, he doesn't care about AI, he cares about graphics.

    Additionally, Carmack doesn't do it for the money, he's not Bill Gates.... He doesn't want a massive corporation that runs the gaming industry, he just wants to make his engines(both in the virtual and real worlds) and be left alone.

    And since he's the boss, he can prety much do whatever he wants. I'm sure if he wanted to do AI, he's jump full steam into that (and he could probably be one of the best AI guys around), but he likes advancing graphics. Imagine where the industry would be graphics-wise without him.

    I'm not suggesting that Doom 3 is gonna be packed with mind-blowing content. I wouldn't expect that from id, and niehter would anyone else. But having played the leaked Alpha, I can attest that it was the first game by which I was ever startled enough to actually physically scream. So they are doing something right.

    --

    How could I say to men: "Speak louder, shout! For I am deaf!"? -Ludwig van Beethoven
  13. Re:Unattributed rumors of Tool doing music for Doo by Zathrus · · Score: 1

    How long ago was "a few weeks"? Reznor has since bailed out from Doom3 in order to work on his own stuff. See this story.

  14. Re:Unattributed rumors of Tool doing music for Doo by Sevn · · Score: 1

    Might have been more like a month. I'm sad to hear that. The ID guys had a sponsored forum on EnterTheGame and they spammed the server. So I saw the broadcast message and hopped in. It was the first question I asked.

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
  15. See, we're not the only ones... by superultra · · Score: 1

    Those of us who've posted here about our lack of enthusiasm for Doom III... we're not alone.

    I bet Hot Topic is already selling t-shirts with the screenshots.



    psssss, iD....gothic industrial is so twentieth century.....

  16. For a change not RTFA but PTFG by nutsy · · Score: 1

    Haven't given the game a chance? Then do so!

  17. agreed.. by sjwt · · Score: 1

    Let me remnise about doom..
    and damm it my post didnt go though..

    My first game on doom was with god mode on, i did the first few leves and then whent "wtf, this is no fun"

    I turned god mode off, and started on UltraViolance in act2.. oh yes call me a wimp for not choseing Nightmare, but let me reminde you there would be no nightmare difictuly for quite a while yet..

    Everythign going fine,
    im killing things, im solving problems,
    im geting killed everynow and then it happend..

    I turn a connor,
    im killing things left and right, and i hear it, then i see it!

    oh GOD the noise!!

    It sounds like a tourcherd soul dieing! and the beast that makes it is huge!! allmost twice my size, i unload shotgun blast after blast
    into it....

    NOTHING!!

    Green balls of death are flying, one hits me! Shit, cant let that happen too often.

    Now im runing, im runing and im scared, ammo is dwinderling and im runing out of ideas, its following me!!

    I dodge, i fire, i run, i fire, im out of shotgun blasts, onto the chaingun, damm next to no shots.. oh no.

    then im saved, i empty the last few bullets and i realise i still have rocket shots!
    up untill then id found them overpowerd and more dangrouse to myself.

    I face the beast, I aim and then .. ..

    *TAPTAPTAP* on my shoulder,

    I tell you that is the closest ive ever been to shiting my pants.

    In game i turned, and turned and turned! tryign to find out wtf was behind me..

    Doom to me was a total emersment in the game its self, i found my self doing stupid things like trying to peer over ledges by edging my view colser to the screen, or trying to turn my chr to look behind my self IRL.

    If doom3 captures this sort of emersment, then id be more then willing to forkout $200(funny aussie money that is) for it.

    and well if it dosent, id still buy it, but probly not for the close to $100 its probly going to be relesed at.

    --
    You have 5 Moderator Points!
    Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?