Slashdot Mirror
DOOM 3 Final Video Trailer Released
Ant writes "A new Doom 3 Final Video Preview/Trailer is now out. It is about 42.5 MB big, 2.5 minutes long, and in Quicktime format. Download it from here (direct link and BitTorrent link), FilePlanet (an account required), or FileShack (an account required)."
I'm using Torrents to grab this trailer and I'm getting it at 76 KiB/s on my box standard cable connection here at home, a big improvement on the 404 Not Found I usually expect to see when more than 200 or so users want to see the same thing at once and the server melts.
The press makes out that Torrents is all about getting "free" software and porn. Maybe they should look at it from a different angle.
9 comments, and the site's already bogging down hard ... heck, we need a BitTorrent source just for the dang BitTorrent source for the movie!
Actually, the tracker can get bogged down too. BT isn't completely decentralized.
So if the tracker crashes or just can't handle the traffic there goes the torrent for the most part.
Fuckin' Jesus. Why does nearly every single video game "trailer" try to copy the "cool kids" in Hollywood?!
Ugh. The Doom trailer does the cliche "crescendo, pause, explode" thing THREE TIMES, one of which is the hackneyed "Final Scare" thing.
I guess I'm just pissy at the never-ending globule of mainstreamism infecting everything.
In my pants.
Making Doom III run on a console is tanamount to professional treason.
Yes, I imagine the entire industry is up in arms over id's decision to port their game to the platform where it will sell the most copies.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
"I doubt you were even around when Doom 1 came out. It's a real shame that you've even posted a reply to a long time gamer such as me. I've been around since the beginning."
You think you're a long time gamer because you were around when Doom 1 came out? That somehow invalidates the original posters points? Are you kidding?
No, "I" used to love id "so much" because they did things that "other" game companies wouldn't try. Making Doom III run on a console is tanamount to professional treason.
Two things. First of all, id is not directly doing the XBox port. Second of all, a company is not fucking treasonous if it wants to make its very much sought after game available where possible. This is good for gamers, not bad. "Treasonous" would be if a company alienated its fanbase by making the hardware requirements so ridiculous that NOONE could play it.
From all the graphics I've seen, Doom III certainly does not "push the limits" on modern hardware.
You either don't know what you're talking about despite your breathtaking amounts of experience, or you haven't seen the screenshots of the game running in high resolution ultra mode, in which case you're just ignorant. Perhaps you haven't seen the benchmarks which are showing that all of our modern hardware will only be able to run the game at around 1024*768, otherwise the framerate might be a bit sluggish.
In fact the game looks like a more adanced and rendered "Halo".
Since Halo looks pretty damn good in the first place, I don't see how this is a valid point. Doom 3 does look much more advanced, it's gorgeous. There's nothing wrong with that.
It looks like the character maps and 3D engine were created two years ago and nothing but story line and graphics were added since then.
So what you're implying is that there was a FPS game out two years ago that looked as good or better than Doom 3 or had an engine as advanced? Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
And for your information, "rich kids" were all that could afford PCs in the early days. You should pay a penalty for getting the best, that's the way the world works.
So a good developer is going to cut off the vast, vast majority of its potential fanbase for the elitest dudes with the top 2% hardware? Color me crazy, but isn't being able to create a game with a top-of-the-line engine that can barely be played on the highest end hardware today at the highest settings, yet still be able to be played on systems half as good PROGRESS?
If everyone catered to the lowest common denominator we'd end up buying everything at the dollar store.
Once again, I don't think you know what you're talking about. Go check out the minimum specs on the game then take a look at how fast the average desktop computer is. I wouldn't be mad at id just because you don't understand the concept of having the largest target market possible. id is a business, making a very good business decision that their market wants.
I would like to see a game so advanced that only the few can play it.
Then perhaps you very obviously shouldn't be seeking this from a mainstream developer?
That's the way it worked for Doom 1
Uh no, most people could play Doom 1, and PC gaming wasn't exactly a huge market at the time anyhow, it was more of a niche market. The times have changed slightly, have you noticed?
drives the industry, that moves things forward. It gives people something to look forward to. If you don't have any forward vision, then why are you here?
Remember Macworld, four years ago, when you could practically smell every non-id developer shit their pants? What we saw was the vision that gave us something to look forward to and set a standard for what other developers needed to get at to keep graphically relevant.
This tripe sounds like the elitest music fan who's pissed off because Linkin Park were so much kewler when they were underground...
I'm well past my prime as a gamer.
That much is certain.
I've got seniority on your ass
Which may be the case, but I'm not going to get into a pissing contest about how long I've played COMPUTER GAMES when your logic is so obviously and fundamentally flawed. It's not necessary and proves nothing.
I'm here to tell you that advanced gaming is disappearing at the same rate as good music
No, you just need to know where to look. The mainstream is not it, old man.
The fact that you mention "Linkin Park" and not "Genesis" or "Rush" just shows your age in so many of its adolescent colors!
Oh, please. I thought it was very apparent I was using an exhaggerated simile. I didn't think I'd have to name two mainstream bands from back-in-the-day to get the basic idea across. Sorry you didn't catch it, I guess.
I don't want to limit id software's advanced games to 2%. I just wish they would limited it to less than 30 percent of the installed base of machines. That's a big difference. You've definitely got me all wrong here.
You're implying that a mainstream company's goal should be to limit its potential user base by making system requirements extremely high. My point is that mainstream developers sort of, ya know, want to sell to as many people as possible, and thus would put time and effort into making the game playable on lower level hardware. Businesses like money. id is a business. Where is the confusion?
And if the game id had showed us at Macworld had actually came out four years ago (or even two years ago), then I would have "shit in my pants".
You'd have to be able to play it first to do that though. Part of what is going to make Doom 3 so great is it's going to be played by a lot of people while still having bleeding edge graphics. You're looking for something else, but you're simply not going to find it from a mainstream developer. It's quite simple, really. I can understand your desire for absolute no holds barred bleeding edge, but you're speaking badly about a company that is obviously not about that and would prefer to get its product into as many hands as possible. Your dismay seems a bit misguided when you take common business sense into account.