Slashdot Mirror
Doom 3 Gets Reviews, Piracy Questions, Exultation
Yeti Von Baseball writes "Now that Doom 3 has officially shipped to stores, Computer Gaming World just posted its Doom 3 review - they also posted about 100 or so new screens." Elsewhere, GameSpy has an in-progress weblog and first-look impressions on the "claustrophobic corridors" of the game, Telefragged posted one of the first reviews, praising "a grand slam of action, story, atmosphere, and pure terror", the BBC reports on how "potential sales could be hit by the extent of online piracy of the game", and Time Magazine has a feature on Doom 3 and id.
I'm going to buy Doom3 from id directly at the id Store. When there's a game I really get a lot out of (or plan to in this case), I try to buy directly from the developer to give them as big a cut of the pie as I can. They get full SRP instead of what's left from the middle man.
My way of thanking companies that still create good titles.
Perhaps I am being naive, but I really don't see the multiplayer support as being that big of an issue.
Unreal Tournament and others have filled the niche of playing head to head rather well. No one cares as much about the graphics quality, the omg lighting effects, the dark horror of the story...they care about fragging that bastard who just got the rocket pack you were headed for.
Doom 3 seems much more a single player game and well appreciated for it. I expect that in time, multiplayer will be beefed up some and become more viable. But for the time being, this is a single player game that seems to be kicking ass at showcasing great effects, great design and a good story-line.
I've always been curious as to how you can rate the technology down to a single percent. Same goes for all the other parts of the game (interface 92%, Grpahics 95%).
Most sites have (wisely) abandonned such an approach and rather go with a 1-5 scale or A,B,C,D,E ratings (with +/-).
I mean come on...
Thanks for sharing the good news. There aren't enough high quality games focused on the single player as it is. You want multiplayer, go play all the rest.
What FPS have you played that didn't involve primarily going from room to room and shooting things? Half-Life, the previous holder of the "best single player FPS" crown was exactly the same. Walk, shoot, repeat. It's all about presentation, which both games have done very well at.
How long till a Linux binary appears?
I tried running it under WineX (Cedega) and it just went into an infinite loop loading. I tried installing win2k on a partition to run it, and the installer BSoD'ed. Too afraid to try it on my laptop.
"Brand new console" is something of a misnomer here. Do you mean the 4-year-old console that was $300 when it came out (PS2) or the 3-year-old console that was also $300 (Xbox)?
Let's not forget that these consoles were sold *below* cost with the intention of making money on the games.
I'm not saying $55 isn't a lot for a video game, but comparing it to the price of 4-year-old consoles that were sold at a loss doesn't prove anything. What you should compare it to is console titles, because console titles are supposed to make up the loss on the consoles. OTOH, PC titles have no need to make up said loss, so why are they getting just as high as the console titles?
UT2004 was a nice exception, costing me only $25.
-Dan
The game gets stale rather quickly. The monsters appearing out of nowhere are annoying. Poof! There's a monster. BANG! Poof! Another monster. BANG BANG! BTW, how many dead zombies can fit in a maintenance closet anyways... Although, the chubby bastards with the rocket launchers for arms were pretty cool.
Outside of the lackluster gameplay, the graphics are F***ing awesome. The detail and lighting effects on everything are incredible (P4 2.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, ATI 9800 XT at 1280x1024 with AA). Everything looked on par with the Final Fantasy film graphics. Heat sources ripple the air and explosions ripple the air with concussions. The light from your plasma gun turns objects in front of it blue, etc... Interactivity with the environment is okay as well (objects can be shoved and positioned)
The AI is fairly decent with the gun toting SOBs using cover and ducking when you fire at them (at least on the VETERAN setting)
The $50+ I paid for it - not worth it - $30 maybe... I feel sorry for all those teens who plunk down their hard earned funds and realize the mistake too late...
Far Cry was much more interesting and better in game play value. Hopefully, the modders will make up some excellent improvements to the game and everyone can enjoy it even more. Hopefully, multiplayer will be better...
Where's my Beavertooth Chainsaw?
http://www.martianbuddy.com (Wonder how many hits this site got before the official release)
It makes it that much easier to look yourself in the mirror.
I bought my copy today. I don't know why you assumed I downloaded it. If theft and copyright infringement are the same thing then why did people make a second word to describe the same thing? Answer: Because they are not the same thing. You can only steal a noun. Since information is neither person nor place nor thing it cannot be stealing or thievery. You can steal a painting, you can steal a CD, and you can steal a book. You cannot steal an authors inspiration. Calling someone who downloads coprighted material a thief is incorrect. It's like calling someone who hates rich people a racist. While both are a form of hate they are distinctly different. It doesn't speak highly of a persons intelligence if they consistently use the wrong vocabulary just to stir an emotional response. You should leave that to lawyers and politicians. Find me a case where someone bootlegging CDs was charged with burglary and I'll retract my statement.
In the US legal system, copying a copyrighted work without proper permission is a particular crime known as "copyright infringement".
It is legally distinct from theft... "the felonious
taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same".
In a case of illegal copying, no property is actually removed from the rightful owner.
I'm not saying that makes it any less illegal, or makes it morally justified, but the earlier poster was at least correct in that it is -not- theft.
I'd mod you up if I hadn't wanted to post.
The ID crew should load up Thief 3 and play "The Cradle". "The Cradle" is scary but interesting. Instead of a never ending stream of monsters, you have a limited amount, and they're not actually all out to get you per default. You can engage, or you can sneak past. One option more than in Doom 3 (as far as I can tell)
"The Cradle" is scary because you'll imagine the worst possible thing happening all the time, and even though the worst possible thing that you imagine doesn't happen, the game use sound, visual and story-telling to keep you on your toes throughout.
In Doom 3, the worst possible thing pretty much happens every turn. If there's a ledge with an item on it, the ledge will fall as you walk on it. If you're backing into a dark corner, there will be a zombie waiting for you This is a much less rewarding experience overall.
Take the place where you find the first shotgun. ID's design: Put a piece of ammo/armor on the floor off the given path. Player jumps over rail the grab item, floor falls out, player ends up in dark room with three/four zombies attacking.
I would probably have designed it thus for a first try: .. player jumps over rail to grab item, floor falls out revealing dark room, player+floor ends up falling on zombie, killing it (can use humor here). Lessons learned: 1) Be careful where you walk. 2) Dangerous creatures are lurking for you in the darkness. 3) They can be killed by dropping heavy things in their heads.
Both approaches would teach the player that exploration is rewarded and that it can be dangerous, one just isn't so obvious about it.
Doom 3 just made me realize how good a game Thief really is. Way underrated.
At least in Thief the lighting made sense most of the time.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
System Shock 2
(Well, it could be played other ways than just run and gun -- almost adventure game style instead of FPS.)
-Tom
I have to disagree with you; I've been playing with the gamma set to "normal" levels, so I can't see the baddies in the shadows unless I use the flashlight. In a darkened room, with the headphones up fairly loud, the game is overwhelmingly intense. The time it takes to switch the flashlight back to your weapon, shooting at vague shadows in the dark, realizing you've just run from a pack of imps into a pitch-black corridor, the whole lighting scheme (and/orlack thereof) is a huge part of the game.
I know some of my feelings for this game come from the excitement of playing the original, and seeing how well they've improved on it, but I think this game still calls for setting your own environment to "ultra-creepy" and immersing yourself.
John
Perhaps those that purchase the game will invest the time to get the most out of the it, whereas the thousands of warez kiddies will leech it before its in stores, give it a quick spin and get their ratings in. First day reviews really aren't worth much IMHO.
No, I did not read the f***ing article!
Until game manufacturers make buying the game a higher quality experience than pirating it, piracy is going to continue to be a "problem". To illustrate my point, let's compare my experience buying the game with that of my friend who downloaded it.
.iso image in sequence using Daemon Tools to install each disc (at much faster speeds than loading from a CD). He has no problems reading some cheaply produced CD. He just installs the no CD patch from the beginning, rather than trying to work around iD's ineffective copy protection. He's up and running with the game before I've had a chance to buy it.
Here's my experience: I bought the game just after midnight last night. I waited in line for about 25 minutes to pay $54.99 for the game. I missed getting the free T-shirt because too many other people showed up before me and they ran out. I go home and start to install the game from the CD's. Disc 1 has a serious problem and keeps failing reading at about 98% of the way through. Eventually after trying 2 different CD-ROM drives and cleaning the brand-new disc several times, I am able to get it to read and continue the install. Now, after the game is installed, I try to run it. It won't let me start without disc 1 in the drive. Okay, I get out disc 1 again and put it in the drive. Now it tells me it won't run because I have CD emulation software running. Okay, I disable daemon tools. Still, Doom 3 refuses to load. At this point, I give up and download the NoCD patch. After that, everything works fine.
Compare this experience to that of my friend. My friend just clicked the download link on a Bittorrent site and waited a few hours. After that, he loads each
Obviously, I'm being the good moral person by purchasing the game. However, the fact remains that my experience is notably worse than that of my friend who just pirated it. I guess the game developers don't care.
My other first post is car post.
Most newer games at least attempt to do something different. Original HL has some nice scripted events and fancy "AI" enemy tactics. Plus it had an engaging story. Some games experiment with varying levels - huge outdoor levels mixed with cramped indoor ones. Some mix stealth tactics with pure run-n-gun. Jedi Knight II had cool transitions from FPS to 3rd-person saber battles. Call of Duty has you storming beaches, being a sniper, infiltrating buildings, driving a tank, etc.
Doom III is a straight up "creep from one monotonous room to the next, while shooting the monsters that spawn behind you" game, with some snazzy new graphics. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but it is non anything revolutionary. It is what it is. The enemy AI is nonexistent - they run right at you while you blast them. The weapons are typical and uninspired. The plot is old. The whole "use your PDA to read other people's email and notes to get clues" has been done.
All in all, it's a very average game wrapped in a $20 million graphics engine. Nothing more.
Funny thing though - all the guys that pirated Doom I and II are now 10 years further up the corporate ladder and $55 is, as you say, a speed bump. Little gamer punks are going to pirate it - more power to them, and more power to id in ten years when the gamer punk pirates of 2004 become the well paid consumers of 2014, buying up Doom V in droves because they got hooked on pirated warez (like we did a decade ago on Doom I).
Something tells me that the MSRP is going to be 'street price' until all the crack junkie id fanboys (like me) buy our copy of and remember what it was like to be a 'day one warez d00d'.
Doom I got a chance to revolutionize the gaming industry because they gave it away - so id worked. It is still going to work, even if the pirates need a fatter pipe this time around.
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
most gamer kids just don't have that
... please tell me where you get these numbers from. One of your own orifices will not suffice as a source, btw. The argument goes both ways as well ... if more people would buy the game then companies wouldn't have to hike the price up to maintain their profit margins. Additionally - assuming the price derives from greed is just that, an assumption. Have you considered the long development cycle, and that perhaps paying their programmers and support staff for the extra year or two ( in comparison to other games ) might be the reason for the increased price, in addition to the need to compensate for piracy?
Yet somehow these same gamer kids can afford the hardware needed to run Doom 3. There is a difference between not having the money, and simply not being willing to spend it.
If Id and Activision would sell it for $29.95, their sales would probably increase 500 to 700 percent. Overpricing because of greed will be the kiss of death.
And this gets modded up as insightful somehow
In about four years, I figure I'll pick up Doom 3 for a similar price, assuming that it doesn't suck.
Why on Earth people are in such a hurry I have no idea. The game isn't going to vanish if you don't buy it the first day, and it's not like it's the only good game in existence.
The cake is a pie
Give id credit for their work, guys. From every moment I'm in the game I see the considerable amount of work put into every square meter of the level. I got the game today, and I can say that this is the most complete, engrossing, and well-executed FPS I have ever played. Its lack of innovation, instead of making me dislike the game (new wheels don't have to be invented to make a great game!) makes me want to strangle all other FPSes to at least get them to the level of Doom 3. Judging from the more negative reviews of the game, the main cause of the feelings is more overly high expectations than anything else--did you really expect (Doom 3 > FPS > shooting at lots of AI bots) to return true? I didn't. But, in my opinion, iD has taken a very tired, though tried and true, formula and made it so the formula wasn't so easy to see. Repetitive play? When the individual elements that are being repetitive are greater than the sum of their parts, it gives you a high--a reason to go on to the next room, a reason to press the quick load key. It's like repeatedly doing very well in Counterstrike and proving time and time again to the rival clan memebr who thinks he owns you that he is t3h nub. Far Cry had a similar level of repetitiveness, but it didn't feel creative, it didn't give me the sense of chaos and unending mayhem that Doom 3 does. You scream repetition, but I gladly agree with you. Just not with "Doom 3 sucking."
A game can be hugely innovative, executing the most ambitious of design docs--but all of this falls flat without sufficient Little Things That Add Up (TM). It makes me feel as if people are bashing Doom 3 because when they are playing, they aren't really "playing" it--they spend so much time looking for the big picture (Doom 3 is just another FPS) that they miss those little things.
Oi ve. First you describe Doom 3 as an "it," then go on to say you can only steal a noun. Well if "it" isn't a pronoun used for nouns, I don't know what is.
A boxed CD is definately something physical. That's why downloading it is copyright infringment and removing a box from a store without paying is stealing.
I correct people, not because it makes infringment more acceptable, but because I do what I can to counter all of the misinformation spewed by lawyers and special interest groups that would like the average person to be as completely ignorant as possible. We're living in an era where paid politicians are stripping personal rights to make the jobs of copyright enforcers easier. They aren't adding new laws or protections, copyright protection has always been there. They are just making enforcement and prevention easier at the expense of our rights.
How many 'anti-theft' solutions are smart enought to know when I'm exercising fair-use to make a backup because I'm hard on my CDs and want to keep the originals stored in my CD rack? How many media groups will take a damaged CD and replace it for only the cost of the media and S&H? When you buy a CD you are buying a license to use it. You still have the license even if the medium is destroyed, yet most every time you break a CD you have to go back to the store and buy a new one for full price. Copyright is an important and complex issue and will become ever more complex as communication and technology advance and spread to new people. Yet most people don't even think or care about it and how it affects them. History dictates that most people don't really care about their rights or freedoms until they are gone. I do what I can to make sure that I and everyone around take them into full consideration before signing them over to some corporation. The myth that copyright infringemnt and stealing are the same thing is midlessly supporting the corporate line that wants to keep the average person oblivious to their rights.
You're bitching as if this is something new. When Doom and Doom 2 were out, the situation was nearly the same. In fact, I knew dozens of people in my college dorm that played Doom 1/2 all the way through, and played all the damn time. I think of the 20-30, I can think of only two that had legit copies. Most had the pirated version, and others had only the shareware version.
Proportionately, I'm fairly certain that the numbers of legit users to pirates are probably the same. Sure, there's a lot more pirates numerically, but I think that the ratio is probably no more than it was 10-15 years ago.
An online author, and for the life of me I can't remember who (someone who linked to the article would be doing a huge favor), wrote a year or two ago that online piracy was a fact of life and should be considered a tax of popularity. Besides, how many people listen to the radio for one or two good songs from an album instead of buying the album? How many people read a book through their local library instead of buying it? How many people buy used games or music (and not a dollar of which sees iD or, say, Island Records)? Even if we're not talking intellectual property, how many jeans are stolen at the Gap?
I think iD will walk out of Doom 3 quite a bit richer than if they hadn't released it all, so I wouldn't worry about John Carmack starving on the streets with a sign reading "Will Code Huge Hit Game for Food." If rampant piracy of their game somehow surprises iD, shame on them. People getting your product for free is part of doing business.
"Despite the relatively low price of PC games, many gamers are still choosing to resort to piracy rather than pay for legitimate boxed copies," said Matt Pierce, publisher of the computer games magazine, PC Gamer.
Forgive me for being a cynic, but I don't see 60 bucks as "relatively low price". Give me the game for 20 bucks (like counterstrike) and I'll go out and pay money. Try to sell it for 60 (especially a single player game) and I won't buy it. Either I just won't get it at all, or I'll just download or copy a friend's CD or (heavens no) I'll wait until he's done with it and play it afterwards. I can only assume that constitutes fair use of a single-computer licence, but I wouldn't be suprised if it were forbidden by the EULA.
Yes,
I expected something to differentiate it enough to make me want to play. Is that so much to ask?
Half-Life was different. That's why I liked it. Deus Ex was different. That's why I liked it. Far Cry was different...you get the idea.
Hell, I've already SEEN this shadowy bump-mapped corridor thing done in Far Cry's interior levels. Yet those areas were interspersed between buggy/boat driving, gorgeous tropical outdoor environments...hell, even hangliding.
I'm hugely disappointed. I was a big fan of the original Doom games, but even they provided more variety than this. EVERY SINGLE ROOM is dark and shadowy. After a while, I was predicting every corner that something would be hiding in and pop out of. It felt so contrived.
Think about this--would this game be getting the press it's getting if it was done by a company other than id Software and wasn't carrying the name "Doom" on the box? No...people would be saying the bump-mapping is nice, but the gameplay is repetitive. How PC Gamer gave this a 94% amazes me. Wait, I forgot, id Software is the gaming media's darling child. Meanwhile, Epic, CryTek, Valve, and more have all caught up to id and surprassed them.
It's like id Software made a FPS from the 90s. Run, shoot, run. But with even less variety than the original Doom! They haven't caught onto the current FPS genre at all. Nice engine, but boring game.
I can:
.com and .net versions of the site, he finally kicks off the download.
Mom, dad, I need this computer with a radeon 9800XT and a 3 Ghz HT P4 because I will be studying all the time and I have to do it to do good in class. I can even use it to run programs to help with stuff for college and all
"well, johnny, ok, if you will be using it to study and it will really help you get into a good college then I think it's a good 2500 dollars spent. *to store clerk* I don't know much about these computers but my son does and he has to have the top of the line for school so just get whatever he thinks is good."
3 months later, with no work ever being done on the computer, the parent realizes all the computer is now being used for is chatting online, reading email, and games that were bought ages ago. Doom III is released.
Dad, I want to get this oh so cool game dad. Everyone is buying it and it's the coolest thing ever.
Dad, while not knowing much about computers, knows about scams and suddenly realizes he was being completely played for a fool. He says "no" and Johnny still wants that game. Oh what ever does a young school boy do, who spends all his time doing nothing very productive(part time jobs are not an option for johnny, he isn't used to his parents seeing through his bullshit, but then, this is probably the first time it cost so much).
Part time jobs are not the option but his best buddy just told him about suprnova, a great sight that you can get anything for free. After misspelling the name several times and going to the
Yeah, this happens. I did it once, convincing my parents that a top of the line computer was needed for school. Unfortunately my uncle and aunt are computer engineers so they got calls first and my bull shit only had a slight effect. Not so many people have that uncle or aunt who can ruin those hard worked plans.
the full package of levels went for $40.00 in 1994.
doom 3 is a much more complicated piece of software, running on much more complicated platforms. the level designs are a few orders of magnitude more complex than doom 1/2 level designs.
the demo's coming.
don't pee your pants.
it could be worse... i'm waiting on the linux binaries.
There is never a lack of understanding of simple supply and demand on Slashdot. Since when is charging a price that people are willing to pay "a bad move ethically"? Since when is investing and risking your own money into the creation of a product and then releasing said product to the world for a price they are fine with paying "a blatant money-grub" (sic)?
Let me ask you. Do you try to maximize the money you make in your workplace (I'm assuming you work)? Or do you say to your employer, "You know, you really pay me more than I need. I wish you would lower my pay by $.50 an hour, or whatever. Do you? Don't you feel bad that you are so unethical for trying to make the most money you can at what you do?
I can't believe there are people that actually think making money off a product is unethical. Do you think companies are out to break even? Of course not, that's not why they exist. Would you rather id and Activision not even exist, so they wouldn't have even made Doom 3, and their evil plot to make money hadn't occurred? Seriously, try to think critically before you speak.
Forget the whales - save the babies.