Happy Doom 3 everybody!

2b97deded6213469bcd87b65cce5d014
0
Mihail121 102 Aug 03, 2004 at 14:10

Happy Doom 3 everybody! ;) ! Just wait till it gets dark then run the damn thing!!! I promise it’s worth it!!!

29 Replies

Please log in or register to post a reply.

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 03, 2004 at 14:36

i’m not even asking how you got it 5 days before the offical european release :)

2b97deded6213469bcd87b65cce5d014
0
Mihail121 102 Aug 03, 2004 at 14:47

Ehm… yes… don’t ask ;) But i tell ya honestly - get those freakin’ 3 CDs and play it!

E05263ec846eb85da803f56e2917962d
0
Noor 101 Aug 03, 2004 at 16:53

thx :). I’m half way through the game. and I must say the GAME ROCK :)

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 03, 2004 at 17:49

you pigs… they delayed the european release till august 13th…

22b3033832c5c699c856814b0cf80cb1
0
bladder 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 01:33

so much d3 noise on forums these days…. :sigh:

E05263ec846eb85da803f56e2917962d
0
Noor 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 01:38

@bladder

so much d3 noise on forums these days…. :sigh: [snapback]9115[/snapback]

in a month you’d be saying “So much HL2 noise on the forums these days”… count me on that :). I know how fantasy people think ;7

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 06:25

in a month you’d be saying “So much HL2 noise on the forums these days”…

are there any news i missed ?

E05263ec846eb85da803f56e2917962d
0
Noor 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 08:51

are there any news i missed ?

not really, I heard it should go gold by the end of this month, i’m not sure tho.

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 09:49

cool… that’s fantastic news. well… i had my hopes on the hl2 + duke nukem forever bundle but if vavle wants to release the game “early” it’s fine with me :lol:

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 12:27

@nkharrat

are there any news i missed ?

not really, I heard it should go gold by the end of this month, i’m not sure tho.

[snapback]9125[/snapback]

Is this the same person from valve who said it would be released at the end of september last year?

Seriously, I think that Valve has realised that the big discussion of Doom 3 vs. Half-Life 2 has been lost. They know that now we can see, feel and touch Doom 3 and that HL2 isn’t cutting it with screenshots anymore. I’ve been let down and lied to too often by Valve to care too much now anyway.

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 13:18

thats just you, baldurk.

not everyone thinks doom3 is the greatest thing on earth. it is, definitely, for rather low end systems. there it shows sort of the end of line of what an older gpu/cpu combo can handle.

hl2 has other targets, first of all definitely in gameplay with its physics engine. and second, the graphics are more.. bright, more indirect, than doom3, creating a much more ambient scenario. feels great in realtime, too. just as doom3 has its quality, hl2 does. and doom3 was delayed quite some bit, as well. it was once planned to come more or less with my radeon9700pro. that card is now 2 years old.

2b97deded6213469bcd87b65cce5d014
0
Mihail121 102 Aug 09, 2004 at 13:52

Cool that you lead such a nice conversation but there’s absolutely no sence in it. The guys that the want to play Doom 3 may play it and the ones that prefer HL2 - please, nothing against that too.

It’s a matter of personal taste anyway…

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 15:36

I didn’t mean to start a flame war, sorry if I did.

To tell you the truth I used to be much more interested in Half Life 2, but after the delays last year, and Doom 3’s launch, I’m not as interested. Bear in mind that Id’s official stance has always been “when it’s done”. They never gave an official date of release before now. Activision may have done, Id may have aimed at one day or another, but they never confirmed a date and missed it like Valve did.

I agree with you dave, Doom 3 and Half Life 2 have different goals. However you can’t say that Doom 3 is designed for older cards. That’s not fair to say at all.

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 16:38

i don’t see how requiring more than 256mb(they admit that it basically won’t run smoothly with less than 512) of ram for a game makes it suitable for low end systems… btw, davepermen : did you play the game at all ?

065f0635a4c94d685583c20132a4559d
0
Ed_Mack 101 Aug 09, 2004 at 18:15

Does Doom3 not look a bit dead (don’t…) and flat to anyone else? The colour is so muted and toned its beyond realism. The characters look quite plastic :(

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 10:16

Does Doom3 not look a bit dead (don’t…) and flat to anyone else?

it’s a bunker… what did you expect ? each room painted in blue with pink dots :D

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 10:18

@anubis

i don’t see how requiring more than 256mb(they admit that it basically won’t run smoothly with less than 512) of ram for a game makes it suitable for low end systems… btw, davepermen : did you play the game at all ? [snapback]9140[/snapback]

nope, as it’s “not yet buyable here” .. :D

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 10:20

i have a low end system. 512mb mem is _very_ cheap.. 60€ or so, here..

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 12:16

I think you’d better think again about what a low-end system is dave. People who do graphics programming and spend lots of money on their systems can’t be classed as having a low-end system :).

6bf0aa41fe57f5d8475567a98655e348
0
HUNT3R 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 14:42

This screenshot represents how good Doom 3 runs on my old ti4400 (ignore the FPS, they are misleading)…
DoomTerd.jpg

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 15:09

according to a statistic paper i read the other day a gf2 system is not uncommon in the US and that’s the lower end of the spectrum then… 512mb of ram is not low end at all. in fact only few people have more (i dare say that only people in the graphics business or hardcore gamers or people who bought a computer in the last couple of month have 1gb at the moment)

E05263ec846eb85da803f56e2917962d
0
Noor 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 19:21

I played doom 3 with an ATI 9200 64MB on medium setting with a screen size of 1024 x 768. And it played like a charm with no glitches at all. There is, by far, no doubt that the game engine is very efficient.

[EDIT] BTW, HUNT3R, I’m I seeing the the thing I think I’m seeing? the screenshot you provided there is disgusting :D [/EDIT]

065f0635a4c94d685583c20132a4559d
0
Ed_Mack 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 21:11

The game’s full of c**p like that

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Aug 10, 2004 at 21:42

@baldurk

I think you’d better think again about what a low-end system is dave. People who do graphics programming and spend lots of money on their systems can’t be classed as having a low-end system :). [snapback]9154[/snapback]

haven’t said i have a low amount of ram. but i have a low-end system (in terms of performance, at least..).

and i don’t spent much money for this system (except the radeon wich was expensive, and the oh-too-much hd’s due failures). 60€/$ (dunno how much exactly:D) as much to invest to have a much bether performing system. and thats what you pay around here for 512mb ram.

i just say the minimum requirements are really low. you don’t have to spent thousands of dollars to be able to play doom3. you can get a quite cheap gpu and play it well (some of the cheapest dx9 are radeon 9550 right now, i guess.. about 60€ as well..), and, if needed, update a bit of your ram. but you don’t need much to play it fine.

and this was carmacks plan at last. highest end systems of gf2/3 times should be able to run it well (means you have a good expirience.. not high res ultra quality, but the game gives the feeling it should, and looks nice). and such systems aren’t expensive anymore.

512mb ram is payable with ease.. there isn’t much you can talk around it. so i count it as something, a low end system can have. the game consts nearly as much:D

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Aug 11, 2004 at 09:49

There’s a difference between being able to run well on low-end systems (that’s what Doom 3 is, it’s good) and being designed to run on low-end systems (that’s not what Doom 3 is, it’s bad).

Doom 3 is very scalable, which means it can run well on low-end systems while still having the potential to stretch top end systems. By October I’ll have an Athlon 3000/1Gb RAM/Geforce 6800 Ultra. I *still* won’t be able to run the game at the absolute max settings smoothly all the way through. That’s a good point for Doom 3 :).

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Aug 11, 2004 at 11:07

it is designed for low-end, too.. it has tons of limitations due that (espencially polygon-count, but the scenario, too..).

advantage is, its both capable of running quite well on low end (means requiring not that much to at least show some thing), but is not really scalable that good to highest end (means even top-notch can not play it that well on highest settings).

it runs everywhere, and has something for anyone:D and will, still, be able to scale up on the next hw gens.. will be some time till we get over 500fps (as we did with q3 some time ago:D)

0684f9d33f52fa189aad7ac9e8c87510
0
baldurk 101 Aug 11, 2004 at 11:38

@davepermen

is not really scalable that good to highest end (means even top-notch can not play it that well on highest settings). [snapback]9179[/snapback]

You’ve assumed that’s the fault of the game. Maybe it’s the fault of the hardware? You’re saying that the game should be able to run on highest settings on the highest end, but maybe those high settings are too high for the hardware. For example, in Ultra Quality according to an ID software .plan there is 500MB of data being used in most levels. If the highest end cards only have 256MB video RAM, not running well enough isn’t because the game is using too much video RAM, but that the card has too little :D

F7a4a748ecf664f189bb704a660b3573
0
anubis 101 Aug 11, 2004 at 12:49

just because there is a 500mb of texture in memory doesn’t mean that i can’t run well. i know it does on my computer (athlon 3000+, 1gb ram, gf5900)

6ad5f8c742f1e8ec61000e2b0900fc76
0
davepermen 101 Aug 11, 2004 at 13:52

@baldurk

@davepermen

is not really scalable that good to highest end (means even top-notch can not play it that well on highest settings). [snapback]9179[/snapback]

You’ve assumed that’s the fault of the game. Maybe it’s the fault of the hardware? You’re saying that the game should be able to run on highest settings on the highest end, but maybe those high settings are too high for the hardware. For example, in Ultra Quality according to an ID software .plan there is 500MB of data being used in most levels. If the highest end cards only have 256MB video RAM, not running well enough isn’t because the game is using too much video RAM, but that the card has too little :D

[snapback]9184[/snapback]

nope, i haven’t assumed. i just said it is like that. i think it’s fine that way. it means we can get much more out of this engine the next years still.

doom3 is fine the way it is, really.