So, Resurrection of Evil then...
more or less the same,go into an area,kill everything that needs killing,then spend half an hour looking @ everything with the torch.Kat wrote: but I really feel for the Art guys, all that fantasic work (esp the temple thingy at the start) and it's shrouded in darkness. I think I must have spent most of my time looking around with the flash light rather than playing the game..!
ive taken my machine into the spare bedroom,
total darkness,headphones, = win :icon14:
Ok, now I've finished it, and I have to say that I did actually enjoy it quite a bit. I really loved the Hell bits in Doom3, so I was glad I had to take another trip to hell in RoE.
All in all it feels like a compressed version of Doom3. Take out all the slow, scary bits (and the monster closets), and you've got RoE. It's not omfglolwtf or awesome in any way, but it's solid, good action.
Btw, the performance issues I was having turned out to be due to my graphics card overheating. The heatsink and fan was stuffed with dust, so after cleaning that up, it ran great at 1024x768 and High detail. Go figure, blame where blame is due.
Oh, and yes - there's no fucking way in hell you could play it through in 2 hours. Perhaps if you do a speedrun and skip all the cutscenes, but not by playing it through like you should. o'dium, you're a damn filthy liar.
All in all it feels like a compressed version of Doom3. Take out all the slow, scary bits (and the monster closets), and you've got RoE. It's not omfglolwtf or awesome in any way, but it's solid, good action.
Btw, the performance issues I was having turned out to be due to my graphics card overheating. The heatsink and fan was stuffed with dust, so after cleaning that up, it ran great at 1024x768 and High detail. Go figure, blame where blame is due.
Oh, and yes - there's no fucking way in hell you could play it through in 2 hours. Perhaps if you do a speedrun and skip all the cutscenes, but not by playing it through like you should. o'dium, you're a damn filthy liar.
A liar? It took me about 7/8 hours to do doom 3.Grudge wrote:Ok, now I've finished it, and I have to say that I did actually enjoy it quite a bit. I really loved the Hell bits in Doom3, so I was glad I had to take another trip to hell in RoE.
All in all it feels like a compressed version of Doom3. Take out all the slow, scary bits (and the monster closets), and you've got RoE. It's not omfglolwtf or awesome in any way, but it's solid, good action.
Btw, the performance issues I was having turned out to be due to my graphics card overheating. The heatsink and fan was stuffed with dust, so after cleaning that up, it ran great at 1024x768 and High detail. Go figure, blame where blame is due.
Oh, and yes - there's no fucking way in hell you could play it through in 2 hours. Perhaps if you do a speedrun and skip all the cutscenes, but not by playing it through like you should. o'dium, you're a damn filthy liar.
Its a very weak, dull, boring game.
Go figure.
Ok sir.alterlott.nyxs-uk wrote:Nice to get some idea what to expect of the game.
Not sure I'll purchase it though.
Also a couple of questions for o'dium.
If Doom3 is a weak, dull & boring game, why have a Doom3 based pic in your sig? And why buy RoE?
Doom 3 sucks, however, at the same time, it doesn't. The game itself is boring and so last year, but the engine, in some areas is not. The textures are weak and the enemies are ugly, but the technology behind them is not. The only huge let down with doom 3, tech wise, is the physics, which are very, very poor. I found myself playing doom 3 and thinking "wow... Didn't i do this exact same thing 5 hours ago?" or "wow... didn't i play this game with the shadows turned off 10 years ago?"
id, in my eyes, have got a little to much of the "simple" gaming side of things. I agree, lets not over complicate things. But when they remove everything from the game ,even the fun, and just make you walk down the same dark road every 5 seconds, it gets dull. Hell, even the biggest fan of doom 3 will agree that monster closits are the cheapest way EVERY of spooking the player out. I played games years ago that did a better job than doom 3 did at this.
Now, with that said, i do think doom 3 has HUGE potential. In fact, some of the mods I have seen look amazing. Some of the maps i've played own the shit out of the retail ones, too. Thats a let down for me.
"why did i buy ROE then?" Well that ones simple. I thought they figured things out and listened to people. Turns out they did, but they made their own problems at the same time. ROE ix 100X the game doom 3 was, but sadly, its waaaaaaaaaay to short. They give you 2 new guns... Wow. One of them we have had before, only now it blows anything that moves into nothing. ANYTHING. And one of them... Well yeah ok we had this before too, in HL2. Only then, it was fun to use. Shitty physics and "Oh no ill drop it after 2 seconds" dont make that weapon fun. The best thing in the game was the artifact, but even that turned into a bit of a cheapy, no REAL powers as such.
It was a fantastic game mind. The entire first half of the game spooked me more than doom 3 ever did the whole way through. But then... Slowly... It started... To happen... AGAIN. Monster closits. Shitty placements. Bad level design, awful cutscenes, and of course, the same god damn looking room i've been in for the past hour... Argh...
So, my feelings towards doom 3 and roe are 2 fold. Its got some great moments, its a fantastic engine, and it really can look sexy at times, but two... id software just dont know how to make "modern" games any more, they lack in some very needy areas such as "making a game". Oh, and some times, the games pure ugly. In their defence its not their fault, its the best they can do while keeping the game playable. But where is the dedication to the fans? Huh? Farcy released a HDR pack that upped the detail shit loads. Do id no longer have the original models? Is it so hard to release an "high poly update pack" thats a bit nicer to look at? I have a good pc, Doom 3 runs at a solid 60fps, i dont mind dropping it down a notch to see it look better.
Etc.
If they up the number of polygons on the actors, isn't there going to be a more than linear degradation in framerate? Like the imps cast a *lot* of shadows when throwing a fireball.
BTW, I'm absolutely certain that they do actually self-shadow when they do this - or am I going nuts?
The secret to Doom3 is, play it on hard. It's the only way to get more than 2 bad guys on screen at the same time.
BTW, I'm absolutely certain that they do actually self-shadow when they do this - or am I going nuts?
The secret to Doom3 is, play it on hard. It's the only way to get more than 2 bad guys on screen at the same time.
You know i cant remember... I'm sure they self shadow... Yet the player doesn't and so do other things... hmm...
If they were to up the polycount then yes, it would drop performance a bit. I've tried with double the polycount on a model, and it hasn't hurt frame rates to bad. But as i said, doom 3 doesn't even come close to stressing my rig, thats why i want MORE, and an option to do that would be nice. Doesn't mean everybody has to use it, does it
If they were to up the polycount then yes, it would drop performance a bit. I've tried with double the polycount on a model, and it hasn't hurt frame rates to bad. But as i said, doom 3 doesn't even come close to stressing my rig, thats why i want MORE, and an option to do that would be nice. Doesn't mean everybody has to use it, does it
Thanks for the explaination o'dium 
Your right that FarCry has a more modern gameplay feel to it.
But iD made no bones about D3 being a simple scary (boo!) fps & a remake of doom.
I'm sure that they are now looking at developing other aspects of game mechanics for their new rpg? game, esp since carmack has learned all he wants to (for the moment) regards 3d engines. trob is they are a small team & it now takes longer & longer to make content.
One thing I noticed with most of the fps games. Hardcore gamers are getting alot more demanding regards gameplay & the developers are now having a hard time producing ALL the tech, content & plot whilst providing it in a interesting enough manner for the v experinced player (of which i regard you as)
The Thief games,DeusEx & System Shock I felt showed the future of game play mechanics.
However eventually we we see a limit with whats possible with keyboard & mouse & screen ( i saw it during HL2 :icon29: )
Your right that FarCry has a more modern gameplay feel to it.
But iD made no bones about D3 being a simple scary (boo!) fps & a remake of doom.
I'm sure that they are now looking at developing other aspects of game mechanics for their new rpg? game, esp since carmack has learned all he wants to (for the moment) regards 3d engines. trob is they are a small team & it now takes longer & longer to make content.
One thing I noticed with most of the fps games. Hardcore gamers are getting alot more demanding regards gameplay & the developers are now having a hard time producing ALL the tech, content & plot whilst providing it in a interesting enough manner for the v experinced player (of which i regard you as
)The Thief games,DeusEx & System Shock I felt showed the future of game play mechanics.
However eventually we we see a limit with whats possible with keyboard & mouse & screen ( i saw it during HL2 :icon29: )
Nah, ids next game is a FPS, not a RPG.
Problem is, i can already tell its a FPS thats set in the future where you run around with 200 amm oof everything, carrying a shotgun and a machine gun, and dont interact with anything in the world because half of the stuff is stapled down to the ground for "performance reasons" while every other game lets you do pretty much anything you want.
Problem is, i can already tell its a FPS thats set in the future where you run around with 200 amm oof everything, carrying a shotgun and a machine gun, and dont interact with anything in the world because half of the stuff is stapled down to the ground for "performance reasons" while every other game lets you do pretty much anything you want.
if thats the case then iD are certainly missing the boat.
With D3 i excepted that they decided for a narrow scope. Because they provided a new gen engine which worked a treat in dark spooky corridors & i could also understand that they wanted to keep the performance good enough for GF-3 cards (esp since a version was to go to x-box).
But now its time to move on with gameplay & if they do another fps, which is just another straight shooter they are definately not interested in producing next gen game play.
Still its their choice.
After reading 'masters of doom' i get a sneaking suspicion that J Carmack has (at least for the moment) sated his appetite for 3d engines, and will leave it to the remainder of the team to develope the next game.
But RoE i'll pass on it. After all i've only got a 9700pro
With D3 i excepted that they decided for a narrow scope. Because they provided a new gen engine which worked a treat in dark spooky corridors & i could also understand that they wanted to keep the performance good enough for GF-3 cards (esp since a version was to go to x-box).
But now its time to move on with gameplay & if they do another fps, which is just another straight shooter they are definately not interested in producing next gen game play.
Still its their choice.
After reading 'masters of doom' i get a sneaking suspicion that J Carmack has (at least for the moment) sated his appetite for 3d engines, and will leave it to the remainder of the team to develope the next game.
But RoE i'll pass on it. After all i've only got a 9700pro
