Is Doom 3 worth the money?

[Cybernoid]

Hmm, 640x480 with incredibly poor performance. John Carmack really knows what he's doing.

 

[Dux]

I'm not sure how relevant this is to this thread, but whatever jimmy. Felt like posting it somewhere.

I find that most people who are having a lack luster time with Doom 3 seem to either be playing it on Easy or Medium. Slap in on Veteran then replay it again on Nightmare - Harcore. And yes, it is most deffinatley worth 25 notes - if you think otherwise then you are too far into Half-Life 2 fanboyism land. While it is repatative at heart that doesn't bother me becasue I knew what to expect from it.

Far to many started to hope that it was actually going to be something more than what Id had stated time after time. I've read a lot of threads and postings over the place from people screaming their dissapointment and disgust at Id for creating such a boringly, glorified and repetative tech demo and carrying on to absolutely bitch at the fact that the Multiplayer is horrendous.

So many people began to expect something completely different from what Id were actually producing and thus seting themselfs up for a terrible letdown and dissapointment upon the release, but thats their own bloody fault the shag sticks. You have to be clear on what doom 3 is and what it is not before you even begin to make judgement on it. While there are some dumb reviwers who have fallen head over heals for it's graphical capabillities and rated it 10/10, 95% and so on is rather rediculous - but you cannot deny how impressive the Engine is. It is undoubtabley the most advanced and amazing peice of ass I have ever seen and played. Id and Carmack are without a doubt the best there is and are second to none in their field.

Also;

The fairest, and most accurate review and score I have seen is by PCGamer UK who awarded it 90%. I have no idea why I have posted this post, possibly lack of sleep and no sign of any rational thought.

 

[Dux]

Hmm, 640x480 with incredibly poor performance. John Carmack really knows what he's doing.

It appears that you do, too.

 

[Cybernoid]

It appears that you do, too.

Then please explain how I can magically make Doom 3 run like it should. 640x480, no AA, no AF, all details set to low - pisspoor performance.

 

[KagePrototype]

Then please explain how I can magically make Doom 3 run like it should. 640x480, no AA, no AF, all details set to low - pisspoor performance.

I'm running at medium settings, with 1280x1024, and I'm getting roughly 20-40fps with a Radeon 9600 Pro, which I think is very playable for a SP FPS. Just for reference:

Athlon 2600 XP
512Mb 2100 DDR

Perhaps your computer is being bottlenecked by something?

 

[Cybernoid]

I suspect that Carmack couldn't code his way through Qbasic. I have never, ever seen such awful performance on hardware of any kind.

 

[KagePrototype]

I suspect that Carmack couldn't code his way through Qbasic. I have never, ever seen such awful performance on hardware of any kind.

What's your spec? I've had a great experience with Doom 3 on my hardware. It looks fantastic, and plays really well.

 

[Cybernoid]

AMD 64 3000
1 gigabyte of RAM
X800 PRO (4.8, DX 9.0c)
Windows XP Pro, SP2

 

[KagePrototype]

Well, then that's suprisingly strange. Have you got Ati's new drivers? I think they're in beta form, but they give better support for Doom 3.

 

[Kadayi]

The game has nice tech (if you can run it) and a 50/50 mix of good/risible scripted sequences. However the gameplay is simplistic, and conflicts with visual lushness of the environments. 95% of all the things you are able to interact with serve some purpose in advancing you through the story, anything else is just wallpaper. Aside from the odd physics model to kick around, there is a distinct lack of any random stuff thrown into the mix, which breaks for me any sense of immersion into the environment. You see magazines everywhere, but you can't pick any of them up, being a classic example. It's a good game, but not a great game. 7/10

 

[lans]

Cybernoid - it's maybe your computer. Regardless of what the game is, Doom 3 is one helluva well optimized piece of software - and when Carmack said it will run even on a mx440, it most certainly does.

I have played the game on a 6800Ultra, 9800 pro, 9600XT and Mx 440 - and it works perfectly at autodetected settings.

 

[Kadayi]

Cybernoid - it's maybe your computer. Regardless of what the game is, Doom 3 is one helluva well optimized piece of software - and when Carmack said it will run even on a mx440, it most certainly does.

ID are good at designing and developing engines.....but optimizing them, , ooh my aching ribs. Carmack expects players hardware (and wallets) to take the strain.

 

[The Monkey]

So if I've got it right, most of you think that I acctaullt should buy the game? Then maybe I should...

 

[Raziaar]

Don't do it!!!

 

[KagePrototype]

I say wait for the demo.

 

[Warbie]

Yeh - wait for the demo.

Being a big Doom and horror game fan I was convinced Doom 3 would rock. In the end I found it a little boring and struggled to keep enough interest to complete it once. There's little incentive to go back.

It's not a bad game, there's just so many better ones out there.

 

[^Ben]

What i would say that really amplified it for me was the reviews that the game got that it clearly didn't deserve.

 

[Cybernoid]

The lightning is bullshit. If you point your flashlight at a railing, the shadow just mysteriously hangs in the air. Thanks John, that really helps me immerse myself...

 

[KagePrototype]

The lightning is bullshit. If you point your flashlight at a railing, the shadow just mysteriously hangs in the air. Thanks John, that really helps me immerse myself...

It's being cast onto the wall. it's just the direction of the light from the flashlight that confuses people.

 

[Unfocused]

Cybernoid it's your system. On your hardware it should perform well on high details I think. I have got a Celeron 1.8Ghz (tomorrow it will be Athlon 3000+ XP ), 256RAM and a GeForce 4 MX 440 and on low settings and detailed shadows off I get from (about) 7 to 45 fps in-game (I don't mean the menus ). Sometimes the fps drops (usually when monsters jump out and the room is detailed) but I can play it, comfortably enough .

Oh yeah I did some tweaking in DoomConfig.cfg and unpacked the .pak files. Google for some tweaking methods. Here is one link: http://www.viperlair.com/articles/howto/software/tweakd3/

 

[Cybernoid]

Cybernoid it's your system. On your hardware it should perform well on high details I think. I have got a Celeron 1.8Ghz (tomorrow it will be Athlon 3000+ XP ), 256RAM and a GeForce 4 MX 440 and on low settings and detailed shadows off I get from (about) 7 to 45 fps in-game (I don't mean the menus ). Sometimes the fps drops (usually when monsters jump out and the room is detailed) but I can play it, comfortably enough .

Oh yeah I did some tweaking in DoomConfig.cfg and unpacked the .pak files. Google for some tweaking methods. Here is one link: http://www.viperlair.com/articles/howto/software/tweakd3/

It seems pretty bizzarre that I have to resort to tweaking when I have the latest hardware.

It's being cast onto the wall. it's just the direction of the light from the flashlight that confuses people.

It's not cast onto the wall.

 

[Neutrino]

I suspect that Carmack couldn't code his way through Qbasic. I have never, ever seen such awful performance on hardware of any kind.

Oh please. I have a far ar lower system than yours and with a little tweaking I can run at 1024x768 with most things set on high and still maintain above 30fps. Obviously in your case there is something going wrong that is not normal.

But no, lets not try to solve the problem. Lets just blame the game company and call the game crap since you can't play it.

 

[ACLeroK212]

It's being cast onto the wall. it's just the direction of the light from the flashlight that confuses people.

I think he's talking about the dynamic shadows, which aren't cast onto the wall. It's a trick they use to make it look like it's cast on the wall, but the shadow really is just displaced a little from the object and moves around depending on your view of the object when you have the light shining on it.

I still think it looks good though. You have to have a pretty keen eye to notice what's really going on, and it's still not that bad.

 

[KagePrototype]

I think he's talking about the dynamic shadows, which aren't cast onto the wall. It's a trick they use to make it look like it's cast on the wall, but the shadow really is just displaced a little from the object and moves around depending on your view of the object when you have the light shining on it.

I still think it looks good though. You have to have a pretty keen eye to notice what's really going on, and it's still not that bad.

Hmm, I never really noticied.

 

[Cybernoid]

Oh please. I have a far ar lower system than yours and with a little tweaking I can run at 1024x768 with most things set on high and still maintain above 30fps. Obviously in your case there is something going wrong that is not normal.

But no, lets not try to solve the problem. Lets just blame the game company and call the game crap since you can't play it.

Let's also use the smiley because it makes us feel intelligent.

 

[Neutrino]

Let's also use the smiley because it makes us feel intelligent.

Well, I would have taken a video of me rolling my eyes in exasperation and sent it to you, but that seemed like too much trouble really.

 

[ACLeroK212]

woah boy. the sarcasm detector is really flying off the charts today!

 

[Cybernoid]

i'll cum on yer faces

 

[mrchimp]

No you most definately will not.

 

[Sparta]

I have never, ever seen such awful performance on hardware of any kind.

Are you serious? Have you ever played Far Cry on Full specs with a Radeon 9600 Pro? Runs at like 20 FPS.

Doom 3, at 800x600 on High runs at 40 FPS (When i had it) It's EXTREMELY optimized dude.

 

[The Monkey]

OK, so how much would you rate it? Sorry for not being happy with 70 reeplies.

 

[Dux]

OK, so how much would you rate it? Sorry for not being happy with 70 reeplies.

I just completed it about an hour ago. Buy - it - NOW. If you don't, them be damned for all eternity.

 

[ACLeroK212]

OK, so how much would you rate it? Sorry for not being happy with 70 reeplies.

If there's one thing we've learned from Doom3 in the past weeks, it's that you shouldn't base your purchase off of other peoples opinions around here. I'm not saying they don't have valid points, but people either love it or hate it and both for good reason, but the best way to figure out what side of the fence your on is to simply find away to try it out before you buy it.

Personally I really liked it and thought it was worth the money, but it's hard for us to tell if your gonna feel the same way, especially since your putting down $50+ for it. There are a ton of people that really like it, but there seems to be an equal ammount of people that were disappointed by it. So your best bet would be to figure out which one you are before putting that much money down.

 

[Raxxman]

three cheers for the best review ever.

Doom 3 does rock, but only if you're into that sort of thing.

 

[Arno]

I suspect that Carmack couldn't code his way through Qbasic. I have never, ever seen such awful performance on hardware of any kind.

Half of all the first person shooter games ever released are based on Carmack's code. If anyone can code an engine, it's Carmack. I run Doom3 in 1280x1024 on an 9800 pro. Excellent framerate, no crashes, no artifacts.
You might wanna try a reinstall of your Catalyst drivers. Are you experiencing any problems in other (OpenGL) games?

I think he's talking about the dynamic shadows, which aren't cast onto the wall. It's a trick they use to make it look like it's cast on the wall, but the shadow really is just displaced a little from the object and moves around depending on your view of the object when you have the light shining on it.

I still think it looks good though. You have to have a pretty keen eye to notice what's really going on, and it's still not that bad.

The dynamic shadows are also cast on the walls. It's just that the shadows have a monotonous black color, which doesn't change over distance. This makes them look a bit 2D, but they really are placed on the 3D walls.

 

[ATI4EVER!]

I have to say, DOOM 3 was better than I expected.

 

[mrchimp]

I suspect that Carmack couldn't code his way through Qbasic. I have never, ever seen such awful performance on hardware of any kind.

You might want to try turning fastwrites off in the smartgart tab.



I finnished Doom 3 yesterday, the last levels are most definately the best. The Doom engine is better at rendering more natural or ornate scenes in my opinion.

 

[ailevation]

:thumbs: Single player good. Multiplayer not good. It has some replay value I guess... well I am saying that because I passed the game once on a 2.0 Ghz Celeron/ 256 266 DDR RAM/ Geforce 2 setup. Now I have it on my own machine where I can play with high reso and high quality. But yeah, the end is the best, the middle starts to get boring...