![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ljpliceaseI got Doom 3 shortly after purchasing my new computer Figment II,
because I wanted a fancy 3d game to check out the graphics card, and all of
my games were for Windows or Linux. So I didn't really expect to play it
all that much, but I got drawn in by the atmosphere of the game. The
engine is really wild, and the lighting and shadows are used to really good
effect. The game is obviously influenced by the Alien movies (the large
over reaching intra-galactic corporation with its own military and elements
of Big Brother and the xenomorph like appearance of the new and improved
imp come to mind).
I don't think it is a total rip off though, Id has given the game a lot of its own detail, and as I mentioned atmosphere. Unlike Doom I and Doom II, where the story was pretty sketchy (although the end to Ultimate Doom episode 4 was hilarious), there are a lot of characters, most of them the dead employees of the UAC that you come across and get to know via their audio logs, but also an arch villain with a spooky voice that mocks you as you make your way literally closer to hell.
Like Super Castlevania IV, Doom 3 is not strictly speaking a sequel though; it is more of a remake. I wish they had called something appropriately like Doom Reillustrated or something. I suppose that doesn't market as well, Sierra tried that tact with several of their games, and I don't think it worked out well for them.
At first I couldn't play the game for more than five or ten minutes without it completely creeping me out, and having to stop. Every move you make triggers a monster or zombie to sneak up behind you and every dark passage way has something lurking in it. After a while you get used to it though, and you learn to only use your flashlight when you are not moving. One of the ultra realistic features of the game is that new enemies are only triggered by progress through the level that you are on.
What does it take to draw me into a game though? I used to get freaked out when a Nazi officer would sneak up behind me in sixteen-bit-DOS EGA grahpics Wolfeinstein 3d, but I play it now and I'm like: this is lame. I can still play enhanced versions of Doom (that use the same maps, but have new features like mouse look), but there is nothing at all frightening about that game now, whereas I used to play really loud Nine Inch Nails and battle the undead and demons for hours when I was in high school; a trickle of sweat dripping down my forehead.
I heard that Quake 4 was going to use the Doom 3 engine. Tyler, who is closer to the industry than me, said that they were referring to the "Quake 4 engine", and anyway, it is too premature to say for sure anyway (maybe the Quake 4 engine includes source from the Doom 3 engine). I was reading about Quake 4; apparently Id is not making it, but licensing it to a third party. The makers of the game said that they were heavily influenced by Quake 2; the game would be less like Quake 1 and 3. I think this is a pity, because Quake 1 is still my favorite of all the Quake games, as I thought the atmosphere of the game was awesome (primitive by today's standards, but they used the technology they had really well). Quake 1 was also groundbreaking, in a way that none of the subsequent Id games have been. I would even go so far as to argue that Quake 1 was the last first person shooter to truly groundbreaking, although there have been some interesting innovations since.
There seems to be something fundamentally wrong when a sequel can be influenced by one of the previous games, but not the others. Quake, it seems, is just an engine, it is the latest technology that Id has decided to spotlight where they bolt on an alleged story at the last minute, and its fans lap it up far too easily. If Quake 4 doesn't even have its own engine, then what is it? Tyler said that the demo looked really cool, and it probably is, but it won't ever be the same as how cool Quake 1 was.
In that respect, that is one way that Doom succeeds. Although it is not groundbreaking like Quake 1 or even the original Doom: it is true to itself.
I don't think it is a total rip off though, Id has given the game a lot of its own detail, and as I mentioned atmosphere. Unlike Doom I and Doom II, where the story was pretty sketchy (although the end to Ultimate Doom episode 4 was hilarious), there are a lot of characters, most of them the dead employees of the UAC that you come across and get to know via their audio logs, but also an arch villain with a spooky voice that mocks you as you make your way literally closer to hell.
Like Super Castlevania IV, Doom 3 is not strictly speaking a sequel though; it is more of a remake. I wish they had called something appropriately like Doom Reillustrated or something. I suppose that doesn't market as well, Sierra tried that tact with several of their games, and I don't think it worked out well for them.
At first I couldn't play the game for more than five or ten minutes without it completely creeping me out, and having to stop. Every move you make triggers a monster or zombie to sneak up behind you and every dark passage way has something lurking in it. After a while you get used to it though, and you learn to only use your flashlight when you are not moving. One of the ultra realistic features of the game is that new enemies are only triggered by progress through the level that you are on.
What does it take to draw me into a game though? I used to get freaked out when a Nazi officer would sneak up behind me in sixteen-bit-DOS EGA grahpics Wolfeinstein 3d, but I play it now and I'm like: this is lame. I can still play enhanced versions of Doom (that use the same maps, but have new features like mouse look), but there is nothing at all frightening about that game now, whereas I used to play really loud Nine Inch Nails and battle the undead and demons for hours when I was in high school; a trickle of sweat dripping down my forehead.
I heard that Quake 4 was going to use the Doom 3 engine. Tyler, who is closer to the industry than me, said that they were referring to the "Quake 4 engine", and anyway, it is too premature to say for sure anyway (maybe the Quake 4 engine includes source from the Doom 3 engine). I was reading about Quake 4; apparently Id is not making it, but licensing it to a third party. The makers of the game said that they were heavily influenced by Quake 2; the game would be less like Quake 1 and 3. I think this is a pity, because Quake 1 is still my favorite of all the Quake games, as I thought the atmosphere of the game was awesome (primitive by today's standards, but they used the technology they had really well). Quake 1 was also groundbreaking, in a way that none of the subsequent Id games have been. I would even go so far as to argue that Quake 1 was the last first person shooter to truly groundbreaking, although there have been some interesting innovations since.
There seems to be something fundamentally wrong when a sequel can be influenced by one of the previous games, but not the others. Quake, it seems, is just an engine, it is the latest technology that Id has decided to spotlight where they bolt on an alleged story at the last minute, and its fans lap it up far too easily. If Quake 4 doesn't even have its own engine, then what is it? Tyler said that the demo looked really cool, and it probably is, but it won't ever be the same as how cool Quake 1 was.
In that respect, that is one way that Doom succeeds. Although it is not groundbreaking like Quake 1 or even the original Doom: it is true to itself.
