-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Doom 3 Gone Gold - Release Data August 3-5
- Thread starter Tenguman
- Start date
The thing that buggers me about "Doom 3" is that there already has been a Doom 3 in the line.
Ultimate Doom - Doom II - Final Doom.
Final Doom being "Doom 3," by simple logic.
Either way, it does look cool, and I'll be looking forward to playing it when it hits bargain bins in a few years.
Ultimate Doom - Doom II - Final Doom.
Final Doom being "Doom 3," by simple logic.
Either way, it does look cool, and I'll be looking forward to playing it when it hits bargain bins in a few years.
ToyMachine228
Member
I just read the full text review from PCGamer...Sounds great. I'm just worried that my system won't run it well. I seriously just got it like three months ago, with the best of everything, but I still worry...
Infinitemadness
Member
you see? Now stop yer crying and go buy yer upgrades NOW
Matlock said:
wasn't final doom not actually made by ID though, or something like that? Sort of like their "master levels" collection? Am I mistaken here or can someone set me straight?
Just looked it up, and yep, final doom was made by Team TNT. That makes Final Doom more of an expansion pack than a sequel (because it wasn't developed by ID software itself).
NotMSRP said:
According to PC Gamer, they got it running on a slower machine with a GeForce4mx + 512mb of ram. They claim that it still looked very decent and ran at an acceptable clip. You should be fine.
I'd imagine that Doom 3 will end up performing much better than Far Cry did, actually...
Nerevar said:
Whether it is or not, I'm not sure...BUT...
id calls The Ultimate Doom/Doom II/Final Doom "The Ultimate Doom Trilogy" in their "Doom Collector's Edition," and the descrip for Final Doom is...
EDIT: Hrm, so it was devved externally. Kind of weird, though, that it's officially called part of the "Trilogy," yet it's not officially "Doom 3."
dark10x said:According to PC Gamer, they got it running on a slower machine with a GeForce4mx + 512mb of ram. They claim that it still looked very decent and ran at an acceptable clip. You should be fine.
I'd imagine that Doom 3 will end up performing much better than Far Cry did, actually...
My computer has much older hardware than even that. I bought my computer in August 2000, so it's outdated. 733Mhz Intel, GeForce 2 64MB, 256 RAM
Biff Hardbody
Member
I'm spending the next month watching peoples impressions about how Doom III runs, reading reviews of cards and whatnot. Hopefully there will be a price drop on some of the really expensive stuff. By the end of this all, hopefully I'll make a smart decision onw hat to buy instead of plunging right in now.
Oh yeah, Doom rocks. Doom III will be Godly.
Oh yeah, Doom rocks. Doom III will be Godly.
4 long years suddenly seem a short time.
It's like yesterday when I read June 1st 2000 in Carmacks .plan: "It wasn't planned to announce this soon, but here it is: We are working on a new DOOM game, focusing on the single player game experience, and using brand new technology in almost every aspect of it. That is all we are prepared to say about the game for quite some time, so don't push for interviews. We will talk about it when things are actually built, to avoid giving misleading comments."
And it feels like yesterday seeing this pic February 21. 2001:
It's like yesterday when I read June 1st 2000 in Carmacks .plan: "It wasn't planned to announce this soon, but here it is: We are working on a new DOOM game, focusing on the single player game experience, and using brand new technology in almost every aspect of it. That is all we are prepared to say about the game for quite some time, so don't push for interviews. We will talk about it when things are actually built, to avoid giving misleading comments."
And it feels like yesterday seeing this pic February 21. 2001:
NotMSRP said:
Yeah, but that's even more of a reason not to play it. Your PC will basically not be able to run the game. I'm sure you could install it and such, but once you get in there, you'd be lucky to pull 10 fps with everything turned off. The game will not be playable on your machine no matter how many details you turn off.
If you ARE a fan of the game, I'd say just wait until you get the chance to play it properly. Why spoil a good game like that?
Or, you could always wait and play it on XBOX. If you don't own an XBOX, I'm sure you could somehow rent one with the game or something. THAT would be a WHOLE lot easier than dealing with your PC situation.
Look at it this way, Doom III is clearly based around atmosphere. Playing Doom 3 on your machine now would be like playing Quake 1 on a 486 (of course, in that case, at least Quake LOOKED correct...whereas Doom 3 would display properly).
Manders said:I'll wait for the xbox version. My pc probably couldn't handle this game. It played the demo at 25 fps.
You can't base the performance on that extremely old build. It was never intended to be run on public hardware and was designed simply to show off the game.
Actually, so did I (well, my first time through). I had to shrink the window size down a lot and the game rarely hit 10 fps. I still enjoyed it, for some reason, but it was SLLOOOOWWWW.
AirBrian said:
I saw this somewere on a Doom fanpage: "A P4 3GHz with a Georce 5950- class card will see u through okay. One of our test systems had a geforce 6800 ultra and ran flawlessly at 1024x 768 with high detail (A higher level of quality and resolution is available , but the PC to run it well isn't). Running with a geforce4 MX card and 512 Mb RAM, the texture detail was great, although the game was choppier in spots."
Manders said:
Noooo...I'd say that Doom 3 will end up running much better than Far Cry. Far Cry is technically ahead of Doom 3, I'd say (though D3 animates much better). Not only does it render MASSIVE outdoor areas with TONS of foliage, it also handles indoor areas in much the same way as Doom 3 (unified lighting + perpixel effects everywhere).
Apharmd Battler
Member
So I take it I'm O.K. with my Athlon 3000+, 512MB DDR RAM, and ATI 9800 Pro. It should run at least as good as UT2K4 right?
I think anyone running a p4 1.7ghz or equivelant with a gf4 4600ti with 512mb ddr will run this game just fine but your resolution may vary or your details may vary. Regardless, I'm sure at 800x600 for the lowest end of that spectrum will still look great. Multiplayer is a totaly different story though... I'm sure at 54.99 a pop though, everyone will want to make sure they can run multiplayer flawlessly as well.