Prozac said:
Honestly.. I can't understand why you guys like this game
sure.. it's got nice graphics, and yes sometimes it can get a big creepy....
but that's it
you just keep on doing the same thing over and over
1) Pick up ammo
2) Pick up health
3) shoot the bad guys
4) goto 1
that's it
owh and occasionally you gotta open a door, flip a switch stuff like that.
but besides that it's the same thing over and over again
but have to admit
I really enjoyed playing this game for the first few hours
ps. stay away from multiplayer... it's a even bigger disappointment )
And what the hell do you do in any other game? In Half-Life 2, maybe? Here's my guess:
1.) Watch scripted scene that sluts havok physics, and is basically a tech demo that completely insults your intelligence
2.) walk around and kill some stuff, get some stuff
3.) listen to an npc talk about the stuff you killed
It's really simple, man. Doom 3 for atmospheric immersion; half-life 2 for ADHD first person shooter fans.
I mean, so what? You're gonna drive a vehicle or two here and there. The graphics will be great. The story will be great. Really it comes down to a preference. You can do more stuff in HL2 and you'll feel more immersed in Doom 3.
For me, when it comes down to it, you come down to two basic gameplay routes:
1.) You are Gordon Freeman, OR
2.) You are a marine trapped on a fearsome military installation that has opened a gateway to hell, and are completely alone, low on ammo, and surrounded by demonic beasts.
The way you all crack on doom is how I feel about the original Half-Life. It did not impress me and I didn't see any special genius in it. It was good but it was not the forefather; it did not invent 3d gaming, the first person shooter genre, the concepts behind 3d acceleration, multiplayer, co-op netplay...and it certainly isn't responsible for the creation of Deathmatch.
In the end, like everything after doom, it is at least 50% imitation, and only 50% improvement.
"it's boring, all you do is shoot monsters get health and repeat"...well, tell me something, all you big badass dudes who know so much about computer gaming. Why don't you explain to us poor undereducated doom fans just what game has come out in the last ten years that you didn't do that?
Oh, but I see how it is. I understand. It's only bad for Doom to be simple.
Personally, I think it's just people trying to find fault in a relatively faultless game. I mean...what else do you people want? What the **** else were you expecting? And why is it so terrible for Doom to "have no depth" (hmm...some people apparently haven't pressed the tab button in-game) but yet countless other games get props? When you get down to it, HL2 isn't any more in-depth than Doom 3.
So why don't you people just go start a thread about why Half-Life 2 is better than Doom, and go circle jerk over there instead of raining on the Doom fans' parade? The thread's called "Doom III Info Here" not "HATERS UNITE: Bunch of Doom ***s Here, Get these *****es!!"
/me thinks a bunch of people are just bent because their game isn't coming out until fourth quarter 2065...
With all this being said, it should be known by the Doom fans that I've found a quick texture fix that might help improve performance on many cards with only slight visual difference. I'll be discussing it most likely in another thread to avoid people telling me how much better Half-Life 2's [insert feature here] will be.
.
