digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Carmack: Doom 4 has Better Graphics Than Rage, uses ID tech5

shacknews.com — Though powered by the same id Tech 5 technology as id's open-world shooter Rage, Doom 4 will be so detailed that it appears to run on "a totally new game engine," according to id co-founder and software engineer John Carmack.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • oduska, on 07/16/2008, -11/+168He's right you know:

    http://erichusted.com/digg/Doom4_teaser.png
    • Jigsta, on 10/15/2008, -1/+45just when I thought my 8800GTS was great...time to upgrade AGAIN?
      • Wiinii, on 07/17/2008, -20/+6I stopped PC gaming years ago, this was one of the many reasons.
      • ferrariman60, on 07/17/2008, -0/+13Yeah, *****, my 8800GT just lagged just displaying that damn picture!
      • BearinG, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2So MovinVan actually admits that he might need to upgrade but Wiinii is wrong?

        That's digg for ya, or maybe just PC gamers on digg ;)
      • xNaquada, on 07/20/2008, -0/+1The sarcasm is so thick it blinds you.
    • praisethelard, on 07/17/2008, -4/+54Woah, man...the blacks are so detailed!
    • Mootabolife, on 07/17/2008, -6/+71Let me compress that screenshot down for you.

      #000000

      Also the number of players still playing Doom 3.
      • Nobiting, on 07/17/2008, -0/+34you could even say #000
      • Vich, on 07/17/2008, -0/+47Are you allowed to display the source code to Doom 3 publicly?
      • Chirp08, on 07/17/2008, -6/+1I didn't play doom 3 because the graphics and performance were absolute ***** on the lower settings. The game still ran extremely slow and choppy and looked horribly worse then other games that ran better and at higher settings. Whatever the ***** they decided to do with their engine might have been all sweet and dandy for a top of the line system but they dropped the ball on making the game look good for 90% of us.

        Example, call of duty 2 maxed out looks better then doom 3 running at 1024x768 (of course), but doom would sitll only run at half the framerate. unacceptable.
    • cyrix, on 07/17/2008, -8/+5No way, that's a photoshopped picture from doom 3.

      See: http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/9814/1153270641 ...
    • GreenPlastik, on 07/17/2008, -2/+25I (don't) see what you did there.
    • whiteguysamurai, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4Suspenseful!
    • Tiak, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8Give the man a break, he spends his weekends staring at super-bright rocket plumes, that's what EVERYTHING looks like to him.
    • jmke, on 07/17/2008, -3/+2nice one oduska :)
    • PolkStreet, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Oh man, that teaser looks just like Doom 3! I'm glad they are keeping the spirit of the old game. Now hold on while I try to find my flashlight...
    • Enjia, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2i was so afraid to click that link, but pretty funny if you've play'd doom 3
  • Slashered, on 07/16/2008, -0/+33So apparently they stopped their plan to create the next Quake game (not Quake Live) to focus on Doom 4. So, Doom 4 better be the most god damn amazing game ever (and better than Doom 3) or I'm going to be mighty pissed.
  • Koush, on 07/17/2008, -21/+18"[Doom 4 is] going to be a 30Hz game"

    I love it when developers throw out crazy claims.
    • Chicken, on 07/17/2008, -5/+330 hz.. isn't that *****?
      • Klowner, on 07/17/2008, -1/+14Just like.. ya know, television?
      • silon, on 07/17/2008, -10/+2TV is 50 (or 60) fps equivalent
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/17/2008, -3/+4NTSC is 60hz 480i resulting in ~30fps (true 29.95fps for technical reasons)
        PAL is 30fps

        All HD modes are 30 or 60fps depending or whether they are interlaced or progressive scan respectively.
      • athrasher, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7SpeedSteamBoat, you're close, but not quite right.

        NTSC is either 30p (29.97 drop-frame) or 60i, while PAL is either 25p or 50i.

        For comparison, film is 24p.
    • evil-doer, on 07/17/2008, -2/+17how is that "crazy" and why are people digging you up?
      • strictnein, on 07/17/2008, -1/+8No kidding. This is f'en John Carmack. Not some unheard of developer.
      • mugicha, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5Yes, I want a rational explanation on why this comment was dug up. Did a bunch of people out there agree that 30Hz sounded like a crazy claim?
      • seraph582, on 07/17/2008, -2/+1/facepalm

        Retarded diggers. Roughly 30fps is the natural refresh rate of the human eye and of your television set in SDTV and in some forms of Progressive scan HDTV.
    • BugMeNot2, on 07/17/2008, -1/+32It's not a crazy claim.

      From the Shacknews comments.
      "I think people are confusing frame rate and the game's tick rate. What he says is "[Doom 4 is] going to be a 30Hz game" not that it will be rendered at 30fps. While the game world (physics calculation, movement etc) will only be updated 30 times a second you can render multiple frames of the same game state. You'll be able to look around at 60fps but as you turn it'll be showing the same game state from different angles for each set of two frames. It's the same with Quake Live which I believe is locked to 60Hz even though it can run at up to 125fps."
      • NanoStuff, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2I hope that's 30fps with interpolation not just a hard 30fps. Movement fluidity will be obviously compromised otherwise.
  • Kingoftherings, on 07/17/2008, -12/+11It says Rage will be on PC and Mac, but what about Linux? iD has always had great Linux support.
    • Chicken, on 07/17/2008, -2/+12Do you really want to start this?
    • AzureRise, on 07/17/2008, -0/+30Carmack already stated in past interviews that there will be a Linux version.
    • noerrorsfound, on 07/17/2008, -1/+8Computers running Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux can all be considered personal computers.
      • Kingoftherings, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1He mentioned PC, and then specifically Mac, since he didn't say Linux I wasn't sure.
  • Thundercracker, on 07/17/2008, -1/+23the flashlight textures are going to rock!
  • turleh, on 07/17/2008, -0/+67Yea, stick the flashlight on a gun this time ffs.
  • DeathJux, on 07/17/2008, -2/+10I prefer the ID 10T technology that Doom 3 was crafted on.
    • gcnaddict, on 07/17/2008, -1/+9The engine used for Doom 3 is heavily underrated, though the fact that it relied on low light to ease strain on GPUs was pretty funny.
      • DeathJux, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I actually enjoyed Doom 3, though it murdered my computer. I just saw "ID tech5" and couldn't help but run with it.
    • mugicha, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Yeah, that's my favorite technology. You see it more and more these days. It's everywhere now, really.
  • houndeyex, on 07/17/2008, -1/+13Where the hell is Rage, by the way?
    • mugicha, on 07/17/2008, -20/+2Up your butt and around the corner?
      • mattlohkamp, on 07/17/2008, -0/+16oh *****, are we back in grade school?
  • swrostmore, on 07/17/2008, -1/+9Pics or it didn't happen.
  • legato763, on 07/17/2008, -4/+40"Carmack noted that the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 editions of the hardware can all use the exact same build"

    Wtf no mention of Doom 4 on the Wii?

    /sarcasm
    • Azerael, on 07/17/2008, -13/+19The Wii would have enough trouble with Doom 2...
    • Bluenoise, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7Id would have to make a stylized version of doom 4 for the wii....

      ...actually that sounds kind of cool!
    • mugicha, on 07/17/2008, -10/+3Man am I glad you put that /sarcasm tag there. Otherwise I would have had no idea you weren't 100 percent serious.












      /yeah, that's right bitch
      • Tiak, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Actually, this is the first appropriate use of the /sarcasm tag I've seen in a long time.

        Yes, some people really are that dumb.
    • xNaquada, on 07/20/2008, -1/+1I guess the Wii cant draw a full black screen. That sucks.
  • gdehms, on 07/17/2008, -2/+8The jump in graphical fidelity comes about as Doom 4 is targeted to run at 30 frames per second, whereas Rage will run at 60 frames per second. Carmack claims this allows id to throw "three times as much horsepower" at Doom 4. " Ugh.
    • Chicken, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1How many horses would that be?
    • Shaflugi, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1Amazing graphics are great, but they aren't so amazing when they aren't running smoothly..
      • p3ngwin, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2agreed, developers need to understand the way people perceive with their eyes.

        human eyesight is processed into 3 distinct ways that are combined to give us what we perceive as a final image.
        1) motion
        2) pattern (the detail "inside" the outline shape)
        3)shape (the silhouette, or outline)

        this translates to textures, geometry and framerate.

        get those in good balance and you have a great balance of graphics that will help immerse the player.
        ***** it up and you can ruin the illusion.

        everything in balance people!
  • limezor2, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8Maybe they will change it up this time and you have to shoot out the otherwise blinding lights this time to survive.
  • kolop1, on 07/17/2008, -16/+9I'm not a PC gamer anymore because I don't want to spend $1,500 on a new PC every year and a half to play games. I'm a console gamer for this reason.
    • freaky2k, on 07/17/2008, -4/+15You're an idiot. I've had the same PC for 3 years and when doom 4 comes out, I'll still be able to play it just fine. And I only paid 1,100 on my PC. Get over yourself!
      • kolop1, on 07/17/2008, -8/+1Just fine on a 3 year old PC? I bet if you have the resolution turned all the way down it will still be choppy. I don't think anyone believes you will be able to play this on that old PC.
    • AzureRise, on 07/17/2008, -1/+15You can build a powerhouse of a PC for 800 dollars if you know what you're doing. And upgrade every couple of years for maybe 300. If you're spending 1.5 k every year, you really don't know what you're doing. Sounds like you're buying a brand new computer every year rather than upgrading.
      • kolop1, on 07/17/2008, -9/+1If you upgrade your PC every few years for $300 you an idiot. Putting a new video card into a PC that's a few years old is redundant and stupid.
      • smackjack, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7Kolop, do you have ANY idea what you are talking about?
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/17/2008, -0/+6Actually, putting a new video card/RAM/cpu into a PC that's a few year's old is savvy and generally costs much less than $300.

        Furthermore, I don't think "redundant" means what you think it means.
      • Meep3D, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I stuck a 7600GT in an old P4 2600 and it played Crysis fine, not amazing but enjoyable. I paid about £60 for the card and £50 for the PC about 2-3 years ago (second hand).

        I suppose $1,500 is only about £200 now, so maybe he has a point... :)
    • prophetpimp, on 07/17/2008, -2/+13stop buying Alienware you morons.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Not sure why you are being Dugg down. You couldn't be more right.
  • Derelict267, on 07/17/2008, -11/+530fps? Why is that a good thing?
    • Klowner, on 07/17/2008, -0/+10He said 30Hz, he could be referring to the game simulation interval, not necessarily the rendering frame rate.
    • happytedium, on 07/17/2008, -0/+15Hz != FPS. He's referring to the game's clock speed. Quake 3 for example was 20 Hz, but fps was capped at 125 fps. It's a server-side/game engine thing relating to the frequency of updates without interpolation as far as I understand.
      • Derelict267, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2"The jump in graphical fidelity comes about as Doom 4 is targeted to run at 30 frames per second, whereas Rage will run at 60 frames per second. "
      • happytedium, on 07/17/2008, -0/+6I'm betting that's a case of the shacknews writer misinterpreting/not understanding what Carmack meant. Carmack only mentions 30 Hz.
  • freaky2k, on 07/17/2008, -1/+15And here's the reasons Mac will never make it into mainstream gaming: "On the subject of id Tech 5, Carmack noted that the PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 editions of the hardware can all use the exact same build with no issues, whereas the Mac engine requires an extra conversion step. "
    • chillypacman, on 07/17/2008, -3/+8Probably because of third party drivers that will undoubtedly turn out buggy and need tweaking.

      That and steve jobs ego needs to be accomadated.
    • estvir, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3Man, if the PC, Xbox360 and even the Playstation3 can all use the same build I'd hate to contemplate how horrible making games for the Mac must be.
  • nullcodes, on 07/17/2008, -6/+18Too bad all the fancy graphics won't be visible because the scenes will be so damn dark.
    • Shiftgood, on 07/17/2008, -4/+8damn beat me to it.

      you know what has better graphics than CS 1.6? All of the new FPSs.

      Which is the best game? CS.

      Graphics wars is so 1990s.
      • prophetpimp, on 07/17/2008, -1/+6CS was a triumph for Gameplay and i doubt anything else can be made in terms of gameplay that can match CS. All they can do it give better graphics.
      • goffy59, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1quake 3?
      • wxdotz, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Team Fortress 2?
        Every ID-developed Quake game?
  • Nerolus, on 07/17/2008, -10/+12This game has the worst trailer I've ever seen.
    The first guy you see, in the ENTIRE game has a ***** mushroom hat.
    WHAT THE ***** IS HE WEARING ON HIS HEAD? Worst hat ever award goes to RAGE.
  • fearlessfx, on 07/17/2008, -1/+11Night vision or bust.
    • chillypacman, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2I reckon they should have the torch get put on the gun as well as night vision but perhaps have them spontaneiously fail or flicker because of all the hellish things going on.

      That would have worked much better imo.
    • h4mx0r, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8or usable light switches that work.
  • Evilblobs, on 07/17/2008, -7/+5I rather enjoy my PC, where fps dont cap at 30/60 fps (and usually run lower), instead run at nice high fps without medium level graphics and upscaled[fake] HD resolutions.

    Anyway, i for one loved Doom 3 (i realize the gameplay was simple, and the AI was crap, and while these cant be forgiven, the game wasnt about those, it was about graphics [which, except for a few too many low-res textures, it had] and scaring you, any way possible.

    Also, vanilla iDtech5 wouldnt really work for Doom 4, since Rage seems focused on expansive outdoor areas
    • RunnyBabbit, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4I don't think the game was necessarily about graphics, I think it was a survival horror game, and for this reason it had to use the best lighting system that could be made in order to accomplish the scariness. The problem with this is that Doom wasn't a survival horror franchise until the third game, and it didn't have to become that way.
      • Evilblobs, on 07/17/2008, -1/+0read: "and scaring you, any way possible."

        and yeah, the lighting system was [imo] the best kind there is for its genre, close spaced horror games.

        unfortunately thats about ALL the lighting system is good at.


        but like i said, it was about scaring you, any way possible, cheap monster closets, awesome ambiance(which i think it had), and any other way it could.
    • HaMMeReD, on 07/17/2008, -0/+0It has to do with your monitor regardless, and on a game console for the most part fps is limited by monitor/resolution capabilities.

      The 30hz may refer to the internal game clock. E.g. the game world runs at a constant 30hz, but the fps can go faster, it will just render using interpolation for extra frames, but ai decisions, collisions, input etc would be running at 30hz on all hardware that can run the game.
  • bluemist, on 07/17/2008, -12/+1I don't like 30fps in a FPS game. It just feels kinda slow. I always sacrifice some graphics for frame rate speed.

    And isn't that like downplaying your own Rage game before it's even released? Yea we're capable of uber graphics in Doom 4 but we won't use it in Rage yet.
  • happytedium, on 07/17/2008, -4/+12id software haven't done anything particularly spectacular and long-lasting since Quake 3, and even then it wasn't/isn't even close to being as great as QuakeWorld. I'm more excited about Quake Live (which I have beta access to) than Rage or Doom 4 to be honest.

    PS. The id software guys love talking in Hz. It confuses too many people. I believe he's talking about the game logic/clock. It has nothing to do with FPS. Quake 3 runs at 20 Hz for example, but fps is capped at 125 fps.
    • ortucis, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1"I'm more excited about Quake Live (which I have beta access to) than Rage or Doom 4 to be honest."


      I am more excited about Rage and Doom 4 than Quake Live tbh. Quake 3 was boring enough back then.
    • HaMMeReD, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7Everytime ID makes a new engine they ridicule the rest of the industry.

      Needless to say, ID can barely make a fun game, but excellent engines, Carmack is a ***** programming god. He paves the way for everyone else, if it wasn't for him, we'd probably be behind 10 years in gaming by now.
  • Dracusis, on 07/17/2008, -14/+6100fps or it's not an FPS.

    This generation of consoles really disappoints. or maybe the developers are to blame, everyone seems to be all about the eye candy, frame rate be dammed, and even then they all neglect AA. Thank god they're still developing games for the PC. *Hugs PC*
    • Chicken, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3yeah.. the consoles aren't as powerful as the PCs so they have to make it at a steady 60 or 30fps which is ridiculous. It'd be awesome if they made an OS that is used just for gaming so it won't have the windows processes taking up the cpu power.
      • paulsmith288, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1linux - when doom 3 first came out it ran better on linux + wine than windows.
      • ufee, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2paulsmith288: I don't know what you're talking about. When doom 3 first came out, wine was incredibly primitive.
    • Evilblobs, on 07/17/2008, -4/+3nothing like trying to aim on a console, with slideshow fps.

      Thank god one platform still has decent hardware... and its not a console.
    • Serphyas, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2I wish you and your multi-thousand-dollar rig the best of luck.
      • Evilblobs, on 07/17/2008, -2/+6My rig cost me exactly 1000$, and will run anything you throw at it, maxxed out at 1920x1080, at atleast 40-50fps (at the lowest points)

        except Crysis, which i have to keep it around the high graphics level, and it sits around 30fps

        people greatly exaggerate the cost of a decent gaming system.
      • denizen42, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Furthermore, people will own PCs regardless, so gaming mostly requires them to pay only for a beefier videocard.
    • m0laria, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7I don't play anything under 300 FPS. Original half-life ftw.
    • thecwin, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2You know, most people's LCD monitors have a maximum frame rate of 60fps.

      Anyway, your eyes can't tell the difference between motion blurred 30fps and non-blurred 300fps. Depending on the quality of the motion blur, the 30fps may even look better.
      • Dracusis, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1It's not all about the display. While many LCD screens may be capped at 60 updates a second, the human nervous system is not. A game running at 120fps on a 60hz monitor will still "feel" much more responsive than a game running at 60fps.

        Although you only really need that highly tuned level of response in shooters, but that's what this article is about after all.

        And Crytek wonder why people didn't want to pay for Crysis...
    • Dracusis, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1The human eye is capable of observing state changes over time intervals as small as 0.5 ms. Motion blur works for film because it captures all incoming light and blends it correctly but no motion blur technology in games can insert data that just isn't being rendered, not even the way crysis does it. Also, real life doesn't have motion blur. It works great in films, but for interactive stuff it just gets in the way.

      It may only take 12-15 still frames per second to create the illusion of motion, but that doesn't mean it's going to be a ~good~ illusion.
  • flare1028us, on 07/17/2008, -2/+9As long as this doesn't provoke another Doom movie, I'll be fine...
    • brianrwalters, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Wuhh!??!? Buried! Doom the Movie was one of the most underrated comedies of all time.

      Samantha Grimm: [about Carmack's transformation] It may even be reversible...
      The Rock: It's irreversible.
      Samantha Grimm: You don't know that...
      The Rock: Doctor-Carmack's-condition-is-irreversible.
      [turns to Carmack and raises his pistol]
      Samantha Grimm: NO-!
      [The Rock shoots Carmack]
      The Rock: Because Carmack's condition is that... he's dead.
      • smmakira, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3It's sad how well you quote this movie...
  • soot, on 07/17/2008, -1/+9The Mars scenario from Doom 3 was pretty cool, but I'd like to see something like Dante's Inferno in Doom 4. The Hell chapter in D3 was too short. It would be awesome if id wove an entire fiction and setting out of it for the game, like the player starts off in Limbo and has to travel through the different circles of Hell and witnesses everything from the book. Or like the Hell from Wayne Barlowe's artwork. That would be ***** nuts.

    Rage looks cool from the teeny tiny bit they showed, but I still don't know much about it. :[

  • anon748296, on 07/17/2008, -1/+12as dark as doom 3 was, my main complaint was that it was almost entirely in small areas with low ceilings. in contrast, doom 2 was 'hell on earth' and had lots of outdoors areas.

    my hope for doom 4 is that they do more open areas and outdoors areas, which is part of what what made half-life 2 so great.
    • ortucis, on 07/17/2008, -9/+2Half Life 2 wasn't really that fun. Running around in lifeless world with generic weapons isn't really that fun, unless of course you are a fanboy and a moron.
      • Zpanzer, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1INFIDEL!
      • ufee, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Lifeless? Think what you want. You're a lunatic.
      • ortucis, on 07/18/2008, -2/+1Well, I find the thought of people in the 'future' cutting down all trees to create random boxes for a random 'scientist' to suddenly come around and play with his fancy gravity gun kinda.. stupid.

        That's just me though, I am sure HL2 fans think of the empty worlds without even a bird (unless I missed it) sitting anywhere ground breaking and *****.
    • Varz, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Well they had open environments for Quake 4 and Rage looks to be open as well. They said Rage and Doom 4 are using the same engine so I guess it will at least be capable of rendering outdoor environments pretty well.
  • cambob76, on 07/17/2008, -5/+6Will it be as one-dimensional as Doom 3? Graphics aren't that important dude.
    • Evilblobs, on 07/17/2008, -2/+6D3 was about horror, the atmosphere, etc.

      And while graphics dont make a game, when i play a game, i dont like by eyes to burn in disgust.
      • Ph34rb0t, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4Liar.

        I bet you played Mario Bros, and enjoyed it at some point. Get off the graphics bandwagon.
    • h4mx0r, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Doom 3 was not the scariest game around but it did well in delivering atmosphere. Of course the flashlight mechanic was negative in terms of gameplay.
  • qbthemc, on 07/17/2008, -11/+2YAY and i got my PALIT 8800GT Sonic 1GB the other day. WOOOOTT.
  • polygons, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2Rage feels like a Zeiram game.
    • LunaticFringe, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Why are you digging him down? It's an awesome reference.
  • brownr21, on 07/17/2008, -10/+3"The build process requires one more step for the Mac".

    So stop complaining, it's your own fault you're targetting that ***** platform. And are they really still using OpenGL? No wonder their games take so long to develop (and why nobody wants to use their engines anymore).
  • wesdenton, on 07/17/2008, -13/+2Doom3 sucked. Why should we believe that Doom4 would be any better? You guys should have stopped at Doom2.
  • xjeffx, on 07/17/2008, -8/+7I hate to say it because Doom is what got me into gaming, computers, programming and technology in general... but I got about 30 minutes into Doom 3 until I got bored and never played it again. :-/
    • ortucis, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8For me, 10 mins into Doom3 and kept on playing it till I defeated that bastard demon from hell in the end. It was fun, expansion was even better.
  • bar10dr, on 07/17/2008, -6/+9Who cares about the graphics when you can't actually see any of it?
  • stillSpirit, on 07/17/2008, -6/+1ditto xjeffx
  • McBradd, on 07/17/2008, -10/+160 FPS is the magic number where everything is silk smooth. 30 FPS is the magic number that tells you to upgrade your hardware. So what their telling us is even after we upgrade our hardware for Doom 4, we're going to need to upgrade our hardware.
  • aftern9ne, on 07/17/2008, -6/+1It could be virtual reality for all I care, if it still plays like ***** it won't matter.
  • phatboye, on 07/17/2008, -6/+2when they say PC I hope they are including Linux and *BSD in that group.
  • ortucis, on 07/17/2008, -5/+7Just like age old chan pics Diggers apparently still find those 'dark' jokes from Doom3 funny.. which were pretty stupid back then as well anyway (I played that game without even using flashlight provided). Learn to ***** calibrate your monitor first and then complain about a game being too dark to see ANYTHING. Idiots.
    • Boofster, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1LOL so true. That game was great. It gave people shudders, esp with the lights off and surround sound.
  • GrantTLC, on 07/17/2008, -4/+5More pointless willy-waving from John Carmack.

    You focused on graphics with Doom 3, John, but released it with dull, repetitive, forgettable gameplay; most everything people loved gameplay-wise from the first games was absent. This time, how about giving us the next-gen Doom we all want rather than dazzling us with the size of your shiny purple-headed pixels?
    • gaminggeek, on 07/17/2008, -4/+1this comment shows you have no idea about game development, John Carmack has nothing to do with the game design all he does is work out how the graphics engine works, like wise for the artists they make the pretty art assets that are rendered with the graphics engine, again nothing to do with the the gameplay. There are game designers who work out how the game mechanics work.
    • GrantTLC, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Ha! That's right - I believe one single solitary guy coded Doom 3, all on his own in a bedroom somewhere, and am not at all using the highly visible and famous name of John Carmack to make a point about Doom 3's bland gameplay rather than waste the short and precious amount of time allotted in my lunch break to research which in particular of the hundreds of faceless Id employees is/are working on gameplay mechanics.

      Schmuck. Your Digg license is hereby revoked.
  • SHUUTOBI, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1Well ET:QWs animations were capped at 30fps, but the frame rate of the game was uncapped if i remember correctly (pc)...
    Either way it just looked odd.

    I guess he wants 2007 tech to run the game @ 12fps and then run great years later when no one want's to play it anymore...
    60hz or bust.
  • kirado4, on 07/17/2008, -5/+1another crysis.. anyone?
  • CarnivalOfDust, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2Wow. Good graphics, you say?!?!?! Quick, I'd better get ordering!!!!!111shift1
    Today's gamers, for the most part, have the attention spans of goldfish. Great, well-thought-out games are being neglected in favor of beautiful-but-crap games that are over in a matter of days and then never played again. It sickens me that there are a lot of cases where you could buy a brand new game that cost millions to make and then find yourself a few days later sitting on your PC playing Super Mario 3 on a SNES emulator.
  • rhythmicdevil, on 07/17/2008, -3/+3Who F'N cares. I waited for what seemed like forever for Doom 3 to come out only to have completely crap game play. They may have updated the graphics (which were pretty sweet) but it still plays like Wolfenstein 3D.
    1. Open door, shoot
    2. Walk down hall
    3. Open door, turn around, shoot
    repeat....................
    • denizen42, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3The game had truckloads of atmosphere.
      Looks like you missed it entirely.
      • gcauthon, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Looks like I missed it as well. Maybe they should release a guide that points out all of the places in the game where we were supposed to be scared. While they're at it, I thought there was supposed to be a plot twist somewhere. I would really like to know where that was.
      • denizen42, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1This game is clearly a game of immersion, you're not supposed to play it on a sofa, on a console, with kids running around, with interruptions, in broad daylight, in low-res, using some dumb controller.
        Rather, its constant suspense is best rendered with opposite conditions, whose influence converge to maximize atmosphere. And if you already use these conditions, well then a soul is what you need.
  • GreatSunJester, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5DOOM 4, now with 64bit "darkness" rendering and patented "Monster-Behind-You" AI.
  • xeomage, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5Looking at the screenshots, they've apparently discovered the awesome graphics power of blur.

    I wonder if this will have the same annoying "imp in the closet" problem as Doom 3. I can just imagine this imp thinking "I bet even though everyone has gone zombie, there's going to be someone to come through here shooting everyone. I'll just hide in this closet for the next four hours until he comes through, then jump out behind him!"
  • flashback99, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2how did ID manage to make both Doom 3 AND Quake 4 suck at the same time?
    • wxdotz, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3Well in defense of ID...

      They didn't develop Q4.
  • vawksel, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3At this point, I don't really care about graphics getting better than HL2's visuals. It's about game-play and I'm sad to see id lost it a long time ago.

    Q3 was a great mutliplayer game, otherwise, the original Doom was cutting edge gameplay/graphics combo back then.

    Doom 3? No thanks, Quake 4? No thanks.

    DukeNukem 3D > Doom 1, 2 or 3

  • enronias, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1So he says . . .

    I have a concept how about we stop working towards insanely photorealistic games and work towards insanely well done art direction and story line. . . I still have a far greater emotional connection and gotten far more enjoyment out of the games that used sprites and other less powerful forms of game graphics such as Baldur's Gate and other early games than I've had with any ZOMG PHOTOREALISTIC character (running at 4 FPS) in many years.
  • maxsunset, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1The surprisingly candid interview where he talks about this:
    http://kotaku.com/5025229/carmack-talks-from-idea- ...
  • deathcat, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2WHY WONT id DIE!!!!

    Please take a hint from the dinosaurs.
  • justice7, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2all this doom3 bashing.. i really enjoyed the game. While it could have been better, the atmosphere and sound was really top notch; maybe i'm just not that hard to please.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.