Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

jerry1 · Aug 10, 2004, 11:50 PM

Just finished it on my PC and the experience wasnt satisfying. I was looking forward to this game for ages now and I get disappointed after waiting 4 years for it. One of the reason I was looking forward to Doom 3 is because it would be released for Macs as well. Now I'm going to save the 60 bucks that I had saved for my Doom3 Mac copy.

Even most of the gaming sites are rating Doom3 8.9 or 9ish and terming it as a good experience not great. Just disappointing from ID. I dont think Valve will make HL2 for Macs, do they ?

sideus · Aug 11, 2004, 12:08 AM

I found the game to be quite exciting. The game actually made me jump, especially when I was playing at night with my lights off. Scared the crap out of me. My sister won't play the game after midnight, she says it is too intense.

I finished it on normal. I've now started from scratch on Nightmare. Currently in Alpha Labs 4. Nightmare is tough. There are no medpaks to be found and when your health is over 25, its slowly depletes. You do have the soul cube though.

mac freak · Aug 11, 2004, 12:42 AM

Doom 3 was hardly a groundbreaking game, but nothing touches its "experience" value. I played it on a new-ish PC with a full DTS 5.1 sound system... and wow, no game makes use of surround sound like Doom 3!

The iMac Man · Aug 11, 2004, 12:41 PM

Well, there should at least be some really great mods coming out for Doom3...

-iMac

lenox · Aug 11, 2004, 01:16 PM

Call me crazy, but Doom3 doesn't even LOOK as good (or at least have the graphical variety) of Far Cry. Kind of sad if you consider the fact that Doom3's most redeeming feature is the graphics.

jerry1 · Aug 11, 2004, 01:26 PM

It is scary but only in the beginning. You get the hang of it very quickly. The scripted sequence of events is gets boring quickly that is lights go out, you hear scary sounds, you open the door and find a monster waiting for you. I finished the game on medium difficulty as well and to be honest I did not find the last boss quite scary, shocking or difficult. I figured him out and it wasnt fun killing him.

Horsepoo!!! · Aug 11, 2004, 01:26 PM

Originally posted by lenox:
Call me crazy, but Doom3 doesn't even LOOK as good (or at least have the graphical variety) of Far Cry. Kind of sad if you consider the fact that Doom3's most redeeming feature is the graphics.

Doom 3's most redeeming feature isn't the graphics...it's the experience...the ambience...the 'real' dynamic lighting...the interactive environment...and the sound.

The graphics themselves aren't hugely impressive but you'll never find a game with levels with as much attention to detail as Doom 3.

iD is going to license the engine to other developers which will use it and improve it as years go by...the graphics will get better and developers will benefit from an engine that allows dynamic lighting, excellent physics, and deformable structures.

So Far Cry me a river.

lenox · Aug 16, 2004, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
So Far Cry me a river.

Oh, puns are so funny!

Anyhow, we're talking about Doom3...not some 'tech demo' engine that will be present in other games that may or may not make better use of it. We're talking about the current incarnation...which isn't particularly impressive.

blizzard · Aug 16, 2004, 05:44 PM

I'd hate to see what it would take to dazzle you.

Lateralus · Aug 16, 2004, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by blizzard:
I'd hate to see what it would take to dazzle you.

I was thinking the same thing...

jerry1 · Aug 21, 2004, 06:31 AM

blizzard & PowerMacMan, so you both judge a game just based on its eye-candy ? Sounds very fair, Not.

blizzard · Aug 21, 2004, 09:41 AM

I'm judging it based on its immersiveness, scare factor, and overall quality of production, which are all as high or higher than any other game I've played. The eye candy is a plus, but it's also there for a reason; to increase the immersiveness.

No game is totally defined by its graphics, and I don't think Doom 3's gameplay is as good as a few other games I've played recently (Halo comes immediately to mind), but in my opinion, Doom 3 is an excellent game.

Chinasaur · Aug 21, 2004, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by jerry1:
...that is lights go out, you hear scary sounds, you open the door and find a monster waiting for you. .

.... Uh. This is DOOM after all. That's ALL the game is about!!!

lenox · Aug 23, 2004, 11:43 AM

The original doom had better variety and gameplay in my opinion. Now that is something sad indeed.

MindFad · Aug 23, 2004, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by blizzard:
I'm judging it based on its immersiveness, scare factor, and overall quality of production, which are all as high or higher than any other game I've played. The eye candy is a plus, but it's also there for a reason; to increase the immersiveness.

No game is totally defined by its graphics, and I don't think Doom 3's gameplay is as good as a few other games I've played recently (Halo comes immediately to mind), but in my opinion, Doom 3 is an excellent game.

Hear hear! I'm Lovin' It�.

Elvin · Aug 30, 2004, 01:37 PM

Just another voice in this fray, but I just wanted to throw in my .02 cents. I have played through most of Doom 3 as well as four other guys that I work with and every one of us have stopped playing it. Doom3 is far too boring.

The general consensus from all of us was that the first few levels were perfect. Good lead in story, jaw dropping graphics, amazing sounds and atmosphere and scary-as-can-be scenes. But for each and every one of us we all felt that it just didn't have any real quality that brought us back for more. I mean, just how many times can you fight an imp? After the initial shock fact of the first few levels, you knew where the baddies were going to jump out from. There just wasn't any lasting story-line either. I know it was a re-make of the original Doom... but for a game that concentrated on single player, the story-line was wafer-thin. The entire game felt too close to the original Half-Life. A shame really because I won't be buying it for the Mac. All my hopes are with Half-Life 2, because Half-Life 1 was a true Grade-A game. Man, Halo was far better than Doom 3.

blizzard · Aug 30, 2004, 03:35 PM

Originally posted by Elvin:
The entire game felt too close to the original Half-Life. A shame really...

...because Half-Life 1 was a true Grade-A game.

Edited for clarity?

Originally posted by Elvin:
Man, Halo was far better than Doom 3.

Ahh, something we can agree on! I must say, I'm rather disappointed Halo 2 isn't a PC release...methinks it'll be time to shack up at an XBox-loving friend's house the day after release...

The iMac Man · Aug 30, 2004, 03:49 PM

Ugh, Halo's level design is horrid!

Zig-zag hallway, circle room, zig-zag hallway, cirlce room, zig-zag hallway, outdoor bridge, zig-zag hallway, circle room....

Boooooooorrrrrrriiiiinnnnnnngggggggg.............

XBox is garbage... my buddy just bought his THIRD one because the other two have broken.

Elvin · Aug 30, 2004, 04:57 PM

While Halo's maps may have had more of an "Alien" design, they also made for more of an interesting layout. Lots of lush open scenery to drive the vehicles around in, lots of 'see-through' glass and light-beam bridges, lots of huge buildings that gave a true sense of falling a long, long, long way down.

Doom's maps were all very dark (The gamma won't go any higher Capt'n) and cramped... and for good reason too. That added to atmosphere, however it just became one dark room to stumble around in after another. (and what good is holding only a flashlight? Halo had rifle mounted lights).

So each to their own, however when incorporating the enemy A.I. into these maps, clearly Halo shone better. Baddies would duck and cover, run for help.. Bungie knew what they were doing. Doom was eerie as they would crawl down the walls, but once they were in front of you... there was just no strategy on anyone's part. Just run and gun.

Again... each to their own... but Halo just had a richer game environment.