Viewing Thread:
"Anyone get Doom3 today (tuesday)?"

I did. I've been waiting for it for a long time and although it is really good, it's not as good as I'd hoped. The monsters don't scale the walls, they do for a brief few seconds where they are scripted too. I don't know why I pointed that one out. Also, the hardest mode available from a new game 'Veteran' is nowhere near hard enough and I'm breezing through it nicely. I've had to stop as I don't want to get through it in a couple of days.

Anyway, what does anyone else think of it?

I kind of wanted it to be a "nearly Half Life 2" game. Which it isn't. $55? That with shipping? I managed to get it for $54.99 with shipping so I saved myself a cent! (which is basically nothing).

I was happy with it, because it is nothing new. I wanted an old fashioned shooter, and I got one. A very pretty one.

$55 well spent, but now I'm back to PGR2.

monkey_man wrote:
> Looks good, but if it has no substance, then meh. Riddick on the
> other hand - oh, baby, I can't wait to get my hands on a finished
> copy of it!

Riddick does look brilliant. The film will be good too, but Escaping from Butcher Bay may be the best thing I do in gaming for a while.

monkey_man wrote:
> Looks good, but if it has no substance, then meh. Riddick on the
> other hand - oh, baby, I can't wait to get my hands on a finished
> copy of it!

Its an updated version of Doom... so if your not after an old-skool twitch shooter, you'll be dissapointed.

Otherwise, its top-notch stuff! :)

Looks good, but if it has no substance, then meh. Riddick on the other hand - oh, baby, I can't wait to get my hands on a finished copy of it!

So, it's distincly average I take it. I hate that, when games get a super build up and then when they finally come they're not as half as good as everyone pointed out. DRIV3R was the same. The new Zelda better not turn out like that.

Burnt wrote:
> I guess if you have the money then it's alright but I dont and i'd be
> shooting my dog all day if I spent that much on a game that turns out
> average.

I had the same problem with Halo, I was quite interested in buying an XBox until I actually played the game and found out how average/repetative the whole expereince was

Burnt wrote:
> Thats why I dont get PC Games (Well, apart from the fact that my PCs
> crap anyway), whats the point spending loads of money on your PC so
> it can play Doom 3 when the game turns out crap.
>
> I guess if you have the money then it's alright but I dont and i'd be
> shooting my dog all day if I spent that much on a game that turns out
> average.

Because Call Of Duty recquires a half decent computer.
And I don't have one.

;(

Thats why I dont get PC Games (Well, apart from the fact that my PCs crap anyway), whats the point spending loads of money on your PC so it can play Doom 3 when the game turns out crap.

I guess if you have the money then it's alright but I dont and i'd be shooting my dog all day if I spent that much on a game that turns out average.

Easily the most disappoting game of the year, after Driv3r of course. It's pretty clear that the effort has gone into the graphics and not the gameplay, look beyond the graphics and it's the same game as Doom was, except not as hard or interesting.

Anyone else think that the opening bit - arriving at the complex, checking at the reception, going to find the scientist etc was, well, just a rip off of Half Life? I did.