Viewing Thread:
"Doom 3"

CVG interviewing id CEO Todd Hollenshead:

'How about the Xbox version?

Hollenshead: We're literally in the early stages of getting the technology up and running on the Xbox. The Xbox is completely within the specs of what the target for Doom III technology is.

You'll be seeing a lot of unique textures that literally make the world just the way you might imagine if Hell really had erupted on a spacestation.

What about a PS2 version?

Hollenshead: Frankly, the PS2 couldn't do the math calculations for the geometry acceleration, real time shadows and light. GameCube is the same thing, no version planned.'

I hope that's enough to silence the moronic fanboys?

My computer can walk on its 'hind legs.

Bet your X-box can't do that.

I have a 400Mhz toaster.

Now you're backtracking. You said "it was stupid to get 400MHz RAM for a chip with a bus speed of 533MHz" then I tell you that the speed isn't really that important because it's running in dual-channel, now you're babbling on about Rambus, which is practically dead now, and with good cause. It was over-expensive and the benefits weren't worth it. Besides, dual-channel 400MHz DDR RAM has a higher bandwidth than 800MHz Rambus anyway, bringing me right back to my original point that it isn't just a case of "BIGGER NUMBERS=BETTER!!!!!!!"


To be honest I don't really understand the point of this argument as you replied to a post I made sarcasticly to undermine your original comments completely seriously, which is amusing in itself. Secondly, you seem to think I'm being childish, when in fact you're just as bad. In fact, the hilariously hypocritical line at the end of your first post, and the fact you even felt it necessary to post this in the Nintendo forum further displays your idiocy.

I expect a witty reply back on your part, with more of this "little boy" nonsense, or "don't get your knickers in a twist", because this is oh so predictable.

Good day.

Tiltawhirl wrote:
> My computer's bigger than yours.

Don't say that. You'll upset him again.

My computer's bigger than yours.

Memorandum! wrote:
> Or maybe you wanted to give your SUPER SPEC!! to make some kind of
> stupid "mine's better than yours" comment.

You're very insecure. Perhaps this stems from your upbringing? If it bothers you that much, I'll say I have a P2 233mhz with 32mb ram. Does that feel better little boy?

> Actually, it's closer to 800. But when you find 800MHz DDR RAM, tell
> me. Plus, didn't you notice the 'dual channel' part?

Ever heard of Rambus? Oops, I can't mention things that are better than what you have, can I? It seems to create an atmosphere. Ok, Rambus doesn't exist. Better now kid?
>
> I mean, anyone who knows anything about computers will know that it's
> not just "OMG BIGGER NUMBAHZ IT MUST BE BETTER!!!!1111111"

I'm already aware of this fact, hence why I opted for an AMD chip and not a Pentium. If you had any sense you would think *before* you spoke and would stop making yourself look so stupid... *sigh*

Anyway, I'm already looking forward to your next reply as I'm in need of a laugh this morning.

AfroJoe wrote:
> I'm still laughing over how highly hypocritical the final line in the
> original post was.

*nod*

Gar-J wrote:
> I replied because I just read what you said. Unlike some people, I
> don't spend every hour of every day here...

But the thing is...it was a sarcastic reply highlighting the idiocy of your original post, or were you just too dumb to realise that?


> I haven't lied about anything. (?)
>
> I don't want you to be jealous. (Double ??)

Or maybe you wanted to give your SUPER SPEC!! to make some kind of stupid "mine's better than yours" comment.
>
> I gave my spec to illustrate that I will not be in any need of
> greater resolution, since you have such a large monkey up your
> back-side about that subject. Or at least you did. But now it seems
> you've changed your mind about that. Strange co-incidence there.

.......

*cough* sarcasm *cough*

You really need to work on your detection of >HUMOUR<

Gar-J wrote:
> Oh and tell your friend he was pretty stupid to buy 400mhz RAM for a
> chip that has an FSB of at least 533mhz...

Actually, it's closer to 800. But when you find 800MHz DDR RAM, tell me. Plus, didn't you notice the 'dual channel' part?

I mean, anyone who knows anything about computers will know that it's not just "OMG BIGGER NUMBAHZ IT MUST BE BETTER!!!!1111111"

I'm still laughing over how highly hypocritical the final line in the original post was.

How strange, I don't remember saying or even inplying that.

I said it was b*llocks, and I stand buy that. ID Software are just giving excuses.