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?

Let me put it this way:

Look at fairly recent Serious Sam 1 & 2 (Sold by the bucket load)

Then look back at Doom.

Like I said Doom is still very relevant and fun now.

*at the

Serious Sam *is* effectively my point.

Fun at first.

Then dull as hell, because you don't do anything apart from running and shooting.

Doom 3 better make it good......

Fending off hordes of creatures has always been fun. Doom and Serious Sam are just complicated enough to be classics of that type of game.

Cyclone wrote:
> Serious Sam *is* effectively my point.
>
> Fun at first.
>
> Then dull as hell, because you don't do anything apart from running
> and shooting.

Actually there was stealth, sniping and using your surroundings to your advantage.

It might've been dull on the PC but I raced through the Xbox melding of 1&2 as it was really good fun and unlike anything else (except perhaps Doom).

Sometimes it's nice to just kick back and blast way - ask Tilt.

When I played Serious Sam on the Xbox - I was expecting a decent 3D shooter. All I got was a cheap attempt at a 3D Doom - was shoddy, and to be quite honest, I'd rather play Doom 1 or 2 any day.

As for the PC versus Consoles argument. I have a decent spec PC - was a top spec PC when it was bought and I have enjoyed my gaming on it. That is, my Command & Conquers, my Star Treks, and Worms games. But when it comes to FPSs, (3D)platformers and virtually any other type of game, I prefer to play them on consoles.

Edgy wrote:
> When I played Serious Sam on the Xbox - I was expecting a decent 3D
> shooter. All I got was a cheap attempt at a 3D Doom - was shoddy, and
> to be quite honest, I'd rather play Doom 1 or 2 any day.

Hmmm. I liked it a lot.
>
> As for the PC versus Consoles argument. I have a decent spec PC - was
> a top spec PC when it was bought and I have enjoyed my gaming on it.
> That is, my Command & Conquers, my Star Treks, and Worms games.
> But when it comes to FPSs, (3D)platformers and virtually any other
> type of game, I prefer to play them on consoles.

Hit the nail on the head here.

ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> PC gaming is sh*et outside of RTS games. Control pads and console
> gaming muchos rockos.

not true...some of the really great rpgs are on the pc...
you know how you love KOTOR so much? well bioware released a shed load of rpgs on the pc before like baldurs gate 2 + throne of bhaal, neverwinter nights, planescape torment etc....all of which are a lot more complex than KOTOR.
I still prefer playing FPS on PC...sod auto aim on console versions! add to that higher resolutions + better anti aliasing.

Hedfix wrote:
> Frequently Poor Shooting?
>
> Failing to Provide Satisfaction?
>
> Yes you're right Mouse and Keyboard are FPS.

Yawn.

Different strokes, but id rather game on the PC than the console.

I believe it's: *Yawn*

:P

Yup different strokes.