Whelp, id has been on the way out for some time now.
Sometimes it's worth starting from scratch. I just hope this won't be the next Duke Nukem Forever.
Doom 3 should of been sent back.
[sp]Just kidding I like Doom 3, just not as a sequel to Doom II.[/sp]
Better that than releasing a bad game
Can't wait
[QUOTE=The golden;40144568]While still technically alive and breathing, I consider Id to have gone braindead years ago.[/QUOTE]
As much as I'd like to see a good game come from them, I don't expect to see one anymore.
well, i can only hope that they deliver
if this one fails, the next thing i'd want would be a hi-def remake of the original D00M, same gameplay and levels and enemies, but with five additional difficulty settings and an adjustable level of gore (with the maximum setting rivaling Brütal D00M)
[QUOTE=The golden;40144962]eheheh stop right there.
If this one fails id is probably going to be canned or massively cut. Bethesda/Zenimax, like any publisher, can't afford to have studios producing failure money-sinks.[/QUOTE]
Cutting off id would probably result in a pretty bad rep for them. Not saying it shouldn't happen if id don't deliver, but it would still severely hit them in the ass too, Zenimax that is.
tbf this is actually quite good if you ignore iD slowly dying; a game got laughed back to the drawing board because it was too much like call of duty! yay!
I hope iD get through this though, it'd be such a shame to lose the fathers of shooter games. They've still got carmack, right?
Let's hope Doom 4 is the true successor to Doom 2 that we've all been waiting for.
And whilst we're at it, maybe I'll look into online dating. (but seriously I hope they re-embrace the old formula of Doom 2, though preferably without monster-boxing)
I wonder what kind of game Doom 4 has to be to be successful. We don't want a Call of Doom. Yet monster closets and 'old school' gameplay don't pull in huge audiences either. It's a title that could easily get stuck in the past and burdened with bad attempts at modernizing it.
[QUOTE=The golden;40144962]eheheh stop right there.[/QUOTE]you don't tell me what to do
[QUOTE=Joazzz;40144856]well, i can only hope that they deliver
if this one fails, the next thing i'd want would be a hi-def remake of the original D00M, same gameplay and levels and enemies, but with five additional difficulty settings and an adjustable level of gore (with the maximum setting rivaling Brütal D00M)[/QUOTE]
There are already mods out there that do literally ALL of that.
[editline]3rd April 2013[/editline]
Anyways, I am hoping Doom 4 is left to a smaller dev team with a focused goal on going back to the old school ways of FPS games. It seemed thats what Carmack wanted. However, I don't always trust his leadership on things, it seems what ID needs is a fresh set of minds and better organization.
And all that shit Kotaku said, I believe like half of it. We saw those leaked screen shots and concept art of an early version and I am thinking that is the Call of Doom version. That was completely scrapped, however I don't think the situation is as dire as the shitty rumor mill Kotaku says it is.
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;40145012]tbf this is actually quite good if you ignore iD slowly dying; a game got laughed back to the drawing board because it was too much like call of duty! yay!
I hope iD get through this though, it'd be such a shame to lose the fathers of shooter games. They've still got carmack, right?[/QUOTE]
It probably was Carmack who decided to scratch everything, seems to be something he'd do (as he has done in the past).
[quote]They report that some had jokingly described the game as "Call of Doom," as its focus on scripted set pieces and "the obligatory vehicle scene" made it feel more like Activision's popular military FPS, than a proper Doom game. "There was kind of the recognition that in order to be a big shooter these days, you have to have some amount of the big, bombastic movie experience that people get pulled through," one source said.[/quote]Call of Duty has fucked over this gaming industry
I hope exciting means scary/engaging.
[QUOTE=Clavus;40145261]I wonder what kind of game Doom 4 has to be to be successful. We don't want a Call of Doom. Yet monster closets and 'old school' gameplay don't pull in huge audiences either. It's a title that could easily get stuck in the past and burdened with bad attempts at modernizing it.[/QUOTE]
I disagree with the prospect that going old-school won't pull in money or audiences. I am thinking after all this call of duty shit going old-school is what people want now. It would pull in huge amounts of money on the PC gaming community front, and the mainstream audiences don't care about what type of shooter it is, they just want to shoot things. If you are trying to pull the call of duty crowd into your game you are doing it completely wrong, it's the approach Battlefield has gone taking and look where that game ended up. Just leave the call of duty diehard 12 year olds to call of duty until that game disintegrates.
What is important is showing you can deliver what fans want, while making the game really good, and then building hype for it. Doom isn't just some small IP you know, it's fucking legendary, the point about doom is that it is simple, you only fuck it up when you try to alienate what people expect from it.
I am really glad Carmack scrapped the Call of Doom game. That would have been a disaster, a huge disappointment. I hope Carmack got a fresh, focused, and inspired dev team without worrying about the peer pressure of games like call of duty.
[QUOTE=Pikachu231;40146316]I hope exciting means scary/engaging.[/QUOTE]
no, not scary.
scary gave doom3.
It's not "bad", but it's nothing like the originals.
the only scare factor should be saving your game with 1 hp left every 20 seconds.
If they're trying to make it an exciting shoot 'em up like the originals, I can't wait for this.
[QUOTE=Durrsly;40144286]Doom 3 should of been sent back.
[sp]Just kidding I like Doom 3, just not as a sequel to Doom II.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Yeah, doom3 was pretty cool. Not like its predecessors, but still pretty cool.
what if the reasoning behind them saying it was not "exciting enough" was that it wasn't CoD enough with "broader audiences" in mind :pwn:? Like what if it was the perfect sequel to Doom II?
[QUOTE=Atlascore;40147323]No one is going to care, ID is an ancient company that hasn't produced anything decent in nearly a decade.[/QUOTE]
Rage was alright, the shooting parts were really fun and the graphics were amazing.
The story... can't really say anything about it, I don't remember there being much of a story at all.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;40147323]No one is going to care, ID is an ancient company that hasn't produced anything decent in nearly a decade.[/QUOTE]
Erm, why do I think what you said only applies if you demand something [b]truely[/b] mindblowing and also almost impossible to make from a game?
Really, sometimes, I see people bitch about how IGN and all those main rating websites rate cod rehashes and other bad games with 9's as if they were completely bought out, then a good game comes out, and they slam it to the ground and call it a huge downslope for the devs that made it, just because of a problem here and there.
It's like those snobbish critics who aren't happy with anything.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;40147323]No one is going to care, ID is an ancient company that hasn't produced anything decent in nearly a decade.[/QUOTE]
But they are still one of the most innovative guys when it comes to new technologies regarding video games (looking at MegaTexture).
And they care about the PC, but not only Windows. They use OpenGL for their renderer to support mac and linux too.
Regarding Rage: it was not a bad game, but it felt a little bit unpolished.
[QUOTE=dass;40147707]Erm, why do I think what you said only applies if you demand something [b]truely[/b] mindblowing and also almost impossible to make from a game?
Really, sometimes, I see people bitch about how IGN and all those main rating websites rate cod rehashes and other bad games with 9's as if they were completely bought out, then a good game comes out, and they slam it to the ground and call it a huge downslope for the devs that made it, just because of a problem here and there.
It's like those snobbish critics who aren't happy with anything.[/QUOTE]
it's not like they are the same people
Just make a new Quake game that's like the original Quake game.
[QUOTE=Coffee;40148629]Just make a new Quake game that's like the original Quake game.[/QUOTE]
Or, they can make a Doom game that is like the original Doom games.
I know which I'd rather.
Here's a idea ID Software.
Take the Doom 1 Gameplay
And put modern AAA Asthetics on it and make the game non serious.
I wonder if 'more exciting' means more first person CoD cutscenes where you fly back from scripted explosions and have to do quicktime events to prevent yourself from dying due to scripted demons throwing fireballs at you while you're lying on the ground.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
