to you "Doom3 Sucks" crybabies

First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

So all you spoiled brats and johnny-come-lately PS2/Xbox rejects
please cool your jets as to what is and what is not 'groundbreaking'.
Carmack was writing code when you were still a sperm cell.

Judge wrote:
First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' -

In all fairness it has the odd 'oooo, what was that' moment and plenty of
'AAIIIEE what just jumped out at me' moments, but isn't really 'scary,
scary'.
Mind you, it takes a *lot* to scare me.

go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

Undying is an absolute classic. Stunning game.


If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

Doom 3's graphics have to be seen on a system which does them justice. I saw
the game at a friend's place who has a Ti4200, and the loss of image quality
was stark. On Ultra, on a meaty PC, words cannot describe how good it looks.
I bought my GT especially for it.

--
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like
administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine

Doom 3's graphics have to be seen on a system which does them justice. I saw
the game at a friend's place who has a Ti4200, and the loss of image quality
was stark.

I'm still using a 4200 so thanks for ruining my day!

"if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter"
I used to get chills down my back when I played that game, it was the
howls.
"Judge" wrote in message
...
First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

So all you spoiled brats and johnny-come-lately PS2/Xbox rejects
please cool your jets as to what is and what is not 'groundbreaking'.
Carmack was writing code when you were still a sperm cell.

When Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

Your mistaken. Quake 2 supported OpenGl out of the box. Your
thinking of the original Quake.

since you have not purchase and or played the game you opinion has no value
you just a nobody

"Judge" wrote in message
...
First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

So all you spoiled brats and johnny-come-lately PS2/Xbox rejects
please cool your jets as to what is and what is not 'groundbreaking'.
Carmack was writing code when you were still a sperm cell.

They just need to stop rushing to "beat" it -- but should instead take it in
slowly, as this article makes clear:


http://www.avault.com/reviews/review...asp?game=doom3

"Judge" wrote in message
...
First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

So all you spoiled brats and johnny-come-lately PS2/Xbox rejects
please cool your jets as to what is and what is not 'groundbreaking'.
Carmack was writing code when you were still a sperm cell.

And this quote says it all:

"It's only fair to evaluate this release on the basis of what it's trying to
achieve, as an updated version of the Doom series, and not on the basis of
recent convolutions in the genre. In a satisfying way, Doom 3 brings the
first-person shooter back to its roots, returning it to the simple, direct
gameplay that spawned this category of games over ten years ago. Rejecting
pressure from pseudo-sophisticated snobs who want to graft on artificial
complexities that have been so trendy in recent computer action titles, Doom
3 is a far cry from the pattern of the latest shooters, and to me, that's a
real blessing."


"Judge" wrote in message
...
First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

So all you spoiled brats and johnny-come-lately PS2/Xbox rejects
please cool your jets as to what is and what is not 'groundbreaking'.
Carmack was writing code when you were still a sperm cell.

erm, it aint exactly ground breaking imo its just the usual quake/doom
variant game just all like all versions it too dam dark

i have an 9800xt and amd mobile cpu at 2.6ghz and can play it on ultra, it
isnt anything special.
plus to try and compare it with original HL is all fine and dandy
considering more people play HL variant games than doom3 ever will just goes
to show decent gfx dont actually make a game, dod/cs plus others will always
be better than doom3 that will last another month or 2 b4 its forgotten.


ps, far cry is a much better shooter to compare it with and i know which i
prefer



dont believe the hype!
"Judge" wrote in message
...
First off, let me say I havent even played the game yet. BUT -

if you dont think it's 'scary enough' - go find yourself a copy of
"Clive Barker's Undying" - that game had quite a few scary moments for
a FPS shooter.

If you think the graphics arent ground breaking - load up Half-Life
original, or even Quake2/3, maybe Duke Nukem? iD has taken things to
another level just like they always have. Yes, those levels are
getting closer and closer, because we've reached damn-near-real levels
of detail. The original Doom2 was mindblowing in it's day, but that
day was back when 4mb of ram on the MOTHERBOARD was 'high end' . When
Quake 2 came out, it wasnt even 3D - the 3dfx board had not even come
out yet to make it OpenGL!

So all you spoiled brats and johnny-come-lately PS2/Xbox rejects
please cool your jets as to what is and what is not 'groundbreaking'.
Carmack was writing code when you were still a sperm cell.

PRIVATE1964 wrote:
Doom 3's graphics have to be seen on a system which does them
justice. I saw the game at a friend's place who has a Ti4200, and
the loss of image quality was stark.

I'm still using a 4200 so thanks for ruining my day!


Sorry dear fellow.

--
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like
administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine