Doom 3 And Halflife 2 - Dead ?

[Aralez]

I just wondered why those huge megasellers (and several other games) aren't played THAT much as e.g. Quake II, DukeNukem3D and Halflife back then when it was released. I remember playing Q2 for months over LAN and Internet, downloading bazillion of mods/models/maps and even with the release of Q3 we still played it.

 

What is it that causes those games to collect dust instead of being played?

 

Are there no longer loyal fans for them? Or is the "product-cycle" too short (good example UT ). Or are the modders no longer there (also caused by the too short product-life)? Or is there too much choice in games?

 

Several huge Doom3 sites closed in the last time (personally i haven't played it again after i finished the last level) and the number of TC'S or bigger mods can be counted on one hand.

 

What do you think?

[Bomb Bloke]

Ever played the Metroid games?

 

Super Metroid was the third one, released on the Super Nes. Then out came the N64, and no Metroid games were relaesed on it. Super Metroid was the last Metroid game for a loooong time - and most people say it is the best released. (You may have seen at least screen shots of Metroid Prime, for comparison of engines).

 

The same thing goes for Doom, maybe.

 

On the other hand, most rules of games don't seem to apply to me anymore. I can play through in a day what would take others a month. I can clear in a week that which would take other gamers several months. Modern games don't last long for me, but they still seem to last a while for other gamers.

 

Oh for the days of Ultima 7...

[Strong Bob]

Doom 3, Half Life 2, and Unreal Tournament 2k4 are not really considered to be good games. Mainly they were idolized by imense hype and made "loyal" fans either dissapointed or angry. (Though I won't lie that there are some people who would claim Doom 3 is the greatest game ever, they are often only wishful thinkers or only look at graphics.) The original Doom was truly ground breaking, it paved the way for true first person shooter games. Nowadays it's just a simple shoot 'em up that's still played by gamers all over the world. But now, you can't really make a good game by building off an old idea. Doom wasn't built off of anything more than the B-Scifi movie ideal, which is nothing.

 

Doom 3 is just the original Doom with an upgrade. People don't play it because it's nothing new, though it also deviates enough from it's original design to not even be nostalgic. The appeal in every direction is minimal.

 

Look at the originals out there... Counter Strike, Warcraft, Black and White, the Sims. These games are extremely popular. Some are new, some are old. The appeal is originality and quality, not hype. It's why Halo is considered a better game than Halo 2, and why more people play the former than the latter.

 

Doom 3 and Half Life 2 didn't have much besides hype to call special. That's why not many people play them. They are not bad games in of themselves. But they aren't exactly anything special...

[Bomb Bloke]

Well, Doom 3 is much like the later Quake games in that it's more an advertisment for the engine to other companies - they just happened to add a 'game' this time round.

 

Half Life 2 on the other hand, must have brought some gaming inovations. I mean, I haven't played it, but surely...?

[shagpuss]

I don't own Doom3 or HL2 but have played both near to completion, and I must say they are both good games, classics maybe not... (Although there is a co-op mod for D3 )

 

I think with a series of games people tend to build the game up sooo much before release they can't help but be dissapointed (Fallout3 and Baldurs Gate 3 examples to come?) B

But from what I have seen there is still life in both these games for a while at least. D3 has an expansion in the pipeline and HL2 (as was the original HL) will be well supported as was its prede.

 

Funnily enough as you said BB, whilst looking for CS games the other nite, there were still a good number of servers running the original CS.

 

Is seems that nowadays that people tend to drift away from games faster than they used to, maybe this is due to the larger variety and number of games and gaming platforms available.

 

Take DOW for instance, they moan about the drop off of numbers playing the game on-line, but the game is still being well supported with mods and maps being released regulary (sometimes too regulary! ) and a guaranteened expansion or two due. I wouldv'e stopped playing if it wasn't for the on-line games and some good guys to play it with

[Xzarr]

Seeing as I have all the games mentioned in this thread I should probably contribute

 

Doom 3 is a good game for single player but its replay value is 0. Once you know what the basic storyline is your bored and fraggin the monsters isn't too hard tbh.

 

HL2 beatiful graphics but dissapointing storyline as it leaves massive holes in the story. Also riddled with bugs upon the first release. The only reason most people I know bought HL2 was for counterstrike : source , which is also a huge letdown. In my opinion they released too early and sold an unfinished product to their fans.

 

You'll see people extolling the virtues of cs ; s every where but the simple fact of the matter is its too easy. Hitboxes have gotten steadily bigger since 1.5 and in cs ;s the headhitbox is ridiculous.

 

[/rant]

[shagpuss]

Xzarr when u aint that good CS aint thet easy!! What spoils it is the cheating...Why bother I ask? Give me 8 kills 15 deaths and i'll count that a good round!

 

As with all games I thinks its what you and your mates make it, and that menas multiplayer, deathmatch aint my thing anymore so give us Co-op single player and Campaigns. Didn't Red Alert 2 have a small Co-op campaign?

Edited January 22, 2005 by shagpuss

[Accounting Troll]

After watching Time Commanders, I was looking forward to Rome Total War for about a year. Two weeks after I got it, I was back to Medieval Total War.

 

It is very hard for the developers to come up with a good sequel to a sucessful game because they have to find a way to combine the good points of the first game with enough new stuff to make the sequel interesting to the fans who will have very high expectations.

 

It is less effort to produce a cheap knockoff of the first game that offers little except improved graphics. Most gamers will figure this out and lose interest, but usually only after they've brought the game. If the developer is lucky, its marketing department will be able to convince the fans that it has learned from its mistakes and the next sequel will be much better, a promise that will turn out to be optimistic. Granted, the gamers get shafted and the game gets killed off, but the main thing is that the company makes a big pile of cash.

 

I'm still optimistic about UFO: Aftershock though, because Altar have shown an interest in what the fans think.

[Aralez]

Accounting Troll, what are your feelings towards Rome Total War ? What is it like? I thought of buying it once, but somehow....

[Accounting Troll]

Overall, I was rather dissapointed.

 

The main improvements over Medieval were more diplomatic options and a greater number of faction specific units and buildings. They even went to the effort of giving the Macedonians their own pike units instead of making them use standard Greek hoplites. And commanding British head hurlers is fun.

 

Creative Assembly took out the option of being able to turn off the battle timer, so you only get 20 minutes to win a battle, and that isn't enough because they greatly increased the size of the battle maps. Your only possible battle tactic is to charge right into the enemy - forget flanking attacks or wearing them down with archers first. It is also very difficult to win a city assault in that time limit. I strongly suspect that CA did this on purpose so that we would have to buy the expansion pack so we can fully enjoy the game. Fortunatly, the modders managed to find a workaround, but I don't think they should have had to. Not everybody turns off the timed battles option with Medieval, but my point is that you are given the choice.

 

Even when you've managed to turn off the battle timer, the battles feel as if they've been speeded up to appeal to the people who prefer fast paced Playstation games instead of the slower pace of strategy games like X-COM.

 

CA also force you to win a campaign as one of the Roman factions before you can start a campaign as one of the other factions, which is very annoying when you would have preferred to lead one of the other factions instead. The good news is that somebody figured out how to make a few changes to one of the files so that all the factions, including the minor factions, can be played.

 

Rome is harder to mod than the developers promised it would be, and harder than Medieval was to mod, although there are several good mods being worked on.

 

It might seem paranoid, but I get the distinct impression that the developers deliberatly decided to have locked factions and no option to turn off the battle timer so that we would be forced to buy the expansion pack. Maybe that's when they will keep their promise to release the modding tools as well.

 

When the expansion pack comes out, Rome Total War will be an excellent, if overpriced, game. At the moment, it is no better than Medieval.

[Aralez]

Many thanks for the in-depth information. I think i will wait until there is some kind of "Gold Edition" of this game available, including the expansion, tools and fixes. I enjoyed Medieval:TW very much and the Viking Invasion expansion wasn't bad either..

 

And now i remember that the first thing i did was too disable the time-limit, much better battles that way. And i remember my first campaign battle, i had ~200 soldiers , the computer enemy 27. The enemies lined up in a small village and didn't move, me neither, i downed them with my archers, not very brave , but i didn't lose on unit...

[Lurker]

When I started playing computer games, it was actually possible to own and to play every one of them. Since then, it has been a process of learning to know myself.

 

Basically, the gist of it all is that there is not enough time to even begin to play any of the games the way that they should be played, certainly can't play all of them that way. Due to time constraints, there is no way to get my money's worth out of them, so I had to come up with a plan.

 

The first thing I did to get more time to play my favorite games was to stop playing the console games. My children have dozens of console games, and I refuse to play any of them. Suddenly there is more time to play my most favorite PC games.

 

The next step in my evolution was to stop buying every PC game that came out. I never liked the RPG puzzle games like Myst, so stopped buying them.

 

Instead, I subscribed to Computer Gaming World, and I only considered the strategy games and Wing Commander and Mech Warrior type that were at the top of the list in their respective categories. If you buy only the best rated or consider only the best rated, it saves you the headache of slogging through junk and getting frustrated.

 

Since then, I tended to pick up hoards of games on closeout or in the bargain bin, and never play any of them, due to lack of time. At around the same time, I noticed that I personally have motion sickness issues, which led to my decision never to buy or play first person shooters, since the motion always made me sick. It took a decade before I finally had a computer that was fast enough to play Unreal Tournament with a high enough framerate without making me sick. Higher framerates postpones the time to motion sickness. So, Unreal Tournament is the only FPS that I have ever really played since Doom, and the feel of Unreal Tournament on my 3ghz computer is just right, and UT 2004 is now the one that gives me the sickly motion sickness thing rather quickly, which explains why I would rather play the original. I won't play or buy any of the other FPS.

 

Finally, I realized that I prefer strategy games, so the last couple of years, I only buy strategy games, and with the exception of Aftermath, I only by the strategy games that make it towards the top of the charts.

 

So, Dawn of War, C&C Generals, Warcraft III, Red Alert 2, and Battle for Middle Earth. Dow, C&C Generals, Red Alert 2, and even Warcraft are better than Battle for Middle Earth in my opinion.

 

I spent some time with Total War, Heroes of Might and Magic, and the two Diablos, which I really haven't gone back to. I used to love Wing Commander and Wing Commander Prophecy and Mech Warrior series, but I haven't pulled out my joystick for a very long time. Wing Commander Prophecy doesn't play right under Windows XP.

 

Instead, spent a lot of time with Starcraft and Total Annihilation, which I try to get back to as frequently as possible. And, I still crave to go back to Red Alert 2, C&C Generals, Tiberian Sun, and Emperor Battle for Dune, but never seem to find time.

 

I liked the Homeworld series, kind of strategy and third person shooter - I'm into space art. But, I only got through Homeworld and ORB either part way or only once. Still, I wish there were time to go back.

 

Ten years ago, I lived X-Com and the sequels, which is the only reason why I tried Aftermath. Aftermath wasn't as satisfying as those others, in my humble opinion, but I did put a lot of time into Aftermath trying out the mods.

 

To summarize, the answer to Aralez's question is multifold. It comes down to preferences, finances, one's tolerance level, hardware, and most of all time. There's enough out there now, that you could spend the remainder of your life playing games and never get to it all.

[Aralez]

Lurker, in parts of your text i can find myself. Not buying all bargain games anmyore, focusing on only 2 or 3 games, etc., ....sounds like me

 

Regarding motion sickness: When i got Doom 1 (and 2) i played it for several hours without pause (and if i say several i mean 10+!!!) After i stopped i still had the rythm of the walk from the game in my mind, somehow my body had adapted to the ups and downs somehow ! Felt like being on a ship for some weks and then returning to land, your body got so adapted to the waves, that you will still feel them for some hours.

[shagpuss]

A ur Krazeee!

[Lurker]

I always get motion sickness in a car unless I'm driving. And sail boating is the sickest I have ever gotten. I thought I was going to die after going sailing. Never again.

 

I do better with space simulators and flight simulators. I like flying in the real life small aircraft, as long as I can see outside what's going on. Brother-in-law has a pilot's license, and went up with him over San Francisco. And as a teenager, I had a mentor who had a plane and a license and took us up over the mountains doing acrobatics in his plane. I found it enjoyable. And, I always liked the feel of a joystick in the computer games.

 

But, some of the first person shooters almost give me a claustrophobic feeling, like the world is closing in on me or the ceiling is going to fall down on me.

 

Now, Unreal Tournament was doable for me, and for long periods of time, before the motion sickness started to come. But whether playing for a long time or for a short time, UT did indeed give me what I call the buzz. I felt like I was still in there running, killing, jumping, and blasting long after I turned the computer off and walked away.

[Aralez]

I had the "car problem", too, as a child. But somehow it vanished. Maybe Doom cured me

[Zager]

HL2 beatiful graphics but dissapointing storyline as it leaves massive holes in the story

 

What holes? The full story isn't obvious, but if you spend time in the game looking carefully, you can find answers to most of your questions. Besides, it's not meant to be a full story, it's the middle of a story, not the conclusion of one.

[Kernel]

What holes? The full story isn't obvious, but if you spend time in the game looking carefully, you can find answers to most of your questions. Besides, it's not meant to be a full story, it's the middle of a story, not the conclusion of one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I totaly agree with you. The problem is that a lot of people (ie "The console generation") now want quick games with very obvious story lines. They want everything given to them on a plate and they get annoyed when they have to explore a little to find out what's going on.

 

That why games now don't last very long... because you get the story in one lump on the first play through and there's nothing left to explore when you play it again. Unfortunalty I think we will see an increasing number of these games in the future because these games sell a lot and that means more money for Developers/Publishers.

[The Veteran]

I'm coming into this late but I just got my hands on a copy of Doom3 for £20

 

I've been playing it a lot but that's because I haven't completed it yet! I forgot how repetetive that genre gets though... I'm getting so bored of the identical levels, why can't we at least go out of the main complex! At least the old games in the genre had alien dimensions, planets, cities and all sorts. Not just labs...

[Aralez]

Doom 3 has NO replay value. Once you have beaten the final monster, you can delete it. imo. HL-2 is similar, i tried to play it a second time (with cheats that time) and surprisingly it is even more linear than Doom 3 !!!! Even Duke-Nukem 3D had more freedom of choice....

[Ki-tat Chung]

it has been oft percieved that in the modern age, producers and developers have abandoned the story, and opted for graphics. well anyway, i personally havn't tried either doom3 or hl2, so i can't comment, but aparently, hl2 was made linier, and is more of a story you just play though.

just for kicks, if anyone's interested, go check out this. courtesy of BB, thanks for telling me about this site!

[Zager]

but aparently, hl2 was made linier

 

A first person shooter that was linear? Why I've never heard of such a thing!

[Ki-tat Chung]

well wouldn't you have to follow a storyline of some sort?