Doug Heffernan
Member
Exactly what I would expect vintage Doom to look like in 2016. They did good.
New screen from Gameinformer's coverage, another update on Jan. 11:
![]()
They need a more classic look. I would run as far from the Doom 3 art style as possible.
Is this a Doom 3 mod?
Wow, I fucking love this screenshot.
![]()
this looks like those ATI cards cgi boxart circa 2001
Its a legit trade off tho
Doom3 was amazing visually but also sacrificed the gameplay that folks fell in love with
I think Doom2016 looks excellent and IS bringing back that gameplay
In the first screen the hose is not reflected in the water puddle
In the 7th screen only the first chamber emits red light
Is this going to have VR features?
Why? I didn't necessarily love a lot of Doom 3's enemy designs, but the environments were great.
But it was in Doom 3!What a shame htey never added an archvile to Doom 3, it fits in perfectly with that aesthetic.
But it was in Doom 3!
![]()
Though they didn't resurrect enemies, they just summoned more.
But it was in Doom 3!
![]()
Though they didn't resurrect enemies, they just summoned more.
If I remember correctly, enemies' corpses vaporize on death in Doom 3. It could have been a certain scene when it happens though. But the closest animation I can think of is humans been possessed by lost souls.Are you sure? I feel like I've seen an enemy get resurrected with this big flashy animation that lifts the enemy up Advent Rising style, and then they come back to life.
Thought it's been like 7 years since I played Doom 3.
Wait, what? How in the fuck did I not remember this? Did I block it from my mind?!
The colouration on the Cacodemons and enemies in general was my main gripe with the graphics initially. It's good to see they've listened. I'm still not sold on the level design and gameplay but they've definitely moved closer to getting the look of Doom right since the reveal.Those are proper fucking Cacodemons!
To be fair, Doom 3 was ahead of its time.I don't see a huge difference... considering Doom 3 is 12 years old.
Cocademons then and now
Kinda wish they'd retained the fatness of the original.
Expansion for Doom 3.
Ah.... that is why. I have only played through the RoE until a bit after you get the SSG.Expansion for Doom 3.
Doom 3 targetted barley existing hardware and Doom (4) is targetting low end hardware @ 60fps.To be fair, Doom 3 was ahead of its time.
I'm not sure... i mean FarCry 1 was already out and it had comparable graphics and in some ways it was even better (lush foliage, large open environments, better physics, etc). IMO at least.To be fair, Doom 3 was ahead of its time.
I'm not sure... i mean FarCry 1 was already out and it had comparable graphics and in some ways it was even better (lush foliage, large open environments, better physics, etc). IMO at least.
I want to see Spider Mastermind in new Doom. Don't know why they didn't put that beautiful monster in Doom 3.its concept was awesome!
![]()
And this blue creature in tech demos was amazing too.
![]()
Yeah but i forgot to mention Riddick (edited). That game had almost just as good lighting as Doom 3 and i think it was an earlier game too. It was also lighter since it could run on XBOX without sacrifices (the flashlight in Doom 3 on XBOX doesn't cast shadows).AFAIK Doom 3's light and shadow rendering weren't matched by Source and CryEngine on a technical level, id Tech 4 introducing a far more complex method of unified shadow volumes and pixel lighting. It was unlike anything else out there.
I think! that CryEngine 1 (that engine from Far Cry) had stencil volume support (as well as bump mapping of course) that was used in a number of indoor scenes; which is basically that same thing doom 3 is doing. It probably is done in a different way though.AFAIK Doom 3's light and shadow rendering weren't matched by Source and CryEngine on a technical level, id Tech 4 introducing a far more complex method of unified shadow volumes and pixel lighting. It was unlike anything else out there.
In our first title Far Cry we had shadow maps and projected shadows per object for the sun shadows. We suffered from typical shadow map aliasing quality issues but it was a good choice at that time. For performance reasons we pre-computed vegetation shadows but memory restrictions limited us to very blurry textures. For high end hardware configurations we added shadow maps even to vegetation but combining them with the pre-computed solution was flawed. We used stencil shadows for point lights as that were an easier and more efficient solution. CPU skinning allowed shadow silhouette extraction on the CPU and the GPU rendered the stencil shadows. It became obvious that this technique would become a problem the more detailed objects we wanted to render. It relied on CPU skinning, required extra CPU computation, an upload to GPU, extra memory for the edge data structures and had hardly predictable performance characteristics. The missing support for alpha-blended or tested shadow casters made this technique not even usable for the palm trees – an asset that was crucial for the tropical island look (Figure 7).
Riddick too. But you know what, if so many games were ahead of their time... then none really was. Maybe it was the correct time.Far Cry was also ahead of its time.
Old
![]()
New
![]()
While the new version looks improved, the eye color and glowing purple mouth removes the scare factor, the older version would have given me the creeps...
I agreeWhile the new version looks improved, the eye color and glowing purple mouth removes the scare factor, the older version would have given me the creeps...
While the new version looks improved, the eye color and glowing purple mouth removes the scare factor, the older version would have given me the creeps...