I think Doom 3 is a good game based strictly upon its own merits. It's just not a great representation of the classic Doom.
>>336405805
I think Doom 3 has no merits, other than looking ridiculously awesome back in the days, and thus pushing the PC tech forward by a mile, alongside with HL2.
every element it has is merely a cheap ripoff of some other product, and the meat and bone of any FPS game, the shooting, is extremely badly done.
>>336405805
>It's just not a great representation of the classic Doom.
Correct.
Neither is D44M.
But D44M looks more like the original than Doom 3.
bamp
>>336405805
I have thought something like this with RE4
it is a good game of its own merits, but not a good representative of name before that time
The computer interfaces in this game were fucking sweet.
the RE* name
>>336407219
>D44M
Please, fucking stop.
>>336405805
>not a good representation of Doom
I actually partially disagree with this. I think the game was a good representation of a very specific aspect of Doom.
>Lighting Engine
Doom was pretty revolutionary when it cam out because of its vector-based lighting system. It was really showcased in E1M2 in the maze-like computer room with strobe lighting. This is VERY similar to the effect Doom 3 tried to invoke.
Have we gotten a definitive yes or no on splitscreen multiplayer for Doom 4? Because it looks like it would actually be a great splitscreen deathmatch game to play with friends, especially with the Timesplitters-style mapmaker.
>>336409128
What people tend to forget about RE4, though, is that when it released people were sick to death of classic RE. The series had become incredibly formulaic.
