Doom 3: Remakes suck... don't they?

[Martymer]

I'm gonna pretend that you're an old geezer like myself (ie almost 30), who were not only alive back in the mid 90s, but actually old enough to play PC games aimed at a (relatively) mature audience. In 1994 I got my first PC. My own, that is. Yay! My own computer! Time to install some serious shit that I don't intend to let my parents know about! So, dirty pictures... and Doom.

Oh, man... Those pics... Erhm, anyway... Doom was the game that everyone was talking about. It had been around for a year or so, but it was still really popular. For those who weren't around back then (or weren't old enough at the time), Doom was basically the game that made the FPS genre. If wasn't the first FPS, nor the first good FPS, but it was the first game that showed just how awesome an FPS can get. This is because it used the first person perspective to create a sense of horror. The often poor lighting conditions and cramped claustrophobia-inducing environments, combined with enemies often waiting in ambush or spawning right behind you, really got the adrenaline pumping. It was unlike any game I'd played before, and everyone I knew of who played it, felt the same way.

The game takes place in the future, in a station on Mars (well, the moons of Mars, actually). The station has been taken over by monsters from Hell (!!). All the humans around have been turned into zombies (or something like that... they use guns, oddly enough). Now, you're a bad-ass space marine. You know the drill. Here's a gun. Go nuts. Being used to the child-friendly, soccer mom-pleasing games of the SNES, I played this game with a constant smile on my face. Oh, cool! When I hit someone, there's actually blood showing! What's this? A shotgun? Bang! Splat! O.O ... ... *drool*... Oh, look... A chainsaw... Who needs dirty pictures?

But, hey, this was about Doom 3, wasn't it? Well, yeah. But, actually, Doom 3 is a remake of the original Doom (Doom 2 essentially just being a bunch of new levels for Doom, released shortly after the orginal). This was supposed to be the original Doom, but with modern graphics and modern FPS controls. Naturally, I bought it as soon as it was released, not giving a damn about what the reviewers were saying: This. Game. Sucks. Were they right? Well...

The first two things that hit me were that the graphics were awesome, and that this "remake" has a story. So it's not a faithful remake. Doom has no story! Doom is mindless action! So, after the opening cutscene there's an introduction sequence, where I don't even get a weapon. Where are the demons from Hell!? Why are there NPCs everywhere? Stop with the story BS and let me shoot some zombies! By now, I'd totally forgotten about the awesome graphics. Seriously. This wasn't Doom with modern graphics. It was just another cookie-cutter FPS. And that was how I felt all through the game.

Granted, Doom 3 has an atmosphere of horror, and the adrenaline does start pumping on a number of occasions, but it just doesn't come close to the original. A few things that were intended to make the experience more scary, actually just made it annoying. The flashlight is the perfect example. In the original, there was no flashlight. In the remake, you can equip a flashlight instead of a weapon. Instead. What dumbass though that would be a good idea? Instead of biting my nails, wondering whether I should unequip my shotgun before I go around the next corner, so that I might see the enemy that I now won't be able to shoot (which was clearly the point), I'm facepalming, wondering why the hell I can't duct-tape the flashlight to my shotgun. Or have the pistol in one hand and the flashlight in the other! Or attach the flashlight to my body armor! It's like in a bad horror movie. "Dumbass *****! You know he's in there! Don't open the door! No, don't op... Told you so." Not scary. Just dumb. On a topic closely related to the flashlight, the game relies way too much on darkness. It gets to the point that you just feel frustrated, as if the bad lighting is the result of a bug or poor level design. Used sparingly, it would have worked, but it's over-done.

Another issue I have is that some enemies, such as the imps, are quite faithfully recreated from the original. That's not as good as it sounds. The imps still throw fireballs, just like they used to. *Just* like they used to. Slowly, that is. In the original, at least to my knowledge, it wasn't possible to circle strafe (not as we think of it today, anyway), and that meant that dodging = not aiming at the baddie anymore. With modern controls, that causes a balance issue, that I don't think was properly compensated for. Several issues like this, plus a crappy enemy AI (that also seems faithfully recreated from the 1993 game...) results in a game that isn't really that challenging.

But is it a bad game? I mean, remakes suck, right? No. It's not bad. It's a disappointment because of the nostalgia involved, and even on its own it's not great, but it's not bad. I don't regret buying it. I'll give this a grade of "meh". I don't recommend it, but I'm not recommending that you avoid it, either. It's OK. But that's it.

 

[oliveira8]

When I think of Doom 3, I think of how the future will suck. The Human race will go to Mars but they cannot attach flashlights to their guns or suits.

The future sucks ass...

Damn flashlights.

 

[manaman]

Doom 3 had its moments, but I never thought of it a remake. They are different games. That would be like saying the movie was anything more then loosely based on what someone thought the story to Doom was.

The original Doom did have a story. It was both in the manual, and if you pirated the game or only played the shareware first episode was included in a text file on the game disk, of course then you didn't get any of the nice pictures.

Of course the story was damn simple. You are a space marine who is a bit of trouble so you get shipped off to the moons of Mars, where they are doing some tests. They open gates to hell, monsters flood out, peril and doom ( snicker- *snort*) and well this is really starting to sound like the start of Doom 3. Maybe it was a remake.

Then again after the fist episode our marine friend goes to hell, then eventually ends up fighting the legions of evil on a hell on earth.

Doom 2 was not just new levels, there was a lot of new content. It also expanded on the story in the manual.

You can tell I played more then my fair share of that game as a kid. It was my favorite game for years and did a lot to bring me back into gaming, also basically introduced me to PC gaming. Having played so many games of the time I can tell you that most of them included a long story in the manual, and this usually included interesting maps, and pamphlets in the game box. It made up for the fact that they could not tell this in the game itself. Mantis might actually be the first game I remember having cut scenes that where acted. There was also Dune, with scenes from the movie.

 

[iblis666]

http://www.amazon.com/Endgame-Novel-Dafydd-ab-Hugh/dp/0671525662/ref=pd_sim_b_1

the original doom had a simple but good story for its time that was then fleshed out and then totally screwed over by 3 and 4 of the book series that was based on the books

 

[Zer_]

When I think of Doom 3, I think of how the future will suck. The Human race will go to Mars but they cannot attach flashlights to their guns or suits.

The future sucks ass...

Damn flashlights.

Haha, this. Doom 3 was one of those games that suffered because the developers put graphics ahead of gameplay.

Uh no. A huge amount of effort and time went into fleshing out world around you in Doom 3. For those of you who didn't really care about the story, you were given the option of ignoring the various PDAs and background story. Of course you were presented with a few cut scenes here and there, but they were kept brief and to the point.

Doom 3 took a very Half-Life like approach to the storytelling which was a good thing. My first playthrough of Doom 3 was quick and right to the end. I ignored most PDAs unless I had to find a code of sorts. I missed out on massive amounts of data and backstory to the entire Mars Facility. Of course Doom 3's Multiplayer was bad, so I uninstalled the game and dismissed it as "decent".

My second playthrough was about a year later. This time around I took my time in playing the game, I stopped and explored every nook and cranny. I picked up every PDA and read them all. I listened to all the audio logs and took the time to appreciate a lot of the careful consideration that went into populating the entire facility with the ghostly voices and text of dwellers past.

A vast majority of gamers are quite hypocritical when they judge Doom 3's usage of audio logs and PDAs to tell a story. Gamers praised the story delivery of Dead Space's use of PDAs while completely ignoring Doom 3's use of it. Personally I found that Doom 3's delivery was better done. If you wanted a pure remake of Doom with better graphics, then just get JDoom and Doomsday. Let's face it, had they simply done that the game would not have sold nearly as well.

 

[Martymer]

Doom 3 had its moments, but I never thought of it a remake. They are different games. That would be like saying the movie was anything more then loosely based on what someone thought the story to Doom was.

Yeah, well, that's not what was said at the time. Doom 3 was pitched as "Doom (1), the way it would have been done today". I call that a remake. Had they called the game something else, I would agree I with you, though.

The original Doom did have a story. It was both in the manual, and if you pirated the game or only played the shareware first episode was included in a text file on the game disk, of course then you didn't get any of the nice pictures.

Of course the story was damn simple. *snip*

I know. I read it. So I'll correct myself and say that Doom has no in-game storytelling, unless you count the text screens at the end of each episode.

Doom 2 was not just new levels, there was a lot of new content. It also expanded on the story in the manual.

True, there was a lot of new stuff in all those new levels, but it was still the same game. Just new content. Today, it would have been sold as an expansion and not as a stand-alone title. That's what I meant. In no way did I mean to imply that it was a bad game that only deserves to be mentioned because it's part of a series. Personally, unfortunately, I only got my hands on it several years after the orginal, which means I'm probably not seeing it in the same light as you are. At the time I was like, "This is just new stuff for Doom 1! Screw it, I'm going back to Duke3d!". I did play it quite a bit, eventually, but I never finished it.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

When I think of Doom 3, I think of how the future will suck. The Human race will go to Mars but they cannot attach flashlights to their guns or suits.

The future sucks ass...

Damn flashlights.

Haha, this. Doom 3 was one of those games that suffered because the developers put graphics ahead of gameplay.

Uh no. A huge amount of effort and time went into fleshing out world around you in Doom 3. For those of you who didn't really care about the story, you were given the option of ignoring the various PDAs and background story. Of course you were presented with a few cut scenes here and there, but they were kept brief and to the point.

Doom 3 took a very Half-Life like approach to the storytelling which was a good thing. My first playthrough of Doom 3 was quick and right to the end. I ignored most PDAs unless I had to find a code of sorts. I missed out on massive amounts of data and backstory to the entire Mars Facility. Of course Doom 3's Multiplayer was bad, so I uninstalled the game and dismissed it as "decent".

My second playthrough was about a year later. This time around I took my time in playing the game, I stopped and explored every nook and cranny. I picked up every PDA and read them all. I listened to all the audio logs and took the time to appreciate a lot of the careful consideration that went into populating the entire facility with the ghostly voices and text of dwellers past.

A vast majority of gamers are quite hypocritical when they judge Doom 3's usage of audio logs and PDAs to tell a story. Gamers praised the story delivery of Dead Space's use of PDAs while completely ignoring Doom 3's use of it. Personally I found that Doom 3's delivery was better done. If you wanted a pure remake of Doom with better graphics, then just get JDoom and Doomsday. Let's face it, had they simply done that the game would not have sold nearly as well.

First off, nothing you've said has any bearing on *gameplay*, which Doom 3 was sparse on. Sure, there were audio logs, and a (really bad) story. But the actual gameplay was bland, the weapons were uninspired, the flashlight mechanic was lame, and was yet another piece of the "fake" horror that filled the whole game.

It got to the point where any time I opened a door I knew that I'd walk to the middle of the room, the lights would go out, and enemies would spawn in front of me and behind me to my right. Repeat. That's bad design. Monster closets are bad design. The Soul Cube in general was bad design. The game was trying to be scary, but all it achieved was "hard to see ugly things will jump out at you screaming a lot".

All that said, I did feel that they did a passable job with some parts of the Hell levels.

- J

 

[Zer_]

*Snip*

The Doom closets as they are called are just that, Doom Closets. The idea of a Doom closet was born with Doom. Quite frankly there are too many, but it's not that bad.

Plus there wasn't a demon around every corner. Sometimes I'd hesitate on getting some ammunition only to find nothing happens. And gameplay wise, the game is fine. Actually having a flashlight attached to your guns would only serve to break the balance. I could understand them putting the flashlight on the pistol alone, but then again, it's not something that bothered me at all. I never found myself frantically switching between the flashlight and whatever weapon I'd be using at the time. I simply learned to fight in the dark.

I don't understand how the Soul Cube is bad design either. Please elaborate on this a little more.

In my first playthrough I was a bit on-edge. I wouldn't say I was scared, but I don't think the game was trying to achieve a sort of Resident Evil/Silent Hill-like fear at all. After the first few levels the game takes a more action-like approach akin to the previous Doom titles.

 

[The Jabberwock]

Naturally, I bought it as soon as it was released, not giving a damn about what the reviewers were saying: This. Game. Sucks.

http://www.gamerankings.com/pc/469881-doom-3/index.html
The reviewers said it was great. I give it a 7.

Also, it is one of, if not the, scariest game I've ever played.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

The Doom closets as they are called are just that, Doom Closets. The idea of a Doom closet was born with Doom. Quite frankly there are too many, but it's not that bad.

Monster closets are bad design. You can dress it up any way you like, but even you are forced to admit that there's too many.

I never found myself frantically switching between the flashlight and whatever weapon I'd be using at the time. I simply learned to fight in the dark.

I bet you typed that with a straight face. I bet you didn't even realize that you just admitted why the flashlight was bad design. BECAUSE YOU DID NOT USE IT. If you learn to fight in the dark, then the flashlight is useless, and you're just playing a game with a broken gamma setting.

I don't understand how the Soul Cube is bad design either. Please elaborate on this a little more.

This breaks down to personal taste. I thought the Soul Cube was badly built for a shooting game. Kill five guys and get an instant one-hit kill on almost anything is something I'd expect to see in Mega Man. Nevermind that actually using it looks stupid.

In my first playthrough I was a bit on-edge. I wouldn't say I was scared, but I don't think the game was trying to achieve a sort of Resident Evil/Silent Hill-like fear at all. After the first few levels the game takes a more action-like approach akin to the previous Doom titles.

The developers' exact words were "We want to scare the hell out of people."

They failed. Then again, I periodically hear folks talk about how the game was "So Scary", so maybe they only failed for people who can recognize basic patterns, like the aforementioned spawning when the lights go out.

Don't get me wrong. I wanted to like Doom3. I loved Doom and Doom2, and for the time, the graphics blew me away, but what id gave me was a very pretty game with boring weapons, a broken lighting mechanic, repetitive level design (for the most part), and uninspired enemies. It was heartbreaking.

- J

 

[Gerazzi]

When I think of Doom 3, I think of how the future will suck. The Human race will go to Mars but they cannot attach flashlights to their guns or suits.

The future sucks ass...

Damn flashlights.

they have mods that fix that though, but you lose your warranty.

 

[BiscuitsJoe]

I agree with Yahtzee about Doom 3. It's like it tripped over the lighting switch and forgot it wasn't System Shock. Awful awful game, and a frustrating mess to run on my crappy computer.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

As for remakes... two words: Fallout Three.

Remakes never work out unless they keep the core of the original intact. Sadly most times the designers of the remakes are always trying to add their own personal touch or *gag* 'artistic inspiration' then keeping the to the original.

 

[danosaurus]

When I think of Doom 3, I think of how the future will suck. The Human race will go to Mars but they cannot attach flashlights to their guns or suits.

The future sucks ass...

Damn flashlights.

Haha, this. Doom 3 was one of those games that suffered because the developers put graphics ahead of gameplay.

Uh no. A huge amount of effort and time went into fleshing out world around you in Doom 3. For those of you who didn't really care about the story, you were given the option of ignoring the various PDAs and background story. Of course you were presented with a few cut scenes here and there, but they were kept brief and to the point.

Doom 3 took a very Half-Life like approach to the storytelling which was a good thing. My first playthrough of Doom 3 was quick and right to the end. I ignored most PDAs unless I had to find a code of sorts. I missed out on massive amounts of data and backstory to the entire Mars Facility. Of course Doom 3's Multiplayer was bad, so I uninstalled the game and dismissed it as "decent".

My second playthrough was about a year later. This time around I took my time in playing the game, I stopped and explored every nook and cranny. I picked up every PDA and read them all. I listened to all the audio logs and took the time to appreciate a lot of the careful consideration that went into populating the entire facility with the ghostly voices and text of dwellers past.

A vast majority of gamers are quite hypocritical when they judge Doom 3's usage of audio logs and PDAs to tell a story. Gamers praised the story delivery of Dead Space's use of PDAs while completely ignoring Doom 3's use of it. Personally I found that Doom 3's delivery was better done. If you wanted a pure remake of Doom with better graphics, then just get JDoom and Doomsday. Let's face it, had they simply done that the game would not have sold nearly as well.

That's a lot of defense for what I consider to be an mundanely executed game. Granted, there was a lot of hype and that would've amounted to a lot of pressure on the developers but I mean.. come on, it's Doom.

The problem with Doom 3 is that there was little, to no variety in terms of immersion, environment or level design. I understand your point about the story and the method of being told but I feel that's a bit arbitrary when the game can't even hold it's own in terms of immersion.
Everything in Doom 3 seemed to suffer greatly from 'this corridor A looks exactly like Corridor B', wait a minute, that's totally the same corridor but with a hell knight in it. As well as this, you get the annoyingly placed 'Boo!' scare attempts by zombies hiding around corners. I think the only good horror placement in the game was early on when an Imp crawls its way through an exposed vent to attack you, seeing as this is a scripted event though - it loses any credibility after the first time you encounter it.
In terms of level design, I know it's meant to be set on a mining station but they could've done more than add spawning baddies in to spice things up. Games like Halo and Half-life are all set in similar locations and look how much replay value those games produce! In my opinion, Doom 3 was just bland level design coupled with bland gameplay.

 

[danosaurus]

snip

snip

I bet you typed that with a straight face. I bet you didn't even realize that you just admitted why the flashlight was bad design. BECAUSE YOU DID NOT USE IT. If you learn to fight in the dark, then the flashlight is useless, and you're just playing a game with a broken gamma setting.

snip

snip

Don't get me wrong. I wanted to like Doom3. I loved Doom and Doom2, and for the time, the graphics blew me away, but what id gave me was a very pretty game with boring weapons, a broken lighting mechanic, repetitive level design (for the most part), and uninspired enemies. It was heartbreaking.

- J

What he said^

 

[Zer_]

As for remakes... two words: Fallout Three.

Remakes never work out unless they keep the core of the original intact. Sadly most times the designers of the remakes are always trying to add their own personal touch or *gag* 'artistic inspiration' then keeping the to the original.

A remake of Doom 1 wouldn't have worked out. Many of these "personal touches" are usually more modern ideas and features that are thrown into the mix. A vast majority of gamers hate remakes because all they seem to want is the same exact game with updated graphics... Let's face it, if that's how remakes were done; they'd be even worse.

Also: Fallout Three is not a remake at all... It's not even a sequel really. Each Fallout game is a different story from the same universe. Had Fallout 3 remained turn based, though it wouldn't have sold half as well.

 

[the_dancy_vagrant]

The hugest gripe I have about this game has everything to do with atmosphere - while they did an excellent job on making the graphics very pretty and immersive, they picked some of the worst weapons sound effects I have ever heard. The main offender is the 'assault' rifle. That thing sounded more like a sped up potato gun than any actual firearm.

Come to think of it, there was no workhorse gun in that game - I found myself constantly switching around as I grew frustrated with each new weapon I picked up for being far too rare not to conserve ammo, far too weak to get the job done, or far too likely to kill me if I fired it at the next imp that popped out of the floor every 30 seconds.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

A remake of Doom 1 wouldn't have worked out. Many of these "personal touches" are usually more modern ideas and features that are thrown into the mix. A vast majority of gamers hate remakes because all they seem to want is the same exact game with updated graphics... Let's face it, if that's how remakes were done; they'd be even worse.

Also: Fallout Three is not a remake at all... It's not even a sequel really. Each Fallout game is a different story from the same universe. Had Fallout 3 remained turn based, though it wouldn't have sold half as well.

One isn't saying that these touches are a bad thing IF the original ideals are kept intact. For Fallout 3 they completely ignored that core and I am not talking about turned based game play here. The layout of the missions was pathetic, if you do just the core you would miss about half the places on the map! The 'monsters' are in no progression at all, meaning they had to 'Nerf' these monsters so they could be defeated by someone who had just strolled out of a vault with nothing more then a pistol to their name. Let us not forget the biggest thing about Fallout 3 they screwed up, your actions in the world meant squat thanks to the pathetic excuse for a ending. Back story was completely ignored in favor of making the monsters nothing more then 'mindless bad guys.' None of these things needed to be lost, it was just a bad game development crew who had no respect for the series.

Doom 3 was even harder to screw up on, the core was nothing more then mindless slaughter of demons. But somehow they managed to screw that up, given the fact this thread exists and many on it seem to agree. By trying to give the game a half arsed plot line they made something which shouldn't be branded with the doom title. All the fans wanted for this series was a bunch of new maps, better graphics and maybe a new gun or two. Anything more stopped it from being Doom and started it becoming a completely different game entirely.

After all it wouldn't be able to live up to the hype, one of the largest problems with remakes, because it was too different to the memories of all the older fan boys out there.