With the
release of Doom 3 this week, one of the most anticipated games in the history of the world saw the end
of a massive five-year development cycle. Why have hordes of gamers, both casual and "hardcore", been
waiting so long with so much hope for this title? The answer lies back in 1994, when the original
Doom was released, initially as shareware over modem-based computer bulletin board systems and
ultimately ending up on store shelves. The empire that Doom built became the empire that is iD, so
it's of crucial importance at this point in gaming history, to remember why exactly it was that Doom
was so impressive. It is my goal to show just how poorly this new incarnation lives up to its
predecessors.Doom had
graphics that were unheard of at the time, presenting the first-person perspective in a way that
seemed more engaging than previous efforts. True, Wolfenstein 3D predates Doom by two years, but not
only did it lack the market permeation that Doom saw, the gameplay was significantly slower, and
altogether different than the experience Doom provided. It was that experience that kept the franchise
alive not only through two actual sequels (Doom II: Hell on Earth and Final Doom) but also any number
of repacks offering only a few new levels or minor modifications (Such as Ultimate Doom).
So, after taking Doom to the
next logical level, true 3d, with the Quake series, iD went "back to the lab" for five years and
sequestered themselves away, promising that their next title, Doom 3, would be a true successor to the
series. And people believed. And waited. And waited. Waited for a game that not only promised to
offer unprecedented levels of realism in terms of visuals, but for a game they hoped would provide the
same fresh, new experience that Doom had in 1994.
This is not that game.
Undeniably, the graphics and sound are
unbelievable. You've undoubtedly seen the endless screenshots and gameplay movies at this point.
Even on a pretty modest system, Doom 3 has a distinct look that's both gritty and realistic, to the
point of seeming like a pre-rendered movie in places. However, ingenuity is where Doom 3 falls flat
on its face.
The gameplay here is at least 5 years out of date. "Emergent Gameplay", that is,
the idea of non-scripted events that just happen as a result of world complexity, are nowhere to be
found here. Instead, expect doors that open as soon as you have walked passed them, lights that
darken as soon as you've picked up an ammo belt, and all the other scripted events that haven't seemed
original since, well, since Doom.
Is it fair to come down so hard on a game for being a copy of
itself? That's an interesting question, but, sadly, one that doesn't really apply - one of the main
features that gave Doom its longevity after players had killed every demon themselves was a
cooperative multiplayer mode that let a team of marines work through the single player game in unison.
That would have worked perfectly in this game, but iD elected to leave the co-op play out. Perhaps
they knew that a user-made modification to allow co-op was one of the first things that would be
developed, but if that's the case, I say to them, "Shame on you!" Any game, but especially one with a
$54.99 price tag, should be complete out of box, and it really is my opinion that Doom 3 without
cooperative multiplayer represents an incomplete product. It should come as no surprise that one of
the "exclusive features" being hyped for the Xbox version is co-op.
In fact, the multiplayer
modes in general are extremely lackluster. The official server only supports 4 players at once, which
strikes me as completely ludicrous. An iD representative was quoted several days before release on
the topic, citing the large overhead of the engine as a reason that most servers wouldn't be able to
handle more than 4 people without chugging, but I think that has to be false ñ this is the same
technology that Ravensoft is going to use to bring use Quake IV, and you can be very sure that that
game will feature 32 player arenas if not more.
I should, at this point, take the time to
mention that just as all the features from the original Doom have not made the transition to this new
game, there are, in fact, a few gameplay mechanics in Doom 3 that the earlier games did not have: a
flashlight, which looks and works suspiciously like Half-Life's flashlight, as well as health stations
that bring the health and HEV stations from Half-Life to mind. The monsters show a strong influence
from games like Undying and Silent Hill. Oh yeah, and you can look up and down this time, just like
every other FPS. My point, of course, being, that in addition to being influenced by their own
earlier projects, iD has ripped off pretty much every successful FPS since Doom in one way or another,
and worked those elements into Doom 3 with varying degrees of success.
Another thing that
really bothered me is that while there are some Deus Ex like narrative elements in the form of PDAs
that you find containing video discs and email, sometimes these mechanics actually work to distance
the player from the game. Twice within the first 4 hours of Doom 3, I received an in-game email with
a web address on it, requiring me to save, exit the system, launch a browser, and then go back into
Doom and sit though that long initial load again seemingly needlessly.
While the levels look
very nice, they don't exactly hold together as cohesive environments. iD must have spent a lot of
time modeling pipes for this game: in fact, it would seem to me that they must have had a department
of artists working round the clock all five years doing nothing but producing pipe-related assets.
Seems everywhere you look, there's a giant pipe with sixteen smaller pipes coming out of it. What are
all these pipes carrying? They're not labeled "hot water" or anything like the pipes in Half-Life.
Sure, they add a sense of.... Something..... but it's hard to say just exactly what. And the overall
layout of the base is enough to give MC Escher a headache: you don't think about it too much as you
fly from room to room, but when you realize that you've been to nine floors and only seen 1 bathroom
but 3 kitchens, something is amiss. Looking at the maps in the official Prima guide didn't help much,
either: it made the environment more accessible, but it still doesn't really feel like anything that
would actually be constructed (although those of you familiar with William Gibson's book Neuromancer
may find a striking similarity between the Martian base in Doom and Gibson's descriptions of the
Straylight facility).
All in all, there isn't much else to say about Doom 3. Graphically,
we've defiantly reached yet another milestone in the history of video games, but that's something we
do every few months anyway. In terms of gameplay, the Serious Sam games remain at the top of my list
of Doom ñ clones: even though the graphics pale in comparison to Doom 3, the games are still more
fun, and I believe the same can be said for Painkiller. And if you're looking for a fun, cohesive
singleplayer FPS with gorgeous graphics and decent multiplayer to boot, you don't have to look any
further than the recently released FarCry. In summary, Doom 3 is a game you should buy if you're
looking for the new Killer App to show off your 600 dollar video card, or if you're such an addict of
Doom-style gameplay that you still play Doom95 on a regular basis. Everyone else might be well
advised to check out the games that I have mentioned above, or just keep their fingers crossed and
hope Valve avoids the trap iD sprang with Doom 3, with their upcoming release of Half-Life
2.