User Reviews (1 - 11 of 411)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Doom 3 is crap

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 43 / 59
Date: August 04, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Disclaimer: I didn't play the full game in normal mode. I couldn't bear it. After an hour I turned on all weapons. Another hour and I turned on god mode. Later I just turned on noclip and wandered through the game. I imagine some people are going to fault me for not playing the real game experience. My point is that I'm faulting Id for making me not want to. If a game can't hold my attention enough for me not to do this then its not a good game. If I hadn't been able to do this I wouldn't have bothered finishing. Half-Life, Far Cry, Splinter Cell, GTA, these are all games that made gameplay interesting enough that I didn't feel like "Enough already, take me to the end".
If what you want in a game is basically Doom with shiny surfaces, then you're fine. If you want something new, or even something with a refreshing twist, then aside from the rendering engine you're basically out of luck.

The game is well produced. The voice acting is good. The facial animation is decent. The textures are all very detailed, but you know, the 'fun' bottleneck is no longer in the graphics. Its in the gameplay.

So the big news is the latest rendering engine from Id, the people who brought us the first widely released FPS. Well, I'm sorry to say that from what I've seen the rendering engine is about on par with the Source (Half Life 2), Crytek (Far Cry) and Unreal 3 (upcoming America's Army and Unreal releases) engines. There are probably purists out there that will say I'm insane for this and that Doom 3 does X that none of those others do, or do as well. Well, if I don't notice it when I'm playing it doesn't really matter does it? The most impressive things I saw were the distortions glass caused in anything beyond the glass, and the 'heat distortion' you could see in items that were extremely hot. The glass distortion was interesting for about 5 seconds the first time I saw it, and then distracting the rest of the time. The heat haze was interesting in one level, and almost completely obscured with smoke effects the rest of the time. Yes, the lighting was very nice, but since its mostly used to create vast areas of darkness to 'freak you out', I began to hate the lighting.

Gameplay was tedious. If you're a huge fan of haunted houses, maybe this will appeal. If you're not, this is just going to drive home why you typically don't see haunted houses year round. It seems like every corridor is filled with false panels. It also seems like hell's minions have absolutely nothing better to do than to go wait behind one of those panels, wait for you to walk past and then pop out behind you. This kind of mechanism should be used at most once or twice in a game. Here it shows up every 5 minutes or so.

Level design is repetitive. Carmack talks about how many levels use up to half a gig of textures. Yet the game comes on 3 CDs. Well the easy explanation for this is that the game has about 4 levels. It has the mars base level repeated ad naseum, the underground caverns level (seen for about 2 levels), Hell (seen in one level and basically the end game) and mars base being overrun by hell (1 level) which really isn't original at all but uses a mixture of textures and design from previous levels. All in all, there are maybe 2 really 'Wow' moments when you're looking around you. This isn't bad, except that the rest of the time, for me anyway, it wasn't so much a lack of 'Wow' but a 'Oh god not this again' feeling.

Sound is well used in the game, but then its only used to try to freak you out.

Overall this is the problem. THe game wants to freak you out. And not just a couple of really good scares, but rather it wants you constantly edgy and terrefied. This isn't really what I want in a game, or at least not what I want the entire game to be about. Think about the most suspenseful movie you've ever watched. Now think about the most suspensful 5 minutes of that movie. Now watch that 5 minutes over and over again. Either you're going to get bored or you're going to need medication.

In the end, the original Doom was constrained in its level design and gameplay by the kind of hardware it had to work with. This isn't the case anymore, so id should get off their ass and try either a) just building a rendering enginer licesning it out to someone who can make a good game or b) hiring some new blood for game design in house.

DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME OR $

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 15 / 68
Date: August 10, 2004
Author: Amazon User

incredibly boring, slow paced, long movies and no action.

Lots of Hype, lets see it deliver....

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 22 / 78
Date: October 31, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Ok, im not doubting id, but lets see the game bfore we give it 100 5star reviews......

Lots of hype but it just didn't deliver.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 14 / 23
Date: August 06, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Now it seems that all the die hard Doom 3 fans are going to say this rating sucks, but if you are considering purchasing the game i recommend you read this.

I think that the developers spent a truckload of money advertising this so they could get their money out of it before player reviews came out.

After reading all the online reviews before the game was released, i thought this was going to be one of the best games i have ever played. It wasnt anything near it.

If you are looking for a good multi-player game, this is not it. It would seem to me that the developers spent all of their time working on the single player game. As for single player, it is extremely dark, and you spend half your time switching between your flashlight and gun(because i guess you cant geta flashlight on a gun....and i guess you cant find a roll of tape). I really expected more of a "dive in and start blasting the endless enemies with cool guns" kinda game, but i couldn't be more wrong, the gun are extremely boring, and the enemies even more so. When you arent switching between guns and the flashlight, you are running around in circle looking for a key to get through the endless doors.

I have played this game for two days, and I want to sell it already. I have never regret buying a game as much as I did this one.

So, unless you like running in circles in small dark hallways, I strongly recommend you dont spend your hard earned money on this sad excuse of a game.

Boring, outdated - big yawn!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 14 / 20
Date: August 27, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I've read the reviews which support this game for it's atmospheric dark looks, the use of the flashlight, the weapons, blah, blah - but this game is just absolutely boring.
The graphics aren't all that (yes running it on good machine but it seems a case of the emperors new clothes), the monsters suck...they just come walking or leaping towards you, the weapons aren't even fun to use.
The only thing I can applaud is Activisions sales - by not releasing a demo version they managed to make a lot more money out of people like myself, who would have taken one look and seen what a mediocre game this was for the $50+ price tag.
Loved the first Doom's, loved Half-life, Battlefields, etc - and will go on playing them, Doom 3 I've sold already at a $35 loss.
Big yawn.

Only losers give 5 stars to games they haven't played

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 13 / 34
Date: July 22, 2004
Author: Amazon User

C'mon dudes. My review title says it all. So mark this review as unhelpful just like all the other useless reviews by people who have nothing better to do than assume it will be "awesome dude"

The future is a very dark place with no duct tape.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 13 / 21
Date: August 20, 2004
Author: Amazon User

If you are a fan of first person shooters with any sort of depth look elsewhere. If you are looking for a Farcry/ UT2004 killer look elsewhere. If you are looking for a game that's looks great graphically, has little replay value, and has extremely limited multiplayer then by all means waste your money on this game.

Great game but requires the best PC to run

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 12 / 25
Date: August 03, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I am excited about this game but when i got it today I barely could run on my P4 1.5 ghz. Turns out you have to have a hella fast computer and top of the line video card to run this game. I just don't have that kind of money to upgrade. Don't waste your money on this game if you don't have the hardware.

Poor "Tech Demo" with zero gameplay/replayability.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 12 / 29
Date: August 04, 2004
Author: Amazon User

After more Doom3 time under my belt, I started to wonder, what these guys have been doing for FOUR YEARS making this??? Were they hand painting, and editing each level down to the finest detail? I hope not, because its so dark, few people are going to care about some nice thing here, or a nice thing there. Doom3 is so devoid of quality story and gameplay that it has me wondering.. Every level shows something Doom3 people copied from another game, literally tons of things from various games out there - including Painkiller and Halo.

Lets see some great games, and stop being a technology graphics lapdogs for ATI and Nvidia where you appear like your just trying to impress them, and not make games for gamers that are innovative, and new.

Doom-3 is a poor game, does nothing new to the genre, and bores you to tears with endless waves of the same repasted levels, mobs, and pathetically weak guns.

Sad.

Doom This

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 11 / 23
Date: August 23, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Soooo disappointing. Over 10 years to get here from Doom 1? Same weapons (but more boring), virtually the same monsters. For sure, the AI is much better, and there is better level planning so there's less wandering around trying to find the next action step (but not none). However, that's about it.

The point of Doom is playability, and FUN. Prettier monsters do not equal fun.

While getting disoriented after each blow may be more realistic, its annoying and not fun. Let's not forget -- if complete realism were achieved, the game would suck as much as actually getting trapped in a Mars base with all hell breaking loose (i.e., no fun). Plus, the computer inherently limits your scope of vision. So, its annoying (and almost insulting in some strange way) to have to get all dizzy and discombobulated because the nerdy software geeks think its "cool" to be more "realistic." (It kinda feels like being lectured on "what it would really be like" to get smacked). Of course, if it were realistic, it would be a lot easier to time the throwing of grenades, and they wouldn't hit the closing door so damn often. Also, in real life, I have a little something called "peripheral vision." Plus, I rarely get caught up and stuck passing too close to the scenery.

I have only played the single player version so far, but at this point I would like my money back. Please tell me the multiplayer is that much better so its worth something.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions