Doom 4 "Indefinitely Postponed" Following Rage’s Disappointing Launch

[K007]

http://kotaku.com/5851953/doom-4-ind...ointing-launch

A source claiming to be close to the publishers of the recently-launched Rage has told Kotaku that, at a recent "company wide" meeting held in Dallas, Bethesda and parent company Zenimax made the decision to "indefinitely postpone" development of Doom 4.

[Rummy]

LOL

[trivium nate]

wtf

[Logical]

Doom 4 'The console players choice' ?

Never been a fan of ID's work, dont like Doom 3 and RAGE confirmed all thoughts i had about ID software and Carmack....

[logan]

Originally Posted by Logical

Never been a fan of ID's work, dont like Doom 3 and RAGE confirmed all thoughts i had about ID software and Carmack....

I'd been a fan of id Software until Doom 3. After Rage, I'm done. No more hoping for better days or better games. They sat on Quake 3 for way too long, and both Valve and Epic flew right past them. They're a 3rd rate game developer at best now that just happens to design engines. In my opinion they should leave the games to someone more creative, preferably someone who isn't stuck in 1993. After seeing all the visual issues with Rage I'm not even sure they should be doing engines anymore either.

[cmsmith]

Originally Posted by logan

I'd been a fan of id Software until Doom 3. After Rage, I'm done. No more hoping for better days or better games. They sat on Quake 3 for way too long, and both Valve and Epic flew right past them. They're a 3rd rate game developer at best now that just happens to design engines. In my opinion they should leave the games to someone more creative, preferably someone who isn't stuck in 1993. After seeing all the visual issues with Rage I'm not even sure they should be doing engines anymore either.

I do want to stress that I have not played the game. And I have no intentions of playing it either. Having said that...

I'm not so sure all the visual issues can be blamed on the game. Carmack and Comp still use OpenGL for games. I bet the video drivers just aren't there when it comes to OpenGL for games and a healthy amount of blame lies with them. Outside of Carmack/Id and the one or two companies that license their engine(s), who still uses OpenGL?

Still, after looking at gameplay videos, I think it's safe to say that Carmack is behind the times. All his games basically have pretty graphics. However, outside of being able to point a weapon at a crate or something and blow it up, there really isn't much interaction between the players and the environments. Here comes a baddy, just aim and shoot. Look for ammo and the occasional weapon you can pick up to add to your arsenal. The same ol' @#$% over and over. Does Rage have any places where wind blows grass or dust around? Do you ever see trees sway with the wind? How about weather effects? Are there any physics in the game? I'm betting the answer to most of those is a 'no'.

This is where a game such as the upcomming Battlefield 3 is going to leave Rage behind. I don't know which has the best graphics (I'm betting BF3 does...) but that isn't the issue. Carmack isn't creating game engines that create an interact, immersive environment and draw you into it like the other games comming out do.

As I said, his stuff is just more of the same.

[sillyeagle]

Originally Posted by cmsmith

Does Rage have any places where wind blows grass or dust around? Do you ever see trees sway with the wind? How about weather effects? Are there any physics in the game? I'm betting the answer to most of those is a 'no'.

Of course it has physics, wind, weather, blowing dust/debris, water dripping from the environments, etc. What game doesn't? Even Doom 3 had some impressive wind and dust effects going on.

[Sean_W]

Originally Posted by cmsmith

I do want to stress that I have not played the game. And I have no intentions of playing it either. Having said that...

I'm not so sure all the visual issues can be blamed on the game. Carmack and Comp still use OpenGL for games. I bet the video drivers just aren't there when it comes to OpenGL for games and a healthy amount of blame lies with them. Outside of Carmack/Id and the one or two companies that license their engine(s), who still uses OpenGL?

Still, after looking at gameplay videos, I think it's safe to say that Carmack is behind the times. All his games basically have pretty graphics. However, outside of being able to point a weapon at a crate or something and blow it up, there really isn't much interaction between the players and the environments. Here comes a baddy, just aim and shoot. Look for ammo and the occasional weapon you can pick up to add to your arsenal. The same ol' @#$% over and over. Does Rage have any places where wind blows grass or dust around? Do you ever see trees sway with the wind? How about weather effects? Are there any physics in the game? I'm betting the answer to most of those is a 'no'.

This is where a game such as the upcomming Battlefield 3 is going to leave Rage behind. I don't know which has the best graphics (I'm betting BF3 does...) but that isn't the issue. Carmack isn't creating game engines that create an interact, immersive environment and draw you into it like the other games comming out do.

As I said, his stuff is just more of the same.

It's not the fault of the graphics API, that should be transparent. OpenGL drivers are good, they need to be because most game developers use it for workstations. OpenGL has actually progress faster than DX in recent years.

[Rakeesh]

Originally Posted by Sean_W

OpenGL has actually progress faster than DX in recent years.

How so? Even Carmack himself said the opposite, even said DX is far better in his opinion, but that he uses OGL instead as a matter of principle.

[cmsmith]

Originally Posted by sillyeagle

Of course it has physics, wind, weather, blowing dust/debris, water dripping from the environments, etc. What game doesn't? Even Doom 3 had some impressive wind and dust effects going on.

I've never seen any of that stuff in ID's games in the past. I didn't play all of Doom 3 (was bored with it) so I'll have to take your word for it. However, I did play a large part of it; I don't recall seeing that stuff.

If that stuff exists in the game, then their promotional videos don't show it from what I've seen. Somebody in their PR needs to be fired.

[Holy Smoke]

Since no one has mentioned it, this rumor has been thoroughly debunked.

Originally Posted by Rakeesh

How so? Even Carmack himself said the opposite, even said DX is far better in his opinion, but that he uses OGL instead as a matter of principle.

He didn't say it was far better, it just handles some things better. DirectX being the better API doesn't quite equate to it being more flexible in all things. Rage, for example, is an OpenGL 4.2 game with DX10 level hardware being the bare minimum requirement. Using OpenGL makes it able to run on Windows XP whereas it would be limited to Vista/Win7 systems if it were using DirectX. The ability to use extensions can go a long way.

DirectX also isn't without its own overheads. Their only reason to make the switch would probably be to avoid AMD's shoddy OpenGL driver.

[ViN86]

Originally Posted by Holy Smoke

Since no one has mentioned it, this rumor has been thoroughly debunked.



He didn't say it was far better, it just handles some things better. DirectX being the better API doesn't quite equate to it being more flexible in all things. Rage, for example, is an OpenGL 4.2 game with DX10 level hardware being the bare minimum requirement. Using OpenGL makes it able to run on Windows XP whereas it would be limited to Vista/Win7 systems if it were using DirectX. The ability to use extensions can go a long way.

DirectX also isn't without its own overheads. Their only reason to make the switch would probably be to avoid AMD's shoddy OpenGL driver.

Originally Posted by slaWter

They already denied that rumor.
It says so even in that article

.

Yea let's close this thread.