Kicking off the festivities at QuakeCon, id CEO Todd Hollenshead took the stage during the keynote presentation and promised he would be showing off either Rage or the previously unannounced Doom 4. So which did they actually end up showing? Well, kind of both. Before a brand new Rage video, Hollenshead officially announced "the next Doom game."While id was not ready to spill any big details beyond a teaser, Hollenshead did promise some of the classic Doom elements: "There will be guns, blood, demons, and gibs." When one fan let out his desire for "flashlight tape" from the audience, Hollenshead joked that his Quake Live account should be banned.
Later in the keynote, after the Rage video rolled, id's John Carmack promised that the next Doom game will "look like it's built on another engine" compared to the already amazing-looking Rage. Carmack said that the Doom project will use "three times the horsepower," and as such it will run at 30 frames per second compared to Rage's 60. Both Rage and Doom will be running on the id Tech 5 engine.
Source: 1up
It is funny that id Software considered Valve their biggest competition for years (even taking subtle pokes at them in their games ... see "Valve Running" signs in DOOM 3), and then finally last year decided to begin offering their titles through Valve's Steam platform.
In other words I'm not interested until I hear about something new and exciting about this game.
I thought Rage was the name of there new engine?
I thought Rage was the name of there new engine?
"Both Rage and Doom will be running on the id Tech 5 engine. " (paragraph 3)
It is funny that id Software considered Valve their biggest competition for years (even taking subtle pokes at them in their games ... see "Valve Running" signs in DOOM 3), and then finally last year decided to begin offering their titles through Valve's Steam platform.
The must have made more money on the licensing of the game engine than on the game it self.
I don't argue on that it's a good engine, just a bad game.
Honestly...why should they bother? Why should any commercial company want to deal with the headache?
Honestly...why should they bother? Why should any commercial company want to deal with the headache?
As much as I hate the fact that you are generalizing Linux users, your Slashdot example rings true to my ears.
All they need to do is put the game in the repository and the user types a command, installs the game. When they run it the first time, they enter their CD key and play away. FreeBSD ports system already supports several commercial Linux games in this way.
The game actually had a great "old school" feeling and I look forward to ANY future installment of the series.
The game actually had a great "old school" feeling and I look forward to ANY future installment of the series.
I couldnt agree more...Quake 4 kinda sucked, but Doom 3 was brilliant.
I also think it is sad how many of the more recent titles advertise "fully breakable worlds" as a feature that actually helps gameplay at all. The best I've seen is more of a "scripted breakable world" which is far from what is advertised.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.