DOOM 3 BFG Edition - Remastered, Armour-mounted flashlights + DOOM 1 & 2 [360/PS3/PC]
- Thread starter Reiko
- Start date
I tried this game recently at eurogamer expo and noticed that they have new sound effects, this alone makes it worth the purchase for me. The original gun sounds were hilariously weak (especially the shotgun) and the sound mods available for PC version aren't that much better than the default.
Nope XBLA versions are the PC versions. 30fps.
These versions in the collection are in 60fps now
I'm shocked that you guys seem to be impressed and shocked that it's HD and 60fps?
This game was released way back when the 6600GT was king of the mid-range cards.
If they didn't run it in HD 60fps then there would be something very very wrong.
A 6800 Ultra has half the power of the GPU in 360/PS3
Being completely honest there' really no reason why the game isn't 1080p and 60fps.
This game was released way back when the 6600GT was king of the mid-range cards.
If they didn't run it in HD 60fps then there would be something very very wrong.
A 6800 Ultra has half the power of the GPU in 360/PS3
Being completely honest there' really no reason why the game isn't 1080p and 60fps.
NV40 has 16 ROPs.
On a side note, are those benchmarks with Pentium IV?
Throwing around the built-in benchmark is nice and all, but ultimately it doesn't give us enough data to definitively say it would be 60fps in all/most situations (something I'm sure JC would actually be adamant about).
It's not hard to achieve a high framerate when no enemies are around, but I do recall things dropping significantly (relative to not being present) once an imp started throwing (shadowcasting) fireballs around. *shrug*
On a side note, are those benchmarks with Pentium IV?
Throwing around the built-in benchmark is nice and all, but ultimately it doesn't give us enough data to definitively say it would be 60fps in all/most situations (something I'm sure JC would actually be adamant about).
It's not hard to achieve a high framerate when no enemies are around, but I do recall things dropping significantly (relative to not being present) once an imp started throwing (shadowcasting) fireballs around. *shrug*
The reason this was difficult to achieve was bandwidth and fillrate, as Carmack already has stated. Or do you feel there's reason to distrust what he says? Those stencil shadows are hogs for both of those resources. Personally I'm a bit surprised that the stencil shadows were kept in the game rather than being replaced with something more modern.
Those stencil shadows are hogs for both of those resources. Personally I'm a bit surprised that the stencil shadows were kept in the game rather than being replaced with something more modern.
What AlStrong said.I'm shocked that you guys seem to be impressed and shocked that it's HD and 60fps?
This game was released way back when the 6600GT was king of the mid-range cards.
If they didn't run it in HD 60fps then there would be something very very wrong.
A 6800 Ultra has half the power of the GPU in 360/PS3
Being completely honest there' really no reason why the game isn't 1080p and 60fps.
Besides that, how many FPS you know this generation that run at a stable 60 fps on consoles? Plus at HD resolutions? Only CoD runs at 60 fps and it's not HD.
Basically John Carmack did an amazing job, as usual. And as for this new version of Doom 3, it's got its bases covered.
Just to illustrate my point, this is the framerate of Half Life 2 featuring the same graphics card.
It just says how good is Carmack compared to Valve. Have you played Half Life 2 on consoles?
The game is technically average compared to Doom 3, yet the framerate is 30 fps -sometimes less-, which just says that Valve made a botch of a job on consoles taking into account HL2 is a game that didn't age well. Counter Strike: GO is an example of an even worse game, technically wise, ported to consoles at a disappointing 30 fps when nothing indicates how it couldn't run at 60 fps, or even 120 fps, the game looks that bad trust me.
Now you have Doom 3, a 60 fps game using a superior lightning and engine, when 60 fps seem to be a luxury these days on consoles, adding new features and rendering with a wealth of detail....
Those to me are special qualities.
I have both Doom 1 and 2 for XBLA. It will be nice to compare them to the new versions.Nope XBLA versions are the PC versions. 30fps.
These versions in the collection are in 60fps now
Also I can't wait to confront the demos that want to take control of the Union Aerospace Corporation -UAC-, and meet the Doctor Betruger again.
While obviously it isn't a survival horror game, Doom 3 has some survival horror elements, and it could be a recommendable game for those who love the genre after the disappointment people experienced from playing Resident Evil 6.
If you add to this an improved sound quality as nightshade mentioned, then it only adds to the oppressive atmosphere.
I think that it just means Valve did a very bad job porting their games to the PS3 and X360 when you take into account that Half Life 2 ran at almost 30 fps more than Doom 3 on average using the same graphics card.
Yet Half Life 2 is 30 fps on consoles and Doom 3 is double the framerate running on a way more advanced engine.
I think it just goes to say who is boss -Carmack- & that Valve did their math. Here it is their formula: 4+5=9, so 4*5=9.
user542745831
Veteran
Hello I.S.T. :smile: Damn time making me forget.
Yes, he was quite the hater. I didn't like that much either as it was like he didn't authorize the Cell to progress.
That's part of the story, but what about their last port Counter Strike: GO, which I think would require a bit more time in all areas.
What AlStrong said.
Besides that, how many FPS you know this generation that run at a stable 60 fps on consoles? Plus at HD resolutions? Only CoD runs at 60 fps and it's not HD.
Basically John Carmack did an amazing job, as usual. And as for this new version of Doom 3, it's got its bases covered.
Just to illustrate my point, this is the framerate of Half Life 2 featuring the same graphics card.
It just says how good is Carmack compared to Valve. Have you played Half Life 2 on consoles?
The game is technically average compared to Doom 3, yet the framerate is 30 fps -sometimes less-, which just says that Valve made a botch of a job on consoles taking into account HL2 is a game that didn't age well. Counter Strike: GO is an example of an even worse game, technically wise, ported to consoles at a disappointing 30 fps when nothing indicates how it couldn't run at 60 fps, or even 120 fps, the game looks that bad trust me.
Now you have Doom 3, a 60 fps game using a superior lightning and engine, when 60 fps seem to be a luxury these days on consoles, adding new features and rendering with a wealth of detail....
Those to me are special qualities.
I think that it just means Valve did a very bad job porting their games to the PS3 and X360 when you take into account that Half Life 2 ran at almost 30 fps more than Doom 3 on average using the same graphics card.
Yet Half Life 2 is 30 fps on consoles and Doom 3 is double the framerate running on a way more advanced engine.
I think it just goes to say who is boss -Carmack- & that Valve did their math. Here it is their formula: 4+5=9, so 4*5=9.
Please that the consoles don't run on the same version of source engine that the 6800 Ultra was tested on, the console versions runs on Episode 2's updated engine and has HDR, dynamic shadows, motion blur and other things that the original game on PC lacked.
If you looks true numbers for a 7800 GT running Episode 2 you'll see that it's right around where the consoles perform indicating that valve did a decent job in the port.
Last edited by a moderator:
huh?
iPad 3 fail.... Been playing up since iOS6 update...
Similar threads
- Deleted member 11852
- Games
