Doom III: Appease the massses?
Author
With the release of Doom III comming soon, and its high end computer needs, it brings a new question:
If this game is popular, do you think games will come out requiring new comps all the time? Doom III is basically saying, "Our game will be so good 90% will buy new hardware!"
Maybe this post should be in Game Design, but as a game programmer, I would like to hear everyone''s response. Over time I have seen indie games with relatively high reauirements, and its form has been frowned on.
Main Question: Do you think high end games are a good idea, and if so, is it because more is expected of them?
There are very few companies in the world whos reputation would allow them to basicaly say ''hey, are game is gonna run poo unless you''ve got cutting edge stuff'' and then have people upgrade.
iD is one, Valve is another and off the top of my head i cant think of others.
Frankly, iD can do it because they already have crap loads of money and just like to push the boundies a bit.
Valve havent done it with HL2, although there will be alot of people who upgrade to get it looking great.
I think games which push people to ugrade are good, otherwise we''d just get stuck with teh majority running 5year old machines and things wouldnt push forward.
Some balances is needed, but things do need to be kept pushing forward or things will stagnate.
iD is one, Valve is another and off the top of my head i cant think of others.
Frankly, iD can do it because they already have crap loads of money and just like to push the boundies a bit.
Valve havent done it with HL2, although there will be alot of people who upgrade to get it looking great.
I think games which push people to ugrade are good, otherwise we''d just get stuck with teh majority running 5year old machines and things wouldnt push forward.
Some balances is needed, but things do need to be kept pushing forward or things will stagnate.
I must disagree that forcing people to buy a new machine is good. I''ve still got an old AMD K62 500mhz with a 64mb Nvidia card and there isn''t a game I can''t run. Or if there is I haven''t found it.
Now of course I do run programs at onlt 800x600 because I''m still using the monitor that came with my 486 (O.K. maybe most people aren''t as much of a cheap bastard as me, but still no one wants to upgrade constantly.
I''m glad I don''t have to buy a new system every year, I''m comfortable with the system I have. I remember when I upgraded from my 486 it took three months for me to get everything setup the way it was and for myself to get used to it. I don''t know about you _the_phantom_ but that isn''t something I''m raring to go through again.
Now of course I do run programs at onlt 800x600 because I''m still using the monitor that came with my 486 (O.K. maybe most people aren''t as much of a cheap bastard as me, but still no one wants to upgrade constantly.
I''m glad I don''t have to buy a new system every year, I''m comfortable with the system I have. I remember when I upgraded from my 486 it took three months for me to get everything setup the way it was and for myself to get used to it. I don''t know about you _the_phantom_ but that isn''t something I''m raring to go through again.
I agree with Ranger50000
Recently upgraded from my Celeron 400 (Whoooooo) equipped with a GeforceMX200 to a 3.2 GHz P4 with ATIRaedon.. Things looks alot better now..and games runs smooth as hell
Developers could give the end user the option to decide if he/she wants to play with a low resolution and crappy graphics.. Simply put a button there with the caption "APPLY SHITTY GRAPHICS SETTINGS BECAUSE I AM A CHEAP BASTARD!".
If I would run off to my local computer dealer and buy me a new, faster (and more exspensive) computer, just to be able to play Doom 3, two things might happend:
#1 - My wife shoots me! (after calling me stupid)
#2 - My bank hires someone to do the same (after calling me stupid!)
I just can''t see the reason why?? Sure, it''s probably fun to play, but it will still be fun in two years from now, when todays top of the line computers will be cheap as hell.. Also, I can live with the fact that I might be forced to use low quality textures and low resolutions.. Good looks != fun (don''t applies to women), I still think that Elite II Frontier is a great game.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H L Mencken
Recently upgraded from my Celeron 400 (Whoooooo) equipped with a GeforceMX200 to a 3.2 GHz P4 with ATIRaedon.. Things looks alot better now..and games runs smooth as hell
Developers could give the end user the option to decide if he/she wants to play with a low resolution and crappy graphics.. Simply put a button there with the caption "APPLY SHITTY GRAPHICS SETTINGS BECAUSE I AM A CHEAP BASTARD!".
If I would run off to my local computer dealer and buy me a new, faster (and more exspensive) computer, just to be able to play Doom 3, two things might happend:
#1 - My wife shoots me! (after calling me stupid)
#2 - My bank hires someone to do the same (after calling me stupid!)
I just can''t see the reason why?? Sure, it''s probably fun to play, but it will still be fun in two years from now, when todays top of the line computers will be cheap as hell.. Also, I can live with the fact that I might be forced to use low quality textures and low resolutions.. Good looks != fun (don''t applies to women), I still think that Elite II Frontier is a great game.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H L Mencken
Author
BTW, Here are the requirements:
Minimum:
CPU: 800 MHZ - 1 GHZ
GeForce 3 TI/ATi 9600 Pro
RAM: 256 MB RAM
Standard:
CPU: 1,7GHZ-2GHZ
GeForce 4 TI 4400/4600/ATi 9700/Pro
RAM: 512 MB RAM
Optimal:
CPU: 2.5 GHZ - 2.8 GHZ
GeForce 5800FX/5900FX/ATi 9800 Pro
RAM: 786-1024 MB RAM
The jump from min. to standard is big.
Beatles are the best!
Minimum:
CPU: 800 MHZ - 1 GHZ
GeForce 3 TI/ATi 9600 Pro
RAM: 256 MB RAM
Standard:
CPU: 1,7GHZ-2GHZ
GeForce 4 TI 4400/4600/ATi 9700/Pro
RAM: 512 MB RAM
Optimal:
CPU: 2.5 GHZ - 2.8 GHZ
GeForce 5800FX/5900FX/ATi 9800 Pro
RAM: 786-1024 MB RAM
The jump from min. to standard is big.
Beatles are the best!
The jump from "minimum" to "standard" isn''t that big. A 1.0 GHz Pentium III is about the same speed as a 1.5 GHz Pentium IV. The biggest difference is that Pentium III pretty much tops out at 133 MHz memory, while Pentium IV starts at 133 and can go all the way to 800 (effective).
Whether you should require high-end hardware or not is a business decision. If you feel that you want the most people to be able to download, run, and buy your game, like most indies, you''ll aim for something like "500 MHz CPU, 128 MB RAM, integrated dual-texture graphics or better". If you feel that your main selling factor is the gee-wiz technology, and you want the technology you build to be licensable three years from now without looking dorky, then shooting for the upper end might make more sense.
Whether you should require high-end hardware or not is a business decision. If you feel that you want the most people to be able to download, run, and buy your game, like most indies, you''ll aim for something like "500 MHz CPU, 128 MB RAM, integrated dual-texture graphics or better". If you feel that your main selling factor is the gee-wiz technology, and you want the technology you build to be licensable three years from now without looking dorky, then shooting for the upper end might make more sense.
quote:Original post by _the_phantom_
There are very few companies in the world whos reputation would allow them to basicaly say ''hey, are game is gonna run poo unless you''ve got cutting edge stuff'' and then have people upgrade.
iD is one, Valve is another and off the top of my head i cant think of others.
Frankly, iD can do it because they already have crap loads of money and just like to push the boundies a bit.
Valve havent done it with HL2, although there will be alot of people who upgrade to get it looking great.
I think games which push people to ugrade are good, otherwise we''d just get stuck with teh majority running 5year old machines and things wouldnt push forward.
Some balances is needed, but things do need to be kept pushing forward or things will stagnate.
Valve makes people upgrade?
Umm... no?
What about Epic?
quote:Original post by _the_phantom_
iD is one, Valve is another and off the top of my head i cant think of others.
Frankly, iD can do it because they already have crap loads of money and just like to push the boundies a bit.
Valve havent done it with HL2, although there will be alot of people who upgrade to get it looking great.
Valve isn't even in the same league as iD software, which is why they really can't push the limits.
Valve has put out ONE good game based off an iD engine.. that's it. iD has put out more games than I can count, and almost every single one is a hit.
iD pushes the industry and creates new things. Valve has taken old methods and made games with them.. err.. game with them.
The key players in pushing technology for gaming are iD and Epic.. Valve has little to no say.
[edited by - imperil on May 27, 2004 7:42:07 PM]
ah, but HL does carry ALOT of weight in gamers mind, thus they will be more willing to upgrade for a Valve games, say HL2, then something from someone else.
And yes, Epic, i feel bad i forgot about them with UT2K4 being my game of the moment.
And yes, Epic, i feel bad i forgot about them with UT2K4 being my game of the moment.
From what I understand, ID software makes more money from licensing its engine to other companies than they do from their own games. If this is true, then it makes a very great deal of sense to target top-of-the-line hardware, since what''s top-of-the-line today won''t be all that mindboggling when the next generation of games based on the Doom 3 engine is released.
This is, of course, based on the assumption that what I heard about that is correct, which may or may not be the case.
This is, of course, based on the assumption that what I heard about that is correct, which may or may not be the case.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement