EmP's Doom 3 review

I just think Doom 3 is so clearly more than a 2. I think it's rather average, certainly - as I've said before, I'd probably go with a 6 - but there are far worse games I've given 3s and 4s to... it seems a little harsh for the sake of it, to me.

Just my opinion, though.

I agree. A score that low should be reserved for games that are literally unplayable due to bugs and broken design (e.g. Over the Road Racing, Super Man 64, etc). Doom 3, while not perfect, isn't even close to such titles. Granted, everyone has their biases, but it probably isn't seemly for a staff review to wear them so openly.

We already have a Doom 3 bash review up that scores this game a whopping one point more than mine. I see how it is; attack the EmP.

I hate the game; I think it's pointless cosmetics-first-gameplay-last software at its worst and, yes, there's bias there because the word Doom is in the title, but I write for a site with Honest in the name, so it would be a crime to hide this. Hell, I go to great lengths to point out my bias in the body of the review.

Whether I'm on staff or not, it's my opinion on what I think of the games first and foremost that I'm going to write about.

Don't pretend it's not the reason why you love me.

I think it's pointless cosmetics-first-gameplay-last software at its worst

I think the review would really benefit from a few lines like this. It would give the context and justification to differentiate it from those types of reviews that give a very low score with the "it's my opinion" defense.

I agree, the score is the most important part of the review and EmP's score is stupid, Doom 3 deserves a 3.01 or possibly a (2 - 7i).

We already have a Doom 3 bash review up that scores this game a whopping one point more than mine.

I see how it is; attack the Suskie.

Oh it's not the "importance of scores" debate again, it really isn't.

It really is a matter of opinion, too, and I respect whatever opinion (and it's why this site is brilliant for posting multiple staff reviews of the same game). Personally, I think Doom 3 is a lot better than - I dunno - the new Turok. But others clearly think otherwise.

I agreed with most of that review except for the score. I was thinking 4 or 5 until I remembered it was an EmP Doom 3 review and then looked at the score.

I also think the game is a 5 or 6. It was an average shooter. Definitely not unplayable but 10 years after Doom II this is all they could come up with?

"...this is all they could come up with?"

Nobody fucks monkeys AND people, you idiot

Doom 3 is worthy of a 2 or a 3 simply because IDDQD and IDKFA aren't the cheats anymore. I actually had to look the codes up online when I wanted to become invincible and level skip passed all the drivel at the beginning. What a sham.

The last three levels were actually pretty fun, though. They made up about 80% of my play time with Doom 3, another 15 or so percent was Super Turbo Turkey Puncher 3. That last five was spent humping walls in dark corridors, because I couldn't be arsed to use the flashlight.

The game was pretty bland overall, but I don't know that I'd give it a two. I'm going to bring up Chrono Cross now: Look at Chrono Cross. That game was critically acclaimed everywhere, but EmP gave it a low score (which it deserved) and I don't remember nearly this much discord over it. Maybe I just missed it. At any rate, when we start throwing out individual opinion (even for the staff) we lose something that makes us special.

I think a 2 makes sense in the context of the review. It seems to me that Emp is arguing that Doom 3 is fundamentally broken because of the way it's set up. The tedious darkness, the restrictive presence of the flashlight, and the lack of foes only allows for fear that is derived from cheap scare tactics. This makes it a shallow and mediocre experience. To say all this and then turn around and give it a 5 would undermine Emp's argument. Arguing whether it should be a 3 or a 4 is also irrelevant because both scores basically come to the same conclusion, that Doom 3 is heavily flawed.

Janus to the rescue!

Emp actually messaged me and BEGGED me to help defend him from this topic's onslaught, but I was too lazy to lend a hand. Thank God for Janus.

haha, call it my national pride.

I understood the score from the context of the review. There was total contempt at how Doom 3 handled classic monsters and how they went from a shoot-em-tha-fuck-up mindset to a "spooky" dark corridors one.

I also understand the score from a personal context in that I'm one of those CLASSIC Doom freaks that could spend hours BSing with people about iD-made and fan-made Doom levels. So, to me, a game with the Doom name that seems to utter bastardize everything that made MY Dooms special deserves a rating in the realm of 2.

I'd wager to say that if you never played the classic Dooms or if you did briefly, but looked at them as these archaic things not worth playing, EmP's review wouldn't be for you. But if you're like me, this is a very good review. Should have been proofed more diligently, but a very good review nonetheless, because it speaks to me and other old-school Doomies and tells us loud and clear that if we were looking for another all-guns-blazing Doom title, we'd be utterly disappointed.

Yeah... I think Janus put it right. Honestly, I thought the review was fine when I read / skimmed through it last night. It made perfect sense the way it was argued, and I honestly don't see what all this pointless fussing about the freaking score is about. Seriously; if he'd given it between a 3 and a 5, this topic never would've even been made, probably. I find this kind of sad - that no one's focusing on the good elements of the review.

Jesus, though. Thank God it's not FFT!

I read the score in the context of the review, and when people are angry at a game and score low, I guess the lowness of score is often a gauge of their emotional piss-offedness. Like Janus was saying, down in the 2-4 region, it's all bad. I had no problem coming to a 2 at the end of emp's review.

That said, my outlook is kind of conservative when awarding scores like this. I always stick the shoe on the other foot (my creator foot). I can imagine working on Doom 3- and I genuinely think they worked hard, I confessed as much in the opening of my own Doom 3 review. And saying '2? Wtf??' But I think this kind of thing is more a danger on a bigger scale when some writer has a monopoly of sorts. Like when there's some film reviewer writing for a huge paper. They review one film each week and if they happen to go way off course, they can stupidly misrepresent the film or damage its reception.

So clearly this isn't that situation! I think I'm going off track now.

Sentence of the ever:

"It would be nice had, when the imps do show up, they're used for more than childish scare tactics."

Some people dislike the review more than you:

http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-209790.aspx?CT=1#Comments

Technically you scored the game 1/5, NOT 2/5.

Don't tell them that!

why are u even talking about a game that is almost five years old? its POINTLESS!!!! focus on gears of war 2

Geo's Doom 3 review -

It's the future and they haven't figured out how to tape a flashlight onto a pistol.

0/10, epic fail.

Happy now? Beat that, any one of you. Try it.

I read the introduction and immediately knew where the review was going. You know, if I expected every Doom game to be as good as Doom II, I'd hate the series. If your worship of Doom II is so rabid that you'll allow your disappointment in the Xbox game to convince you they're bad, fine, but don't act like this opinion is the norm. Your intro is laughable because it runs through the history of the Doom series as if it's universally accepted that all of the post-Doom II games sucked, which is a complete falsehood. If I'd begun my DMC4 review by saying, "Well, we all know that DMC3 was much worse than DMC1, but that's not a factor here," people would just shake their heads and chuckle.

I get the feeling you wrote this review with the idea that we'd all nod our heads in agreement during the opening lines. Instead, I just thought to myself, "Okay, so this one is as 'bad' as all those other 'disappointments'? Sounds awesome. I think I'll check it out." Your plan backfired, in other words.

Oh, and I was wondering why JANUS2 liked this review, and then I browsed through his ratings for the old Dooms and found the same fanboyish devotion to Doom II. So that answers that.

You are right. Video game reviewing is no place for personal and unique opinions. After checking Gamerankings.com, I have seen that the correct score to give this title is between 7-9/10. I feel like I have let you, this website and the entire internet down by not simply rehashing the unconformed thoughts of the masses. But, most of all, I have let myself down.

I renounce the name EmP. From here on, I am simply #7630946. And Doom 3 is great.

When you write reviews like this, Gary, they don't contribute anything positive to the site. It's just an incredulous opinion, and we're just a site that is apparently only too happy to accept this sort of material out of the fear that one horrible review for a game is better than no review.

What great successes you two will become.