View Full Version : DOOM 3 for PC and XBOX platforms!

12-16-2001, 10:34 AM
Although the rumors of Doom III appearing on the Microsoft Xbox has been ongoing for some time, at QuakeCon, id Software CEO John Carmack spoke specifically on the subject. According to Carmack, Doom III can be transferred over to the XBOX without any graphical changes. He further claimed that currently the Sony PlayStation 2 isn't powerful enough to handle Doom III, without making serious graphical sacrifices. It's undoubtedly the most demanding game that id has ever designed. The game was born to take full advantage of the GeForce 3's graphical strengths. Carmack confirmed that there are no current plans to release Doom III on the PS2 and if at a later date a version is announced the project will be handed over to an outside developer.

CaptainStarMac (Carmac) send out some quotes regarding the upcoming Doom game about Doom Engine Performance. Obviously, any game done with the new Doom engine is going to run slower than a game done with Q3 technology. You can make some of it back up by going to the simpler lighting model and running at a lower resolution, but you just won't be able to hit 60+ fps on a GF2. The low end of our supported platforms will be a GF1 / 64 bit GF2Go / Radeon, and it is expected to chug a bit there, even with everything cut down.
There are several more Q3 engine games in the works that will continue to run great on existing systems, and Doom is still a long ways off in any case, so there will be a lot more upgrades and new systems. We are aiming to have a GF3 run Doom with all features enabled at 30 fps.
This game is going to be brilliant...

Work specifically for Doom III didn't start until about six months after id shipped Quake III: Arena. The team explored other game ideas first, looking for fresh ground for its next project to move beyond the world of Quake that had served as the company's focus for half a decade. After little more than a year, the game is still very much in its infancy, and most of what we know so far about the game comes from John Carmack's discussions of the game's underlying technology. What id has done best over the years is to design games that make the most of state-of-the-art graphics and turn this potential for visual realism into intense, visceral gameplay. Doom III should be no different. The graphics are unbelievable, combining realistic lighting with highly detailed characters and environments. While it's easy to fixate on a few tempting bits of eye candy, John Carmack, the programmer responsible for the graphics of several generations id games, says it's really not about effects. Doom III's impressive real-time lighting and shadows, for example, are not just a technical tour de force, but also an element that will help create a distinct atmosphere in the game.

The two demo sequences we've seen of the game have shown how id is translating the essence of the original Doom game into the new graphics engine. Doom, always reminiscent of Aliens with its mix of sci-fi and horror, is a space marine game in which there's no shortage of humanoid zombies and other nasty monsters to shoot. Already, the preview sequences have shown how several familiar faces will appear in the new game, including a pink demon, an imp, and a human zombie with a whip arm--any of which look capable of dealing you a gruesome end in a dark lonely corridor. One dramatic scene we saw took place in a white-tiled bathroom. A pink demon strode up to a bloated cadaver in the center of the room and tore a bloody chunk out of its stomach, revealing its entrails and spreading a pool of blood across the floor. The sequence was cinematic in quality, smoothly and believably animated. But it's tough to say what the engine will look like from a standard first-person view. The original Doom was characterized by hordes of monsters on the screen at once, and this may not be feasible with this complex graphics engine. Having many 3D enemies on the screen at once is much more taxing for PC hardware than moving animated 2D sprites around.

Check it out:

Carmack says that Doom III's graphics are a whole evolutionary step beyond the 3D-accelerated worlds of the Quake games. The heart of this change is the new real-time lighting model, which works uniformly for everything in the gameworld: architecture, objects, and characters. Of course, when it comes to lighting a scene, shadows are just as important as the lights that cause them. One environment from the demo sequences featured a spinning fan on the ceiling, with external light shining down through it. The fan cast down a wide moving shadow, even shadowing the appropriate parts of a character standing in the hallway below. Before this, we had never seen a game capable of such classic movie shots as the villain standing with his face hidden half in shadow, but now, such atmospheric shots are possible. Carmack's goal is to make surfaces look much more interesting with many-layered texture effects. In Doom III, every pixel will have at least a bump map applied, and some pixels will have layered effects of a magnitude more complex, requiring up to 50 passes for a current-generation GeForce or Radeon graphics card to render.

Doom III is about atmosphere rather than mad frame rates. Those used to getting well more than 100fps in Quake III will have to settle in for the steady 30fps average that Carmack targets for the game on a GeForce3. It's undoubtedly the most demanding game that id has ever designed. The game was born to take full advantage of the PC's growing graphical strengths and couldn't be ported over to the PlayStation 2 at the same level of detail,
although the XBOX could handle it easily.

Id is already thinking about ways to use sound to further enhance the game's atmosphere. In a surprise announcement, Carmack revealed at QuakeCon that id has a verbal agreement with Trent Reznor, of Nine Inch Nails fame, to do the music for the Doom III game, just like he did for the original Quake--however, the deal is not a sure thing yet. Beyond the soundtrack, in-game audio will get a completely new sound engine, which will include 5.1 support.

It's incredibly exciting to have a game like Doom III on the horizon, but it is quite a ways away, probably much more than a year from shipping. Id has defined the look and feel for Doom III, and it's the test of the artists and designers to flesh out a single-player game that lives up to its potential and even surpasses the conventions established by Doom those many years ago. Id isn't the same company it was in 1993--Doom's original level designers have long since split off from the company to try their hand at other games--and first-person shooters haven't been the same since Half-Life. Even Gray Matter's Return to Castle Wolfenstein, whose development id is sponsoring and overseeing, shows the effect of story-based levels with its pre-mission briefings, so it's quite likely Doom III will do more than just turn you loose to clear the level of monsters and find the exit. In any case, I just can't wait to see more.

DOOM III VIDEO from Macworld Tokyo (stream)
56K: http://www.gamespot.com/live/streamer.html?format=asf&speed=56&path=doom3_pc_1.asx&title=Doom+III+Movie+1



John Carmack Video Interview Part 4
While at QuakeCon 2001.
These are 4 clips of the interview.

56K |
Cable |

John Carmack Video Interview Part 3
While at QuakeCon 2001. This clip is part 3 of the interview.


56K |
Cable |

John Carmack Video Interview Part 2
While at QuakeCon 2001. This clip is part 2 of the interview.

56K |
Cable |

John Carmack Video Interview Part 1
While at QuakeCon 2001.

56K |
Cable |

12-16-2001, 10:35 AM
Check Out these Screenie's:
http://doom3.gamesweb.com/screenshots/macworld_210201/doom30.jpg http://doom3.gamesweb.com/screenshots/voodooextreme_030901/doom4_klein.jpg http://doom3.gamesweb.com/screenshots/quakecon2001_020901/doom2.jpg http://doom3.gamesweb.com/screenshots/quakecon2001_020901/doom1.jpg
PIX From QuakeCon 2001:

PIX From MacWorld 2001:

More Screens:

Doom 3 Coming to Xbox!
id Software CEO John Carmack announced the development of Doom 3 for PC and Xbox platforms. The announcement was made during the annual Quakecon, where Carmack also announced the development of Quake IV using the new Doom engine, which may also be coming to Xbox sometime down the road. According to the announcement, Doom engine will boast extremely high polygon models and realistic lighting. While commenting on the Xbox port of Doom 3, Carmack stated that PS2 would not be able to handle Doom 3 graphics without "big sacrifices", while Xbox port will look just as good as the PC counterpart.

DOOM's Gona RoCk!!!

12-16-2001, 02:41 PM
HOLY HEAVENLY MOTHER OF GOD THAT IS THE MOST MADDENINGLY TEMPTING POST I HAVE EVER READ! IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED!!! DOOM 3 FOR XBOX!!! (Gamecube kiddies, its toooooo scary for you...that and your system's too weak ;) ) OH lordy lordy...i simply cannot wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DOOM FOR EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DOOM FOR EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Devil May Cry
12-16-2001, 03:53 PM

12-16-2001, 04:18 PM
uh oh someone's goin thru "non-doom3 on ps2-itis" depression. its ok...you can still tinker with Fantavision :D

12-16-2001, 04:53 PM
Of course all those pics are from the PC version on a geforce3 for the video and some are quite old. I really want to see some with the Xbox, in game, unless I missed them somewhere.

KGB Agent
12-16-2001, 05:07 PM
May be better on the PC - but methinks the XBOX verison'll be fine enough.

12-16-2001, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by DOOM
While commenting on the Xbox port of Doom 3, Carmack stated that PS2 would not be able to handle Doom 3 graphics without "big sacrifices", while Xbox port will look just as good as the PC counterpart.

12-16-2001, 05:23 PM

It is one thing saying it, it is another thing showing it. Carmack, show me that it is just as good on the xbox in a resolution of only 640x480 or 720x480 compared to a PC with 1280x1024 or 1600x1200. If you show me side by side screens running on the appropriate hardware then I'll believe that statement.

Of course I know it won't look good on the PS2 when compared to the xbox or pc.

12-16-2001, 06:08 PM
what makes you think xbox will be in a lower resolution? Carmack said that the pc and xbox versions will be the same.

12-16-2001, 06:25 PM
Because that is all the xbox can do. 720x480 if it is a widescreen title or 640x480. I doubt this game will have HD support 1920x1080 because of how detailed it is. The only way you would be able to play that way if they did include it is if you have an HDTV so the game will still have to cater to everyone else and thus be 640x480 or 720x480. If you don't have a tv that supports progressive scan then that resolution is effectively 640x240.

There is no doubt in my mind that stuff like lighting and partical effects and textures will look just as good but when it comes to jaggies the PC will look better unless the really take advantage of some AA.

I'm not saying it won't be possible but they will have to show me some screens of the xbox before I believe them.

12-16-2001, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by Lynxfx
If you don't have a tv that supports progressive scan then that resolution is effectively 640x240.

Please explain that statement. Progressive scan doesn't add resolution. Progressive scan simply draws the lines in order rather than even/odd. The frame rate is the same. The number of pixels is the same. Only how the pixels are put on the screen is different.

Anyway, I think the XBOX version has the potential to look as good, if not better, than the PC version simply due to the greatly reduced overhead and static configuration of the XBOX. The XBOX version can be optimized in ways not possible on a PC.

12-16-2001, 08:32 PM
The NTSC interlaced system shows 60 unique images per second, but each one uses only half of the vertical resolution available on the display. With an interlaced image you are getting only half the lines at a time hence 640x240i then the other 640x240i comes filling in the blanks. The resolution on an interlaced tv and the resolution on a monitor for a pc do not act the same. a 640x480i image on a tv has the vertical height as 640x480 on a monitor but it only has half the resolution (240). This changes when you go to a progressive tv. Now the image is being displayed the same as it would on a monitor and it retains the 480 vertical resolution.

So yes, progressive scan doesn't add resolution but instead utilizes the full resolution coming from a 640x480p or 720x480p image.

Yes the xbox does have the potential but Doom III has been in developement for the PC first and with the Geforce3 as the standard gfx card. The xbox does have the advantage of being a static system and the lower resolution that the card must produce will help framerate but I don't know if it will look as good as on the pc. I'm mostly talking about jaggies. If they utitlize the AA in hardware then that might go away and the xbox will look as good as on a high end pc at high resolution.

Again show me the shots Carmack that aren't rendered or doctored for the xbox.

12-16-2001, 09:19 PM
Technically, yes, only 240 lines are DRAWN using interlace mode in any given pass. However, the other half of the screen is drawn so quickly that most people won't be able to tell the difference. A 480p image has exactly the same resolution as 480i, but with 480i you only see every other line at any moment in time. No special geogmetry is required. The poly count is the same. The color depth doesn't change.

I do agree with what you're saying but I don't want the newbies to think the difference between 480i and 480p is more than it is.

12-16-2001, 11:43 PM
Oh I know what you mean. I didn't mean to make it sound like it was a whole shlew different. It isn't. Besides resolution is different in terms for tv vs. the computer.

Either way I think that DOOM 3 will equal the pc if played on a digital set. :)

12-17-2001, 12:38 AM
i don't care much about the Doom series... i want Quake 4 on xbox...

12-17-2001, 01:55 AM
Doom 3 will come before Quake 4 (if it ever comes). Both from id and Doom is where their focus is.

I lost interest after Q2. Q3 was too cartoony for me. Went to UT after that.

12-17-2001, 11:26 AM
I lost interest in ID after DOOM 2. I'm far more interested in solid single-player gaming than I am in multiplayer or arena.

12-17-2001, 01:38 PM
woah woah woah...you're telling me that the xbox's MAX resolution is 640x480 w/o hi definition or digital or whatever?! :confused:

12-17-2001, 04:12 PM
Yeah that's the way all consoles are. It is how your tv is made.

12-17-2001, 04:22 PM
Hmm...so the TV limits the xbox's resolution?

(Though xbox looks **** fine on such a low resolution!)

12-17-2001, 04:38 PM
yes and no.

I'll explain this just in US terms since the actual res varies from the US to Europe etc.

ATSC -Broadcast- Standard: NTSC

SDTV- 640x480i and 640x480p (4X3 AR)
EDTV- 720x480p (4x3 16x9 AR)
HDTV- 1280x720i, 1280x720p, and 1920x1080i (16X9 AR)

Standard tv is set to only 480 lines of vertical resolution. Now with the advent of digital sets and now HDTV that vertical resolution has been upped to 1080 lines interlaced or 720 progressive. To render this though the xbox would have to punch out polys that would be the equivilent to playing a pc game at 1920x1080. That is a pretty high res and most of us know how games perform at 1600x1200 on the pc. But the graphics cards are pretty powerful and I think with a static system like the xbox it shouldn't be hard to actually get games running at that res with steady frame rates.

Devil May Cry
12-17-2001, 05:56 PM
bigger online pool, MUCH bigger than xbox's and more options too

12-17-2001, 06:07 PM
ahh, i want a duke nukem game for the xbox =) nukem forever has litterally taken forever to produce..... wonder if they will actually finish it in the next 5 years...hmmmm

12-17-2001, 07:04 PM
Well i can say this,Playing X-box on a standard tv looks better far as jaggie's than a Hdtv counterpart.....So i think it will look better than the Pc counterpart.

12-18-2001, 09:39 AM
Check it Out:

12-18-2001, 03:54 PM
thanks for clarifying :) now i REALLY can't wait for my 63' flat screen HDTV :D :D :D

12-18-2001, 05:02 PM
DOOM 3 Concept Art:
Lot's More Pix Here:

Devil May Cry
12-18-2001, 05:51 PM
Man i hate those stupid faces that show how damaged you are and gunt when you're hit, its jsut a waist of time and effort.

12-18-2001, 05:54 PM

12-18-2001, 07:21 PM

12-28-2001, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by Devil May Cry
Man i hate those stupid faces that show how damaged you are and gunt when you're hit, its jsut a waist of time and effort.

Actually your suppost to use it to see where your getting shot from. So its not a waist of time at all.


Sup former Teamxboxer here!

Sweet pic of that cacodemon!!!!

06-01-2002, 10:00 AM
Final word- Doom 3 is possible on Xbox
Let me start by saying that I'm sick of all the anti-X trolls arguing that Doom 3 can't be done on the Xbox. Because John Carmack and Id have said this is not the case several times, it's a blatant attempt to flame, troll, and bait. First, these trolls should be warned, then they should be banned. Mods, please listen, and take out the trash.

We know for sure that we will be excluding some of the game buying public with fairly stiff hardware requirements, but we still think it is the right thing to do.

The requirement for GF1/Radeon 7500 as an absolute minimum is fundamental to the way the technology works, and was non-negotiable for the advances that I wanted to make. At the very beginning of development, I worked a bit on elaborate schemes to try and get some level of compatibility with Voodoo / TNT / Rage128 class hardware, but it would have looked like crap, and I decided it wasn't worth it.

The comfortable minimum performance level on this class of hardware is determined by what the artists and level designers produce. It would be possible to carefully craft a DOOM engine game that ran at good speed on an original SDR GF1, but it would cramp the artistic freedom of the designers a lot as they worried more about performance than aesthetics and gameplay.

Our "full impact" platform from the beginning has been targeted at GF3/Xbox level hardware. Slower hardware can disable features, and faster hardware gets higher frame rates and rendering quality. Even at this target, designers need to be more cognizant of performance than they were with Q3, and we expect some licensee to take an even more aggressive performance stance for games shipping in following years.

Games using the new engine will be on shelves FIVEYEARS (or more) after the initial design decisions were made. We had a couple licensees make two generations of products with the Q3 engine, and we expect that to hold true for DOOM as well. The hardware-only decision for Q3 was controversial at the time, but I feel it clearly turned out to be correct. I am confident the target for DOOM will also be seen as correct once there is a little perspective on it.

Unrelated linux note: yes, there will almost certainly be a linux binary for the game. It will probably only work on the nvidia drivers initially, but I will assist any project attempting to get the necessary driver support on on other cards.

John Carmack


08-16-2002, 09:43 PM
Doom III confirmed for Xbox

John Carmack confirms that the graphically impressive first-person shooter will come out for the Xbox and will match the visual fidelity of the PC version.

Id Software had previously expressed interest in doing an Xbox version of its upcoming first-person shooter, but hadn't confirmed that there would be a console version of the game. Today during his keynote at QuakeCon, id's John Carmack said that the Xbox is the only console platform that id is "completely committed" to releasing Doom III on. Carmack further commented that the Xbox version will have the "full graphics fidelity" of the PC version, which made a major debut at this year's E3, where it won a number of awards.
Id Software has said that work on the Xbox version won't start until the PC game is complete. At QuakeCon 2002, id expressed hope that the game would be done before next year's E3 in May.
Check It Out:

08-16-2002, 09:57 PM
I will definitely be buying this title. I'm not a big FPS fan, but DOOM changed my life and I can't wait to see what they do with the latest sequel.

08-16-2002, 11:27 PM
....ill buy it for pc. fps - mouse

08-18-2002, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by Hugh_Jass

Please explain that statement. Progressive scan doesn't add resolution. Progressive scan simply draws the lines in order rather than even/odd. The frame rate is the same. The number of pixels is the same. Only how the pixels are put on the screen is different.

The above statement is not entirely accurate. a 1080i signal gets draw to the screen at 60 fps. But it's not 60 frames per second, it's 60 fields per second. For an interlaced image, this field is every other line. The first refresh will draw the even lines from the frame buffer. The next refresh will draw the odd lines from the frame buffer. It will take 2 screen refreshes to draw the entire image from the frame buffer. This effectively drops your frames per second from 60 to 30. It can be a little worse if you are watching this on a progressive display. Since the frame buffer is constantly changing, the odd lines and even lines are not necessarily drawn from the same image. This effect is not noticable on an interlaced display, but it is on a progressive (watch standard TV on a laptop and you'll see what I mean).

480p DOES have twice the resolution than 480i. The image is rendered at the same resolution, but 480i has an effective fps of 30 frames while the 480p has an effective fps of 60 frames per second. I'll grant you that the 480i image will look smoother than a 480p image at 30fps, but it will not look as good as a 480p image at 60 fps by any stretch of the imagination.

08-19-2002, 08:56 AM
Thanks for all the great info Doom!!! I can't wait for this game.. I'm like Hugh Jass... the original Doom changed my life!

08-19-2002, 02:56 PM
I finally got to read the actual Q&A session Carmack gave at QuakeCon and noticed something that I found interesting, and a little confusing. I believe this is the statement that most of us have been referring to when we have written that Carmack said the graphics would be the same on the Xbox and the PC:

From Carmack's Keynote Q&A at QuakeCon (Tom's Hardware Reporting) (http://www6.tomshardware.com/business/02q3/020817/quakecon-07.html)
Q - Any possibility of a console version of Doom III?

A - We are committed to doing an X-Box version. The graphics fidelity on the X-Box version will be the same as the PC version.

Note that Carmack does not say that the graphics will be exactly the same. He does not mention resolution, refresh rates, poly's per second, any of that. What he says is that the graphics will be of the same "fidelity" on both systems.

According to Webster's definition of "fidelity":

2 : the degree to which an electronic device (as a record player, radio, or television) accurately reproduces its effect (as sound or picture).

This term usually, when used in the A/V electronics world, refers to how well a device can reproduce the original. So, in my analysis, what he is saying is that both the PC and the Xbox will accurately be able to display the "original". The question is, what is the original? The only real specifics that are given on Tom's hardware page are that Carmack's team has been attacking a performance rate of 24 fps - the same that is used for film - and 6 different "back ends" or types of hardware effects reproducable by the video hardware. Target resolutions are not discussed. What this says to me is that both the Xbox and the PCs that are being targetted will run the engine at at least 24 fps with all 6 of these effects being displayed. I'm thinking that the 24fps on the Xbox will be at 480p at 4:3. The 24fps on the computer, going by industry trends, will most likely be at 800x600 or 1024x768. There is nothing that Carmack said directly to this effect, however, there is nothing that he said contrary to this either. I do expect the PC version to have higher performing graphics than the Xbox - but only in refresh rates and screen resolution. The graphical effects - as Carmack said - will likely be identical on the two systems. These graphical effects - as Carmack said - are not reproducable on older lines of PC video cards or consoles such as the PS2 at 24 fps.