Why id Software Future Looks Bleak For VideoGaming.

Not a bash at all, I matured with id games over many years. In addition, John Carmack is an admiration - every day I work hard to someday surpass him as a smarter person. To make this short, with game development, specifically western game development lacking a great deal of ability to compete in terms of selling a game based heavily on gameplay on say a Wii Console, it has resulted in a high factor of publishers/developers to dedicate on higher end platforms to sell on technicals. Today, I must say, id Software has indeed shadow with other developers, where there's an arsenal amount of games today that are also technically marvelous. It's a concern for me, due to as more processing power becomes available, it seems more games will sell on technicals making it that much harder to care about a id Software game. Nevertheless, this is an opinion.

I am sure joining the zenimax fold was not a bad move either, considering the average pull they acturally have.

For me id has indeed been through some rough years, seemingly the main problem (in my eyes) is the struggle to keep up in the gameplay department.

(not to mention story and execution)

Having more funds, and suddenly having the ability to get some quite skilled people to help flesh out a story combined with the genious that is Carmack, I do expect Doom4 to be quite good, altho Rage was in production by the time they got aquired (if you can call it that).

That is what I hope anyways, to me Doom 3's biggest flaws was as mentioned before gameplay, and a somewhat skizofrenic approach to what game they wanted to make. It ended up being cheap monster closets, and shock factors, more then the envioment and buildup of suspence.

Kinda sad too, for the engine is still one of those I consider the best of that era. And the sound was just about the best, most chilling Ive heard (how machinesalmost sound alive, and breathing, and strange noices gets distorted).

At a tecnical level Id say that id never lost its edge, but the 1990's approach to level design, and outdated ideas,that the gaming industry (and gamers expectations) long since hasleft behind.

The target audience doesn't care for Rage's multiplayer, dedicated servers are a waste.

The engine supports mods, but our PCs don't. Compressing and decompressing the hundreds of gigabytes takes tens of hours on a regular PC. Carmack noted that in a few years from now the average PC will be capable to work with the huge amounts of data, but now it's not an option.

I think id's lack of visibility is mostly because they haven't had a major release since 2004.

I think Id is nowhere near to what it used to be. Rage looks good but it wont come close to what Doom 3 was in 2004. Doom 3 was a major release back then alongside Far Cry and Half Life 2. Rage on the other hand will be just another consolised fps like Far Cry 2 was.

I think Id is nowhere near to what it used to be. Rage looks good but it wont come close to what Doom 3 was in 2004. Doom 3 was a major release back then alongside Far Cry and Half Life 2. Rage on the other hand will be just another consolised fps like Far Cry 2 was.

jernas

Really good points here. As for the earlier Valve comment, I will agree. Valve has struck a nice balance between technicals and gameplay. Here's a short list I made of companies when I think about their agendas(PC list).

Valve - Technical and Gameplay company

Blizzard Entertainment - Gameplay company

id Software - Technical company

Crytek - Technical company

Epic Games - Technical company

Bioware - Gameplay company, but scratching the surface of technicals with the recent Mass Effect's.

Infinity Ward- Technical company and at one point was defining to additionally being a gameplay company, however the constant re-use formula has lassitude.

Relic Entertainment - Relic is very close to striking a fine balance between the two.

Rockstar Games - Technical and Gameplay company

Capcom - Technical company

Dice - Technical company

Maxis - Gameplay company

Feel free too comment.

[QUOTE="jernas"]

I think Id is nowhere near to what it used to be. Rage looks good but it wont come close to what Doom 3 was in 2004. Doom 3 was a major release back then alongside Far Cry and Half Life 2. Rage on the other hand will be just another consolised fps like Far Cry 2 was.

dakan45

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="jernas"]

I think Id is nowhere near to what it used to be. Rage looks good but it wont come close to what Doom 3 was in 2004. Doom 3 was a major release back then alongside Far Cry and Half Life 2. Rage on the other hand will be just another consolised fps like Far Cry 2 was.

mo0ksi

yeah ID is pretty much dead this gen may be Rage will change that.

Valve is still the best.They just need new source engine.

Personally I think Rage will be a tech demo, designed to test out id tech 5. I'm thinking it will be a less rpgish yet better version of borderlands. I also think that doom 4 will probably be an incredible game, because id isn't really a small budget constrained developer anymore. If all the things they say about id tech 5 is true, I think that they could make a lot of money out of licensing the engine.

Rage is, at least for me, their last shot.

As much as I enjoyed Doom 3 and Quake 4 (ooooh lordie, how I loved Quake 4) they were essentially cash grabs; no true effort nor innovation was put into them, but then again I suppose it was silly to expect a developer known for making vanilla games to do anything more.

Sure, id might have been a pioneer in the early days of shooters, but theyve contributed nothing in the grand scheme of things for over as decade.

But, lets see how Rage is, and lets see how Carmack treats PC gamers over the next few years.

Rage is, at least for me, their last shot.

As much as I enjoyed Doom 3 and Quake 4 (ooooh lordie, how I loved Quake 4) they were essentially cash grabs; no true effort nor innovation was put into them, but then again I suppose it was silly to expect a developer known for making vanilla games to do anything more.

Sure, id might have been a pioneer in the early days of shooters, but theyve contributed nothing in the grand scheme of things for over as decade.

But, lets see how Rage is, and lets see how Carmack treats PC gamers over the next few years.

mrbojangles25

Id, in my view, have always been a half-a$$ developer - if you look at the cuts between episodes/parts in DOOMs 1 & 2, they clearly had little care for narrative. The games have always been about guns and violence for Id, and as the game industry has changed - they haven't changed at all, and the fact that they have stayed with the roughly the same game mechanics since Wolf 3D makes them stand out from the rest. In fact, I'm worried that they are taking the current trends too seriously - multi-ported games, big storylines, interesting characters et al. When it comes to DOOM or Quake, I want none of that. Overall, I think Rage will be a change for Id's style, but I'm hoping it won't be a major change. Financially, Id should be fine with their fanbase of die hard FPSers (like me), and the fact that they develop arguably (probably) the best 3D engines on the market.kdawg88

exactly

id is like the Aerosmith of the action game world.

theyre not exactly bad, but theyre more lucky than they are good. Just like Aerosmith got on the rock bandwagon early, so did Id get on the shooter bandwagon. Couple this with the controversy surrounding shooters and violence back in the 1990s (parents say "no", kids suddenly want) and you end up with a studio doing mediocre work and getting lucky.

We all talk about how much we love Doom and Quake and Wolfenstein "back in the day" but in all honesty that is strictly nostalgia speaking; we would be idiots to think those games are better than today's most mediocre shooter.

Quake still has better level design than 80% of today's shooters.

And who doesn't want a new fantasy Quake?!

Quake still has better level design than 80% of today's shooters.

And who doesn't want a new fantasy Quake?!

Baranga

Quake still has better level design than 80% of today's shooters.

And who doesn't want a new fantasy Quake?!

Baranga

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

Quake still has better level design than 80% of today's shooters.

And who doesn't want a new fantasy Quake?!

kdawg88

I want a Doom 4 and Quake 5 games; I'm not very interested in Rage but maybe will let a try.

Just in the other hand, I'm not interested on Valve games or any game linked to Steam. I enjoyed Doom 3 and Quake 4 more than HL-2.

That's all I want out of a Quake 5. Awesome multiplayer. I'm not exactly sure what the complaints are with Quake 4 multiplayer. I thought it was fine. Sure, it was basically Quake 3 with a paint job, but I don't know what they could have done really. Change it too much, and people would scream bloody murder. Don't change it enough, they just say more of the same and ignore it.zomglolcats

One single advice: DON'T expect the Doom 4/Quake 5 multiplayer to be very popular if they don't radically change the gameplay. Arcade shooters as UT and Quake will never have the preminance of the old days. I love their run & gun gameplay, their demand of skill, but MOST of current average players don't want this kind of games, so you can try to change the game to the new times or better let the franchise die.

Id Software, as Neo will be either the sword and the wall, and will be forced to choice the pill: either add classes, unlockable stuff, ranks and grades as in Modern Warfare, Battlefield, Halo and Killzone series, as the most currently played games, or choice to keep the essentials and then live to see how the game fall in a hardcore niche with less and less players.

Three examples: F.E.A.R Combat and Quake Live, even free, had a very small community of players, and the same with Unreal Tournament III.

[QUOTE="zomglolcats"]That's all I want out of a Quake 5. Awesome multiplayer. I'm not exactly sure what the complaints are with Quake 4 multiplayer. I thought it was fine. Sure, it was basically Quake 3 with a paint job, but I don't know what they could have done really. Change it too much, and people would scream bloody murder. Don't change it enough, they just say more of the same and ignore it.Ondoval

One single advice: DON'T expect the Doom 4/Quake 5 multiplayer to be very popular if they don't radically change the gameplay. Arcade shooters as UT and Quake will never have the preminance of the old days. I love their run & gun gameplay, their demand of skill, but MOST of current average players don't want this kind of games, so you can try to change the game to the new times or better let the franchise die.

Id Software, as Neo will be either the sword and the wall, and will be forced to choice the pill: either add classes, unlockable stuff, ranks and grades as in Modern Warfare, Battlefield, Halo and Killzone series, as the most currently played games, or choice to keep the essentials and then live to see how the game fall in a hardcore niche with less and less players.

Three examples: F.E.A.R Combat and Quake Live, even free, had a very small community of players, and the same with Unreal Tournament III.

yea its almost sad in a way.

I didnt have internet until the late 90s, and I started with Team Fortress Classic and Counterstrike, so I thought that was run of the mill for online shooters. It wasnt until Quake 3 that I discovered the joys of fundamental, beautiful deathmatch and TDM

[QUOTE="zomglolcats"]That's all I want out of a Quake 5. Awesome multiplayer. I'm not exactly sure what the complaints are with Quake 4 multiplayer. I thought it was fine. Sure, it was basically Quake 3 with a paint job, but I don't know what they could have done really. Change it too much, and people would scream bloody murder. Don't change it enough, they just say more of the same and ignore it.Ondoval

One single advice: DON'T expect the Doom 4/Quake 5 multiplayer to be very popular if they don't radically change the gameplay. Arcade shooters as UT and Quake will never have the preminance of the old days. I love their run & gun gameplay, their demand of skill, but MOST of current average players don't want this kind of games, so you can try to change the game to the new times or better let the franchise die.

Id Software, as Neo will be either the sword and the wall, and will be forced to choice the pill: either add classes, unlockable stuff, ranks and grades as in Modern Warfare, Battlefield, Halo and Killzone series, as the most currently played games, or choice to keep the essentials and then live to see how the game fall in a hardcore niche with less and less players.

Three examples: F.E.A.R Combat and Quake Live, even free, had a very small community of players, and the same with Unreal Tournament III.

I think what most of us want is a pure deathmatch experience. There's no problem with classes and unlocks, but I also want another "pure" experience like in the past.

Deathmatch and the other modes that rely only on player skill are overlooked today. That's a result of the Axis vs Allies model found in most shooters today (blue/red, terrorists/SpecOps etc).

As proved by Quake Wars, id's games lend themselves well to both models. I want the next Doom and Quake to feature both whatever class'n'loot trend is cool when they launch, but also a pure DM option.

Well they are going to follow IW`s steps, plus their engine wont support any mods. We`ll see how it turns out in the end. Dante2710

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="mo0ksi"] It was a PC exclusive at the time of release. Do you think about what you say before you post sometimes?mo0ksi

With John Carmack still writing code over at ID I wouldn't write them off. Even if their new games completely tank the technology ID put out will most likely mean other companies will license ID's new engine. ID has a history of their engines being better than their games. In fact their tech is a large part of why their successful games were so successful in the first place.

PS: I agree about Quake's level design

Really good points here. As for the earlier Valve comment, I will agree. Valve has struck a nice balance between technicals and gameplay. Here's a short list I made of companies when I think about their agendas(PC list).

Valve - Technical and Gameplay company

Blizzard Entertainment - Gameplay company

id Software - Technical company

Crytek - Technical company

Epic Games - Technical company

Bioware - Gameplay company, but scratching the surface of technicals with the recent Mass Effect's.

Infinity Ward- Technical company and at one point was defining to additionally being a gameplay company, however the constant re-use formula has lassitude.

Relic Entertainment - Relic is very close to striking a fine balance between the two.

Rockstar Games - Technical and Gameplay company

Capcom - Technical company

Dice - Technical company

Maxis - Gameplay company

Feel free too comment.

OoSuperMarioO

This is a good list but i don't agree with IW being a technical company, their engine is not licensed out as far as i know and whilst pretty i think its a bit dated.

This is a good list but i don't agree with IW being a technical company, their engine is not licensed out as far as i know and whilst pretty i think its a bit dated.sammysalsa

In comparison with how dated valve's source engine and hl2 is getting, IW is top notch!!

wolfenstein last year was good so I woudnt say they havent made a good game in a while;)

wolfenstein last year was good so I woudnt say they havent made a good game in a while;)

Darksonic666

Relic Entertainment - Relic is very close to striking a fine balance between the two.

OoSuperMarioO

Yes, Homeworld was a technical marvel with brilliant gameplay. CoH was nearly the same. Unfortunately, it feels like the magic has been missing with the CoH expansions and DoW 2. Maybe Homeworld 3 will come along soon....