>that they would get DNF out before DOOM 3 because they didn't want
>to compete.
Well. Same like Potter/Lotr. But they wanted to bring it out before?
Uh. I fear they won't be able to do so, since DooM 3 was announced to
go gold yesterday.
But a pal said: "Maybe DooM 3 will be quite lame, just incredible
engine but the game won't. And they made DooM 3 more for engine
licensing than game fun."
Well, I'll wait and see for myself. But many people keep telling that
there won't be the masses of stuff and demons like DooM 1 & 2. *sigh*
But I think DNF would be able to compete. Remember the times of Duke3d
and Quake 1. "I'm afraid of no quake". Well, I loved Quake, but in
fact it missed th gimmicks of Duke and was far more technical. So at
the end I like both games, till today. I still play stuff like doom
(getting new wads every week on doomworld), Rott, Duke, Blood, Quake.
Whatever.
I think both games will be a great hit. So they should just release it
after the fist dust has settled that DooM 3 whirled up.


>they could after released two or three Duke games by now and be well
>on their way in development of a fourth and still keeping high
>quality standards.
Hmm, I doubt that. Of course, it's a matter of engine improvement by
themself (time consuming) or licensing ready engines and concentrating
on the game "itself". The problem I see is, that with each month of
delay the expectations rise and maybe some people will be disappointed
by the game if it ever hits the street. Of course, they got the money
for delaying and game quality is a very fine thing (esp. if you look
at all the smaller publisher dependent companies that only produce
buggy stuff) - but they really should go for a release this year,
maybe around Christmas.

>part of the problem is they don't know what they want of the project
>and the other part of the problem is they're not willing to stand
>back and accept that they can't ride each new development wave.
Yeah. But it's impossible to keep up with each development, especially
if they're closed source, non GPL. Maybe they had a fine engine. Now
they see the light stuff in DooM 3... and so they keep working another
year. Crap. Light effects aren't everything in a game. Hey, there a
still guys like me that play EGA games. Shitty 320x200; 16 colours, no
fu*ked up light effects ever. And some of those games are still
enjoyable. Gameplay and fun, a good input support, nice music, these
thing are also part of a game. Of course light effects maybe used for
realistic looks, scaryness (and that's one of D3 principles). But it's
only a part of the whole game. And Duke should have enough good stuff
in it to compete. I saw that trailer once and 'it really kicked ass'!


>but it's not worth 8 to 9 years of development already spent and god
>knows how much is left.
But maybe they're working the Prey features into it.
Well, high ambitions...
The same with GNU/Hurd & GNU/Linux. Linux is monolithic, but it works
fine and it is existant! The ambitious Hurd-Microkernel remained quite
a dream.

>DNF & Tux
>won't be open source
Of course.

>but in true 3D Realms fashion I'm sure they'll make the game totally
>editable.
Well, that was invented by id. And that's a thing that kept DooM alive
for so long. Make your own levels, graphics, stuff. But editable
doesn't mean automatically compatibility with open standards. It
doesn't mean that it will run with Linux, Bsd, MacOS, whatever.

>Last thing I've read about Linux from them they're not even going to
>look at the possibility of Linux or Apple until after DNF is released
>on Windows.
Huh. Not nice. Of course, most people release for the windows
plattform first since it's the most spreaded one (by OEM licensing)
and they expect the biggest market there. But wouldn't it be the best
to serve all markets? If you stick to nonproprietary standards, roalty
free stuff, then it's way easier to make a portation to other systems.

>They will then outsource to another company for portation if they
>decide to go for it.
I hope so. I hope for their sake, or they won't see a cent from me.
Cause: Why should I spend money for a software that doesn't run in the
environment I want? I mean: I won't pay anyone to cut my digital
rights to digital restrictions. Look, there's 2xfree stuff (free in
software and free of cost) that allows me to run it when, where and
how I want. No copyprotection getting on my nerves, no 'you may not
this you may not that'. I've had a look at the big freedom of free
software already. And I accept that developing software is a work like
everyone else does a job, so I'm also willing to pay a programmer. (If
my budget fits it.) But I won't pay someone to put me into (digital)
chains.
Well, enough of ranting, I hope I'll see all these games some day, on
the machine and software environment I prefer.
And to this date I should keep playing ... um... maybe I'd try
Catacomb again. :)