Gameguru Mania - The Best Gaming News

Gameguru Mania News - Mar,08 2004 -

DOOM 3 System Requirements - briefly
(hx) 09:15 PM CET - Mar,08 2004 - Post a comment / read (34)
The german magazine PCGames Hardware has published a brief Q&A with John Carmack (thanks PlanetDoom) in their latest issue. According to this interview (if the translation is right) you'll need a graphics card with at least 128MB RAM and Pixel-Shader 1.1, better would be 2.0 of course (GeForce 4 Ti / Radeon 8500 or better) and your CPU should run with at least 2,5 GHz for the game's physics and shadows.

- A video card with at least 128MB RAM and Pixel Shader 1.1 support is required for DOOM 3.
- A 2.5GHz CPU should be enough for the stencil shadows and physics calculations.
- The testing phase might last till summer or even later this year.
- DOOM 3 will be released on 4 CDs and multiplayer will include Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Tournament and Last Man Standing.

UPDATE: PlanetDoom asked id software for confirmation and they have replied saying that "the information that appeared in the article is totally false and a fabrication on the magazine's part".

last 10 comments:

xxxx	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 21:18
well'p that settles it, i'm not getting it cuz i'm not upgrading my fine running machine to play 1 game nicely. maybe next next summer. love that tho, i really want to see this game run on a GF4 or 8500.. gimme a break.

Doom3aint comin go g	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 21:54
forget DOOM3! another Carmack hype project that will be a big let down at release. Dont expect this game until XBOX 2 is available, i'm sure MS has their dirty lil paws into this project too..... CAN YOU SAY "PAINKILLER" coming in April baby!!!!!

Nuke	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 22:21
at least 2.5 GHz......... oooo fuck that I'm not upgreading my pc for this.

capeta 666	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 22:33
they are pushing games foward, ppl love to complain, altough its taking too long to come ill for sure wait and see. at least for the leaked version and the trailer its going to be next generation gaming. stupid ones cant understand or see new engines.

xxxx	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 22:37
pushing games forward! lol. Painkiller is a new engine, runs damn fine and looks damn fine, so is stalker. doom3 is all f'ing marketing, any idiot knows that. you're just another sucker willing to fork out cash to play "a" game. hope that 4 player multiplayer is really fun! LOL! stupid ones? i'm not the moron who's going to upgrade my machine to play "1" game dickweed.

samadama	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 22:49
If I am correct, I thought they were making an xbox version, if they are then I might by it if it is good.

	posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 23:24
two words "fuck that" period

Zeus

posted - Mar, 08 2004 - 23:35

ha, although i have a machine that fits this configuration, i dont believe they are serious. its one thing to push forward (anyone remember the wing commander series), but usually this used to concentrate on one hardware piece, like the RAM or the CPU or the GFX, but now its like all of it. at least 128mb gfx card!?! i have tested the alpha leak on a geforce 2 mx with 32mb and it ran ok at a very low (not the lowsest!) resolution. i dont believe those specs, probably thats for the highest resolution with details at full and AAx6 and dolby surround 14.4 or whatever.

stan	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 00:16
i played the alpha on my gfti4200 with 128mb and although i do have only a 1.8ghz proc that thing ran fine until there were more then 3 monsters on the screen at one shot. Im pretty sure too though that they have some fast physics going on in the game that weren't in the alpha and those will need some heavy duty proc speeds.

chris	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 00:24
whats the point of selling dvd-rom drives and burners when GAMES !!!!! are still sold on cd-roms... c'mon.... lets move to dvd-rom,..... PLS !!!!

JackTheRipper	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 01:54
I got 2 words for this game "FUCK IT" If the requirements are this steep, im not gonna fuckin spend a shit load of $$$ to upgrade my mobo for one damn hyped game.

Bill Gates	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 02:43
i can neither confirm nor deny that Microsoft has any involvement in the Doom3 Project

	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 02:47
2.5 ghz...verryy goood i'm gonna upgrade asap! now gimme d3

droper	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 04:45
This game should not be released till late this year for it to make any sense $$$ wise. Most people won't even buy it because its single player they will test it on their system see that its unplayable and move on to something fun.

droper	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 04:50
I just read the planet doom site they updated saying the info is bullshit. http://www.forumplanet.com/planetdoom/topic.asp?fid=4952&tid=1311705

posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 08:04

this is so a load of shit. there is no way in hell that this info is true. I used a GF4Ti4200 64MB, when i tried the Alpha leak, it was nearly smooth, slowed down when there was ultra extensive shadows, but it was smooth otherwise. Now that i have: AMD AthlonXP 2600+ 512MB DDR PC2700 ATI Radeon 9800Pro 128MB there is no way that this game is gonna be slow. (probably abit sluggish, but too slow) If a game requires that much, i would never, ever get it.

pink-doom-monster	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 13:50
You guys are comparing the ALPHA to the final???? I'm sure a LOT of work and heaps of features have been added making it more demanding. Plus I bet carmack added "wait-states" if you own an ATI card. ;)

asd	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 14:01
it seems to me like these specs are BS

JK	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 14:16
well, i just said that the Alpha Leak was smooth-ish on my old GF4Ti4200 64MB, so if the final release is more stable and optimized, it is surely going to be smooth.

doom3fan

posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 15:41

you people complaining about hardware specs... tsk tsk, I bought a 2.8 ghz cpu from ebay for £80. It was no biggy, stop moaning just because the graphics of games are getting better and companies can't be shit bothered to provide 100% super fast compatability with older systems. With the way things going, the hardware demands of games are continuing to grow at a much faster rate now. I played the alpha of doom3 on my machine, main cause of slow-downs are the realtime shadows, which can be disabled anyways. and YES, it is a damn good game.

stumpus

posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 15:42

Comments from Nuke - nuke********@ggdsfgs posted - 04:21 PM EST - Mar,08 2004 at least 2.5 GHz......... oooo fuck that I'm not upgreading my pc for this. ROFLMAO!!! You guys just stick to your XBoxes, You can buy a 2.5GHz CPU for buttons! They *ARE NOT* expensive, If you haven't got a system near those, specs then forget about PC gaming. GeForce 4 TI is over 2YEARS OLD *again* not expensive -you can buy a Radeon 9600 Pro for just over £100 (DX9 card) As usual a knee jerk reaction without MUCH THOUGHT from supposed gamers..... You guys complain like old women, and gossip like them too!!!!!!! Lot's of "two faced" replies will no doubt be playing D3, just like to hear yourselves moan............

adsf	posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 18:29
to sumpus "Lot's of "two faced" replies will no doubt be playing D3" guess what you DON'T know me i won't be playing it

xxxx

posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 19:24

u know that 'is' such a stupid comment. thats usually associated with, 'i lost in this arguement so i'll put out some stupid ass line' and probably made up by a 12 year old and say, trash talk now, buy it later. Nah, sorry i was around the day doom was released, it was a fun game but this new doom3, nah thanks, requirements are too steep(i know they are false) but any moron knows common cards today wont power this game properly. a lot of you kids have very little priorites in life aside from screwing some chick or buying beer and getting pissed drunk so just blowing it on any game, that's your perogative, but for a majority of us mature gamers, doom3 is simply a cash cow project of carmack doing something he said he would never do in the past for extra money. Carmack was and is over rated and i truely believe there are better engines out there period and are way better from a resource perspective to boot. and what is with carmack, is it he only has the intelligence to do fps games? wow! what a genius. and this guy is working on a rocketship, i hope he's the first to fly on it. Good Riddance!

Zeus

posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 20:33

i gotta comment on the people who bought new hardware and now act like its no big deal. i also got recently new very good hardware, but saying its cheap is a lie. take for example the people who say the cpu is cheap, great, too bad you have to buy usually a motherboad and new ram. so there goes the cheap cpu. as for gfx, a good middle class card costs in europe around 150 euros, dunno where you live, but i dont think thats CHEAP. its not as expensive as a 500 euro card, but really does the average guy care if the porsche is soo much cheaper than a ferrari? i guess its the "we buy new hardware every half year and act like the people who refuse to throw money out of the window are dickheads". i dont like consoles and people who hate them like to bitch how much the games cost, but its no real argument, when i look at how much money people spend on new hardware for their pc. and to the guy who said he played the alpha and the game is damn good, you must be joking. you dare to judge the quality of a whole game by the alpha, that only showed technical aspects? and turning shadows off, to make it run better is a bad bad solution, i figured that out on deus ex 2, the whole atmosphere was gone, and i expect doom 3 to be the same, it lives from the shadows.

Tom

posted - Mar, 09 2004 - 21:23

Don't usually agree with you usually Zeus, but I am here. Exactly. This thing about shadows is something that developers will spit on you if you bring it up. Usually this is their first solution, like ATI. You go to their Rage3D site and search for shadows, u will have lots of people on there and suggest shadows off. It is BS. To do this in any game is insulting and shows just how useless a card is. I had a 9700 and most times i "had" to shut off shadows. People with 9800's have to do it too(unless they are 2.8ghz or more, course they will lie to save face.). Then ATI and others including their testers will tell you your system is shit even though you exceed the 'preferred' requirements or the game sucks and the code is shit etc.. it's never the video card maker, it's everyone else! And that's why I will never touch another ATI card for the rest of my life. I switched to Nvidia and I have 0 problems anymore. Even if my FPS is low the game STILL is SMOOTH and I've never turned off shadows yet. Everything and everything I run now is MAX and I only got a 2ghz cpu. I will never buy hardware based on a game. To me, you are a complete idiot if you go out and blow tons of money for a "game", shows your priorities or lack of em in real life or fact you got ZERO social life. I upgrade when I see I have no choice, not when some stupid ass rich programmer writes a game. I too hate Carmak he's so F'ing overrated.

John Carmack	posted - Mar, 10 2004 - 00:44
i am not overrated. i rule. i even drive a ferrari to prove it

CarmackSmack	posted - Mar, 10 2004 - 01:53
Know what will happen, Carmack will pull a "Half Life 2" trick, have someone steal the code and then wait another year for the general population to catch up in the Hardware arena... you never know....

duh!	posted - Mar, 10 2004 - 03:25
UPDATE: PlanetDoom asked id software for confirmation and they have replied saying that "the information that appeared in the article is totally false and a fabrication on the magazine's part".

John Carmack	posted - Mar, 10 2004 - 03:49
agree with CarmackSmack. i also bet there is another "Half Life 2" trick and before u can say doooooooooom III, it's requirement will increase to pentium 5 4ghz or whatsoever is higher then.

Sly

posted - Mar, 10 2004 - 19:13

I have a pretty average rig (ti4200, AMD2.1+) and was expecting it to last for a bit. So far, all the games i've ever played on it runs ok with everything set to max. And now suddenly a new game pops up that turns my rig in the *minimum* spec?! I'm a pretty hard core gamer, even upgrade my PC just to keep up with the games. But even i can't keep up with these kinds of leap games with quantum leap requirements =( What were high end PC specs when this game was first introduced anyway? As for the hardware cost. I don't know where you guys get your stuff but over here, the prices don't change much over time. What a hardware cost 2 years ago would only be less than 5% cheaper today over here. I certainly hope these aren't the real specs. I certainly hope the minimum requirement wouldn't be a pentium 5 and an FX card. Buying a cutting edge machine for just one game isn't really practical.

xxxx

posted - Mar, 10 2004 - 19:29

good luck man.. but i can assure you the most you will play doom3 at with that vid card is 640x480 with lots of stuff turned off. i wouldn't cry over the loss of doom3 anyhow, his purpose is more to sell the engine more than the game but for other games like painkiller and hl2 im sure your card will run fine at lower resolutions and these are also state of the art new engines, just gonna be way more resource friendly than carmacks bloatware game..

CARMACKSMACK

posted - Mar, 11 2004 - 01:32

In response to Duh! Understand that the said magazine probably quoted word for word what was actually said to them.. it is only after the impact of that reality of truth that ID would claim that it was not an accurate statement.. it is in ID's best interest to respond that way.. it's marketing 101! Dont fall into the HYPE of Doom3 it will not deliver unless you have a CRAY 3 Computer! He is waiting for the 64 bit processors and the PCI express technology to evolve before DOOM3 will exist. Also Microsoft XBOX div. also wants exclusive release for XBOX2..look what they did with Halo!

Mr. Grinch

posted - Apr, 29 2004 - 11:43

You've got to pay to play. I've never been disappointed with the games I've bought from ID. If and when Doom3 comes out, I'll wait a bit and see what the best hardware is for the game at that time. If I can afford it, I'll buy new hardware for it. It wouldn't be the first time I bought a new system for a game. If I can't afford it, I'll wait for prices to drop. And while I'm waiting, I'll keep playing the old games that run just fine on what I have now. It's nothing to get uptight over. It's not like we are enduring great hardship just because a new game requires new hardware. My first system was a Sinclair ZX81. Then an Amiga 1000. After that, a Micron Pentium 133, to play Mechwarrior. Next, a Pentium 2-400, to play Quake 2. At the time, I spent a bit extra to get a dual-cpu motherboard. Since then it's been upgraded to a Dual P3-800, 1GB ram, Ti4200 video. Now it's 4 years old and doesn't cut it for new games. But it still plays the old ones fine. No use trying to guess what hardware will run Doom 3 the best. I'm sure any half-decent system made today will run it acceptably. But I'll wait. And if the price is to high to get the performance I want, I'll wait until they drop. It's no big deal. Maybe by then we'll see stable versions of PCI Express motherboards and cards. Who knows. It would be nice if Doom 3 came out before I'm too old to play it.

you dumb $hit$	posted - Apr, 30 2004 - 07:58
********************************************************************************Don't forget to read the "update" at the end. Maybe ID Software isn't full of $hit when they say the article is "totally false". Quit bitching and learn to read.

write a comment
The old comment system has been replaced. Check out FORUMS!