Todd Hollenshead defends Doom III

By Tom Bramwell Published 8 July, 2008

People slating it "get no credibility".

Id Software CEO Todd Hollenshead has defended Doom III's reputation, pointing out that the four-year-old first-person shooter is "the most successful game in id's history".

Asked by Kikizo whether there were any 'weaknesses in Doom III that need to be corrected' for upcoming multiformat racing/shooting hybrid Rage, Hollenshead rejected the premise completely.

"I think there are three people on the internet that keep making these posts that Doom 3 was 'bad', and they get no credibility from any other people... there's some mass-misperception out there," he said.

"I get this occasionally - why don't I think Doom III was successful? We sold over three million units! It's the most successful game in id's history."

Released in August 2004 on PC (and later on Xbox), Doom III took players on a spooky tour of a dark and distorted Mars research base where naughty experiments had opened a gateway to Hell.

The game was highly rated at the time, even collecting a 9/10 rating from our own Kristan Reed, but it did come under fire for its repetitive environments, single-minded focus and the fact you couldn't hold the torch at the same time as your gun.

Doom's developer is currently working on various projects including a fourth game in the series based on id's current engine, id Tech 5.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (61) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • andijames #1 4 years ago

    I thought it was a pretty good game! A bit ahead of it's time really the graphics cards needed to handle the engine properly only came out about 6 months after the game i think.

  • asphaltcowboy #2 4 years ago

    I loved Doom III, it was awesome!

  • the_dudefather #3 4 years ago

    I'm in the 'I quite liked it' crowd too



  • Sir_TimAlot #4 4 years ago

    Don't worry Todd, i liked it......
    that should put his mind at ease
    Edited by 1 at 08/07/08 @ 15:33

  • jellyhead #5 4 years ago

    It was ok, repetitive gameplay but lots of atmosphere.

  • alimokrane #6 4 years ago

    Doom III, in my books, is one of the best FPSs ever. GREAT GREAT atmosphere

  • Schiraman #7 4 years ago

    Actually what was most wrong with Doom 3 was the 'zombie in a cupboard' syndrome that it suffered from so badly. Walk into a new area, pick up some armour, 3 hidden doors open revealing tiny little rooms full of monsters and/or some monsters just teleport in for the hell of it. Repeat. And again. And then some more.

    Still, it was a good game on the whole despite its flaws.

  • Setaro #8 4 years ago

    Well I for one liked Doom 3: it was immersive, atmospheric (I don't think not being able to hold a weapon and torch at the same time was a flaw; yes it was a cheap trick to make it more intense, but hey, it worked) and fun.

  • ChthonicEcho #9 4 years ago

    I love insecure and ignorant people. They're always a source of great entertainment.

  • Killerbee #10 4 years ago

    Have to agree. Doom 3 was great fun, mainly off the back of the fantastic atmosphere the game built up. With the possible exception of some sections in FEAR, no other game has made me creep round levels in case an enemy pops out from behind the next door I open. The torch / gun thing might have been unrealistic, but it was clearly a gameplay mechanism and in that sense, it worked really well.

    Surely if people want to lay into any id game, then it should be Quake 4. (Okay that was Raven, but still...)
    Edited by 1 at 08/07/08 @ 15:47

  • Dynamize #11 4 years ago

    It was mostly average with a bit of flair here and there. Great, moody beginning showing a lot of potential. Then manoeuvring itself so it satisfies neither atmosphere and exposition-lovers, nor carve-your-way-through-legions-of-monsters people.

  • Dizzy #12 4 years ago

    The curse of emo whining NeoGAFers.

  • Waldo #13 4 years ago

    I preferred it to Half-Life 2.

  • anomagnus #14 4 years ago

    i also loved it

    did this come from neogaf/onefag?

  • Whizzo #15 4 years ago

    I just love monster closets, they're fantastic, especially ones that open up behind you, that's not at all cheap and not fun.

  • Artemis_Matsas #16 4 years ago

    Great game, Great graphics, Great atmosphere. I can't believe that people are complaining about it!

  • Xerx3s #17 4 years ago

    Doom 3 coop was a blast. Especially the tactical team work that it forced with the flashlight was nicely done.

  • daz_john_smith #18 4 years ago

    I must be one of the 3 people who didn't like it that much, but I've never started a thread on the interweb to voice my dislike. It just made me want to play Ultimate Doom and Doom 2 again.
    Edited by 1 at 08/07/08 @ 16:04

  • Xerx3s #19 4 years ago

    I think that the biggest con people have against it is the "I grab this weapon and predictably there will be monsters spawning around me" gameplay. But what do they expect? This is exactly how doom games work. It's the doom formula.

    Besides, it made my mate so scared that he hasn't finished the game to this day. Comedy gold. \0/

  • mrt181 #20 4 years ago

    go go power Hollenshead...

    i like doom3 and roe, played through it 3 to 4 times until now, everytime with a better gpu and more graphic enhancing mods. great dungeon crawler.

  • craziii #21 4 years ago

    I love doom III, only complain was the flash light thing, but it is good for a laugh.

    what were people complaining about? I didn't see anything wrong with it when I played besides the flash light thing.

  • Stupid_Fat_Hobbit #22 4 years ago

    Doom 3 was a perfectly decent game. I think it got more criticism than it deserved because it came out within a few months of Half-Life 2, and frankly, a lot of games look bad in comparison to HL2.

  • eurisko2k #23 4 years ago

    I was disapointed by it... Then again I've not been a Id fan for years.

  • Goffee #24 4 years ago

    I'm still waiting until I upgrade my PC before seriously trying to play it. But i remember the first couple of levels on a mate's uber-PC as gorgeously gloomy.

  • jamie_fear #25 4 years ago

    I liked it. It melted my £300 ATI 9800XT graphics card though.

  • TSYNDMonkfish #26 4 years ago

    Doom3 did look great, plus it had a nice & dark atmosphere, but once the novelty wore off it was just to repetitive for my tastes. I guess I'm not a great fan on linear shooters as I got bored with Bioshock also.

    Id still buy Doom4 when it comes out though.

  • Genji #27 4 years ago

    It kicks the shit out of Half Life 2.

    /didn't really like HL2 all that much

  • DanWhitehead #28 4 years ago

    As far as unimaginatively designed, heavily scripted, AI-free, on-rails haunted house rides go, Doom 3 is definitely in the Top 10.

    Well, Top 20, at least.

  • arcanis22 #29 4 years ago

    the simple fact (in my opinion) is that DOOM III did have its flaws but they were all based around keeping it a DOOM game (repetitive gameplay, heavy scripting etc.) it's what gave it that oldschool feel and why many people loved it so much.

    As for the flashlight thing, I can see why people disliked it but I thought it was genious, it really made you feel vunerable and kept you on edge ready to quickly switch to your gun if something jumped out.

  • Mox #30 4 years ago

    I found Doom 3 was better on the middle difficulty than the hard one, because it kind of ruined the atmosphere to have monsters all over the shop. Too many creepy moments were getting ruined with a monster pop-up on the hardest setting.

  • asphaltcowboy #31 4 years ago

    "I love doom III, only complain was the flash light thing, but it is good for a laugh."

    The flashlight thing was awesome - only complete muppets complain about the flashlight switch!

  • subtlesnake #32 4 years ago

    I thought it was a very good game, and deserving of 'AAA' status, but it was not without its faults. The beginning was pretty tense, and embodied a strong survival horror vibe, but this soon gave way to the familiar arcadish action, and as a player I never felt particularly threatened. On the other hand, I thought the game picked up towards the end, climaxing in the trip to hell, which was suitably intense.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #33 4 years ago

    "I think there are three people on the internet that keep making these posts that Doom 3 was 'bad'

    Doom 3 was bad.

  • rowsdower #34 4 years ago

    Dark, monotonous corridors with monster closets aplenty and enemies spawning behind you in cleared out rooms. Doom 3 was a revolution alright, a revolution in insipid game design and bland monotony. We'd grown out of Doom 3 before it was released. We're even more grown out of it now.

    If there are only three people badmouthing Doom 3 on the internet, I'd like to meet them. They certainly have more of an idea of good game design than the cretin currently driving iD down the hoary road of complacency and franchise milking.

  • Uncle_Fishboy #35 4 years ago

    Why do people blither on about how great HL2 is? I played through it (and the extra episodes) for the first time on the 360 recently. I was glad when it was over. Boring. Crap graphics. Load of old toss. Go away HL2 - you are the shit of devils.
    Edited by 1 at 08/07/08 @ 17:02

  • illusiondance #36 4 years ago

    mr.rowsdower has summarized the faults of the game perfectly.
    while im aware some people seriously love the simplicity of the game and find the graphical effects exciting, i personally found the bankruptcy of design ideas pretty appalling - to the extent that it was really hard to stop ignoring the shortcuts and lazy decisions taken by the id staff.
    this hollenshed man must be expressing a guilty conscience through a pretence of incredulity. silly

  • hahayou #37 4 years ago

    Well, I was bored and frustrated by it. It had a few good genuinely scary and disturbing moments, but, basically, a horror game in a futuristic setting with a protagonist with a plasma rifle doesn't work. And the multiplayer wasn't remotely as good as Q3. No network co-op either!

    Also, Serious Sam made a far better sequel to Doom than Doom 3 did.
    Edited by 1 at 08/07/08 @ 17:45

  • kingdumpalot #38 4 years ago

    Doom 3 was bad. the graphics were meant to be groundbreaking, but they ended up being let down by the textures IMO. Also, many of the weapons lacked punch, which is quite important for FPSs. There wasn't very much variation between the enemies (though I will grudgingly admit it was a bit better than HL2 in this respect). I didn't get far enough to get to the "hell" bits, but after a very good intro, the game got boring a bit too quickly.

    They got the scares right, for the most part, but I would consider that to be the bare minimum for a Doom game.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #39 4 years ago

    I guess I would have enjoyed the game more if I didn't expect something like Doom and Doom 2. The games have pretty much nothing in common (looking at the gameplay) which was very disappointing. Yet another linear FPS that didn't know how to create suspense other than by teleporting a monster right behind you. Ok for a few times but not if every single level is based on that.

    Gone are the mazes and the action packed battles in rooms full of monsters. Of course Doom 3 wasn't all that bad but in my book it simply didn't deserve to be called Doom.

  • monty2k #40 4 years ago

    One complaint about Doom 3 that always annoys me is the "Lots of monotonous corridors" - It's an underfunded and understaffed research facility on Mars which is run by a shady military corporation. What were you expecting? Wide open vistas of verdant green foliage with white-capped mountains in the distance and blue sky overhead? Google pictures of military bunker/ ISS/space shuttle interiors and the corridors of Doom 3 look quite nice and comfortable in comparison.

    Now that I've vented my spleen, I do agree about the irritation of monster closets and the inability of a fully trained marine to hold a gun and a torch at the same time.

    On a related note, not only do I quite like Doom 3, but I also quite like Half Life 2. Does this make me odd?

  • Ihya #41 4 years ago

    Fucking awful game I had the misfortune of playing.

  • DanWhitehead #42 4 years ago

    One complaint about Doom 3 that always annoys me is the "Lots of monotonous corridors" - It's an underfunded and understaffed research facility on Mars which is run by a shady military corporation. What were you expecting?

    Well, it's not like it's a documentary. Obviously dark works better for Doom, but they could've set it anywhere, or at least varied the environments within the facility.

  • ch3w84cc4 #43 4 years ago

    The problem I had with Doom3 was it just looked to plasticy when compared to Half Life 2. HL2 was inovative where as Doom 3 struck me as being a tech demo for the latest graphic cards.

    The game mechanic was tired and to be honest if you are going for shock value the first AVP game when you play as a Marine was a far more satisfying experience.

    Multiplayer was also bloody awful. I know Q4 is for the multiplayers but that wasn't particularly great either. I am sure there are still more people playing Q2 and Doom2 than play Doom3.

  • monty2k #44 4 years ago

    @ Dan Whitehead:

    I'm not arguing against more level variation. Although that would have Doom 3 a better game, darkened corridors seem more logical to me and fit better within the Doom universe.

    Despite Doom 3 being set 137 years in the future, all the weapons (bar the plasma rifle, BFG and soul cube) have modern equivalents. The PDAs are blackberry ripoffs. Most of the buildings and architecture would be possible with current day technology and the more advanced sci-fi technology, for example, faster than light travel, doesn't seem to exist in the Doom universe. The only really fantastical element in Doom 3 is the demon infestation.

    With all the emphasis on current day technology, I don't see why the environments of Doom 3 shouldn't all be poorly-lit, barren corridors. After working in several hospital and university biology labs, I can tell you it's a disturbingly accurate portrayal of the real thing.

  • MaxiSleep #45 4 years ago

    People also seamed to miss the entire tribute to system shock thang going on

  • creepylizard #46 4 years ago

    my problem with doom 3 was when the fecking enemies just appeared in front of, or behind, you and you had no chance of avoiding being shot....

  • VMerken #47 4 years ago

    I enjoyed Doom III. It was never meant to go beyond the traits that made its predecessors so much, braindead, fun: search bigass weapons, find demons along the way, smash demons. I'm also glad there was no yellow-red-blue key backtracking malarchey but rather a focus on the story of a lonely marine stranded in a dark, desolate, slowly decrepifying environment, all odds against him, yet oddly managing to get by. Oh, and let's not forget it is the source of inspiration for Portal's Weighted Companion Cube.

    As for the flashlight thing, if it is troublesome, I believe there's an elegant patch around where the Marine's mental capacities become just high enough to realise the wonders of taping the flashlight to the guns he finds.

  • Waldo #48 4 years ago

    People also seamed to miss the entire tribute to system shock thang going on

    Most of those people went on to review BioShock.

  • squarepusher #49 4 years ago

    cos we went from this;

    [link url=http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=EtjdwF4fsLw
    ]http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=EtjdwF4fsLw
    [/link]

    to this;

    [link url=http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=6GyZHvzGcyE
    ]http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=6GyZHvzGcyE
    [/link]

    See?

    btw Eurogamer you gave Doom 3 9/10 and Painkiller 5/10... :¬/

  • Kami #50 4 years ago

    Whilst an enjoyable FPS, the greatest criticism I can level at Doom 3 is that it really was pretty standardised stuff. We'd seen it all before more or less (taking element from HL, AvP and AvP2, even previous Doom titles) and it was all dressed up in very very pretty graphics.

    To quote a one Mr Yahtzee; The word that best sums up Doom 3 is SAFE. It takes no risks and pushes no envelopes. An envelope would move more if you put it in front of a glacier.

    I have no doubt it was one of their biggest sellers, it's as far from a terrible game as you could hope to get without hitting perfection. I just hope Doom 4 lets off at least one measely firework...

  • J.C #51 4 years ago

    Most disturbing FPS ever made. played with the lights off and decent headphones OH MAMMA!

  • Roland44 #52 4 years ago

    I wanted to play it...but it made my chest hurt lol

    No lie, I guess headphones and no light was too much for my ticker heh

    Maybe I should go back and try it again ;)

    Regards

  • peppergomez #53 4 years ago

    a might defensive there, todd? doom 3 was the best looking game of its day, and the first few hours were pretty intense, but the game ran out of ideas and got monotonous. the worst was the hell level, which seemed to be the brainchild of a bunch of teenagers sitting around listening to black sabbath or judas priest, and was cheesy and adolescent, not scary. blech...

    if my history is right, far cry pretty much stole doom 3's thunder.
    Edited by 1 at 09/07/08 @ 03:15

  • Svecke #54 4 years ago

    Doom 3 was not a good game, with its monster closets getting tedious fast, and the pitch blackness that also just got irritating instead of scary.

    BUT!

    But, several years after the fact, when they released Doom 3 and its expansion pack on Steam, I bought them, and I keep playing them on and off from time to time. With the duct-tape mod, obviously. So it can't be -that- bad, it just isn't the newborn Jesus.

  • TheNinkyNonk #55 4 years ago

    I loved it and it looked fucking amazing on the original Xbox.

  • bad09 #56 4 years ago

    "I loved it and it looked fucking amazing on the original Xbox."

    +1 brilliant game! I don't understand the hate. But everyone is different I suppose, I thought the great god HL2 was one of the most overrated and dullest FPS's ever.

  • zuul_ #57 4 years ago

    Yeah, crappy weapon sound. So I'm not the only one. I always wondered whether my sound card was broken when most weapons would just emit a tiny "pock pock pock" instead of "BOOM!". It was even weirder because everyone praised the Doom3 sound engine.
    Edited by 1 at 09/07/08 @ 10:42

  • GitSomE_UK #58 4 years ago

    I really enjoyed Doom3 so what if it had the weapon pickup zombie cupboards here and there. That's the point, that's Doom it's a shooter with a back story nothing more.

    There were many areas of the game that really shone. Transitioning through Airlocks, The teleporters both the test and the actual portal, the messages scrawled in blood on the walls and the fluctuating hell scenes in the corridors all built into a great atmosphere of hell spilling into another reality. I think ID did a great job at the time, even today after 4 years the graphics can still piss on some of the more recent PC games that have been released.

    Many people gave up after a few levels it's only when you get around a third of the way through that the game ratchets up the suspense level.

  • Vermillion3000 #59 4 years ago

    No it wasn't shit but I played through to almost the end before the constant trudge and insto-death just robbed me of the will to live and I have no intention of playing it ever again. (which is not teh case with Doom1 and 2)

    The big problem I had with it was the pacing - every inch of the game was a really trudge of attrition. And those pointless bloody PDU's with door codes were complete mood breakers. A side narrative is fair enough but they overdosed on YET MORE SPOOKY STORIES FOR YOU TO READ!

    Meh.
    Twice!

  • louyfitz #60 4 years ago

    @ Uncle_fishboy

    Fucking spot on! I played through *most* of HL2 and ended up playing Doom 3 and FEAR instead.

    I dont see what all the fuss is about with Half-Life, it's nothing special.

    I'm not saying that Doom 3 or FEAR are particularly special either, but at least Doom 3 was dark and a little Grungy. FEAR was very fast paced action for quite a lot of it, then when it got too fast paced you could slow-mo it for a few seconds to clear the room of hording clones or whatever the fuck they were.

    Half Life just didnt excited me, nor did I look back at something I'd just done, and gone "Dude! that was fucking intense!".

    No online mode, pretty weak story, shooting guns feels like your taking a piss on the enemy rather than blowing then to bits. Not to mention that stupid hovercraft thing that went on for ages.

    And people are still dissing Doom 3?

  • 7creature #61 4 years ago

    Enjoyed D3 too, even though it is quite different from predecessors. I even started to like this whole flashlight thing :-)