Interview With John Romero 211
spensdawg writes "Here is an interesting interview with John Romero on Games.net. He gets into the original design philosophy for the first Doom games, what he would have done differently, and his plans for the future. Worth watching if you want to know a little more about the mad scientist behind Doom." A warning: this is a video interview
Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:4, Informative)
Two points:
- Why does a text article require flashplayer 8 to view it? It's a waste of bandwidth, waste of CPU and cutting down on this site's potential market.
- Why has Macromedia has only released a (very buggy) flashplayer 7 for linux x86, and no flashplayer at all for amd64? The selling point of Flash is that it's multi-platform but that's not really the case.
I look forward to the day when SVG and other standard technologies becomes more prevalent and Flash is relegated to the technology graveyard.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:5, Funny)
I guess since adobe is now in charge it isn't as high a priority, they are too busy finding bloat to put in it.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Even with FlashBlock around, I simply don't care enough about Homestarr to stomach the wasted screen space on like 1/3 of pages. And with flashovers, FlashBlock doesn't shove Flash deep enough.
Let it rot.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Also, note that a missed graphical ad is just a bit of visual annoyance. A missed piece of Flash is a major slowdown, tries to take over the browser, and generally is a major pain in the ass.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Just add a filter to *.swf
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:5, Informative)
Because it's not text, it's video. And if that weren't bad enough, every 5 seconds or so it decides to pause the video to buffer some more. I don't know if it's my Internet connection tonight (which has been slow and flakey at times for no apparant reason), or if the site is being /.'ed, but either way the video player has some serious issues with its buffering time heuristic.
In the end, it just isn't worth it. Trust me, you're not missing a thing.
Yaz.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:3, Interesting)
Flash Video is Evil. Yes, that's with a capital "E". Computer designers had video overlays nailed back in Windows 98. Remember the "Buddy Holly" video? Are you all trying to tell me now that we are throwing all that efficiency away and replacing it with a flash object painting to a browser renderer, which then paints to the screen? I can't believe my 3.0GHz dual-core is dropping frames now.
You can't save it either, nor can you zoom in / resize. I'm running at 1600x1200, your 100x100 flash video is the siz
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, which of these work on the majority of platforms without another plugin to download or better yet lots of dedicated custom streaming servers? Also, which of these provide a simple means to display multiple videos on a single page or can scale to the browser window size automatically? The flash video stuff is used because it's a least common denominator w
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Yeah, I just love nagware that asks me to upgrade to Quicktime Pro each and every fucking time I use it. I also love a "free" media player that won't let me view videos full-screen unless I pay 20 bucks. Even Mac users (myself included) STILL have to pay 20 bucks to get a fully-functional media player (unless you use Applescript hacks).
And the fact that on Windows, Quicktime HIJACKS your browser MIME settings for all media types WITHOUT ASKING - yeah, I really e
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
That is never going to happen, for two reasons.
One, Macromedia has a vested interest in keeping its sticky thumbs in everyones browser via Flash installations. They're not going to allow SVG to usurp the great thing they've got going, not matter how many users it infuriates. Expect a wealth of new Flash upgrades and especially better Flash authoring tools if SVG even l
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
So what you're saying is...Macromedia will want to compete with any opposition? You mean, like they're some kind of business or something? Like, if, th
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:5, Funny)
Ruminate on those two statements for a while.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:2)
Agreed. Everyone: go to the site, and if you can't read TFA, click the 'feedback' link just to the right of the mostly-empty box and tell them.
Re:Flashplayer 8 required :( (Score:5, Interesting)
It brings in more revenue because it's harder to quote (bloggers love to copy and paste entire sections, just as
That's why (Score:2)
Maybe later I'll download the Flash, rip out the mpeg video, and watch it in mplayer, where I can skip the commercial.
Two words (Score:2)
It's amazing... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:It's amazing... (Score:5, Funny)
And this alone is proof that God exists.
I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:5, Interesting)
Eivind, former game developer.
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean no disrespect of course, there are a lot of hobbiests that can pull all of this off, but a lot of good mappers have yet to pull off the kind of artistic ta
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:2)
Yeah, there are karky amateur-made maps too, but they're in the minority.
[And I say that with a wide array of maps fresh in my mind, since I still play DOOM every day... but almost never the default maps.]
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:5, Interesting)
He was the lead designer of Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, and Quake and co-founder of id Software.
Lead designers are kinda important for these projects and influence the gameplay quite a bit.
But conversely, it's not enough with just one decent lead designer when making a game, as Daikatana showed.
Even that's not that simple (Score:4, Informative)
Well, not contradicting what you wrote, but more as a reminder to everyone else: Daikatana was a complex phenomenon, at no number of designers could have saved it past a certain point.
For starters, it was largely a management failure, rather than a game design failure. The game design wasn't particularly bad, and in some ways it was ahead of its time. E.g., Daikatana tried to have a story in a FPS long before Half-Life, for example. In fact, it tried to have a story at a point in time where everyone else was churning mindless Wolfenstein 3D clones. And by comparison, once John Romero was gone, Id reverted to John Carmack's view that a plot is as needed for a game as for a porno movie.
What killed most of that design for Daikatana was simply being released so late as to not matter any more. Story in a FPS was no longer unheard of, the game engine was outdated, and some of the artwork looked like classic ass by sheer virtue of being old by now.
And that, in turn, could be traced to just bad management of the project and the company as a whole. John Romero wasn't necessarily bad at game design, but he was useless as a manager. All I'm saying is: let's not confuse the two issues, because they're different skills.
Plus, let's not underestimate the effect of Ion Storm's being the "victim" of a massive hype backlash. Partially because of its own PR blunders, that's for sure. (E.g., the "bitch" ad.) But also partially because a few idiots started screaming that Ion Storm killed Looking Glass, when Eidos let Looking Glass die. Suddenly it was _fashionable_ to be against John Romero and mourning Looking Glass, and a lot of SFVs (Stupid Fashion Victims) joined in the chorus without even having a fucking clue what they're pro or against in that campaign.
So me say just one thing: if a _quarter_ of the people posting all "Daikatana sucks!!!" all over the place had actually played the fucking game, it would have been a major commercial success. It would have probably outsold The Sims. No, that's not saying it was that good, it's just saying how many SFVs were posting about it without even having seen it. Just because it was fashionable to be against it. It was instant karma to bitch about how much Daikatana sucks.
A lot of people still bitching about how bad Daikatana's design or gameplay supposedly was, still haven't actually even _seen_ that design or gameplay.
No, I'm not saying that it was great, but it was's as bad as people love to post all over the place either. It was just a mediocre FPS with a story. No more, no less. I _am_ however, saying, that the world would be a better place if people refrained from talking about stuff they have no clue about. I wish that everyone who hasn't actually played Daikatana (or whatever other game) just freakin' gave it a break already and talked about things they've actually experienced, instead of rehashing the same old canned hype they've read on some site.
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:5, Insightful)
Half-Life came out long before Daikatana.
When Romero was at Id, none of their games had plots, either. They didn't revert; they remained consistent.
So me say just one thing: if a _quarter_ of the people posting all "Daikatana sucks!!!" all over the place had actually played the fucking game, it would have been a major commercial success. It would have probably outsold The Sims.
Are you being facetious? Daikatana's target audience was hard-core FPS players. The Sims reached out to every segment of the market. What a ridiculous statement! You are greatly overestimating the number of people who read game sites at the time. Your general gaming audience had never even heard of Daikatana, and the name "John Romero" was meaningless. They saw an ugly red box with a silly title and bad graphics. That's why it was a poor seller.
A lot of people still bitching about how bad Daikatana's design or gameplay supposedly was, still haven't actually even _seen_ that design or gameplay.
The first level of the demo consisted of killing small frogs in the rain. The whole level. Design genius? Perhaps in an abstract fun-is-not-cool hipster universe. But in this world, it was stupid, and pointless.
> The game design wasn't particularly bad
"I CAN'T LEAVE WITHOUT MY BUDDY SUPERFLY!"
QED.
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:2)
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:2)
Not quite accurate. The Sims was originally pitched to the hard-core Sims fans and focused mostly on the nifty AI and technical aspects. Once the hard-core geeks got done with a brief and passionate affair with the game, other people started picking it up. The game was played by the spouses and better halves of the hard-core players, and then the game spread primarily via word-of-mouth to other players. These people were the ones that used the game to
Re:Can you read? No, seriously? (Score:2)
You'd be surprised. Seriously (Score:2)
You'd be surprised what kind of momentum it seemed to have gathered. There were non-gaming magazines and web-sites screaming for blood and digging up all possible shit they could dig up against Ion Storm, Romero, Romero's girlfriend, everything. Even benign stuf
That's actually the whole point (Score:2)
Then how about shutting the fuck up about things they don't have a fucking clue about? Noone's saying "you should have bought Daikatana." Just, you know, then talk about stuff you _did_ experience first hand. Judging a game -- _any_ game -- without actually having played it, strikes me as idiotic to the extreme.
It would be like me trying to tell you why Dark Age Of Camelot or Age Of Empires suck hairy ass, except I've never pl
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:2)
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:2)
It's difficult to explain how it sucks but it's not hard for people to realize it sucks who haven't actually tried it.
I know Glitter sucks, if you wanted to see it I would recommend against it, this is the same thing.
Examples of why Daikatana sucks, SuperFly is the most irritating character in any game EVER, enemies and weapons boring and uninspired, levels bland ugly and dark. Multiplayer is tainted by a ridiculous sword fight thing, (Also sword stays in t
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:2)
Re:Even that's not that simple (Score:2)
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:2)
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:3, Interesting)
But that's all besides th
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:5, Interesting)
Incorrect. I can say with a great deal of certainty that there have been very few games like Quake and the classic Doom series in recent years. Run and gun is not stale at all, just as long as it's done right. Being story driven does not necissarily make a game better, and being run and gun does not necissarily make a game worse. I still play Doom all the time, but whats more, I've introduced Doom to other relatively new gamers, and once they get past the graphics they have a lot of fun with it too.
In my opinion, John Romero and John Carmack made a great team. Romero had the nuts ideas and awesome level designs, and Carmack had the engine and the smarts and the work ethic. Without Carmack, Romero didin't have the tech or the reigns to keep him on target with Daikatana. Without Romero, Carmack and the rest of ID couldn't figure out how to make a fun FPS.
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:2)
Daikatana -- ambitious design goals, no direction
American McGee's Alice -- Cookie-cutter Q3 engine game in an unimaginative Alice in Wonderland setting, fantastic production value
Quake 2/3, Doom 3 -- Minor evolutionary steps, amazing technology, but absolutely nothing new in terms of game design
If you go back and read a l
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:2)
Conversely, storylines and cutscenes get tired after you've seen 'em a couple times -- it's like a rerun of some TV show that wasn't really all that creative in the first place.
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:2)
Re:I'm sorry, the genius behind Doom? (Score:2)
The funny thing is that Carmack and Romero were big D&D fans and they could've come out with a MMOG (could've been a really cool Planetside with Carmack's engine) or even a MMORPG. It was sa
Rats, flash 8 (Score:5, Funny)
If you don't read this article (Score:5, Funny)
2 Paragraph Summary of 5 minute interview (Score:5, Informative)
Asked questions about what he would have done about Doom differently (he would've hired a great level designer), what was wrong with Doom (nothing, talked about how the game was designed), how he would do if he would make another Doom (pitch black, something new like stuff from HL 2), when he knew he hit it big (after seeing the numbers), what he thought of sequels (would only do one), what other projects he did and what he learned (he likes creation, and not so much cleanup), what he is doing (his new company, that he's working on something new that so far hasn't been done).
Strange thing to me was that I saw mostly DOOM III video gameplay (no DOOM I or II gameplay video - difficult to find?), and there was HL 2 showed for a quick bit.
Re:2 Paragraph Summary of 5 minute interview (Score:3, Funny)
Re:2 Paragraph Summary of 5 minute interview (Score:2)
If there's anything that turns my stomach worse than a game like this, it would be... a *movie* based on a game like this! I'm calling Uwe Bo
On level design & Romero (Score:5, Interesting)
In fact, fans are still recreating Doom levels for other games as homages, which isn't to say those levels were stunningly brilliant. No, they were all they had to be--because the gameplay was so great. And the great fun rubbed off on the levels.
By contrast, Daikatana's levels were built and rebuilt, polished and repolished. Fat lot of good it did. Design is law, of course, as the Ion Storm mantra went; but Daikatana is $0.99 in the bargain bin, too.
Romero's on better ground when knocking Doom 3 for being dark, repetitive and predictable. Although he doesn't realize it, this argument bears on his earlier misguided comment. D3 is a masterpiece of level design, or at least of a certain highly-detailed future-industrial style. And that's all anyone takes away from it: how it looked. Having stood in line to get a copy the day it came out, I'm still trying to forget how mind-numbingly poorly it played.
Bottom line: level design is vastly overrated. Sure, it can be an art form (see, for instance, old custom Quake levels built by geniuses such as Headshot or Mr. Fribbles). But most games look alike today; no matter how technically sound their appearance, few do more than go for realism or ape genre cliches. This even as hyper-realistic design means longer development times and higher costs. And nobody thinks games are more fun than their blockier predecessors--no, quite the opposite.
So where Romero talks about level design as a virtue and even dreams about going back in time to revisualize Doom, the truth is something different. Level design is becoming little more than a clonable commodity.
The solution is to outsource it. Set up companies that do nothing but build cities, dungeons, jungles, etc. to some standard, scriptable world-building spec. Devs can then buy chunks of these "places" and build their games in them--for much less than the cost of paying salaries for asset creation. This would liberate game companies to pour their energies into gameplay before it becomes a lost art.
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:5, Insightful)
You're using level design in a different way than I understand it. (I am a pretty casual gamer, so there's a good chance my definition is wrong, BTW. Also I couldn't get the video to play, so I wouldn't know if you were using it the same way as Romero.)
To me, "level design" doesn't mean "designing the visual look of a level." That's an aspect of it, but not the most important part. More importantly is designing the layout of the level--where various paths lead, and where various obstacles occur, and where enemies lurk. This obviously has a major impact on how well a game plays, and having a good level designer makes a huge difference.
In this respect, I think the original Doom levels were incredibly well designed, especially given that they didn't really have the technology for true 3D play. It really created the feeling of not knowing what was around the next corner, and resulted in the famous Doom Lean, where you find yourself tilting your real-world head, as if that was going to let you peer around a corner in the game...
(I think we agree in substance, actually, but your use of the phrase "level design" was different enough that it made me wonder if I'm the only one who defines it as I do.)
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
Obviously these are very diffrent methods of making levels, if DOOM levels were available for any of these activities they would suck, there are poor strategic elements, shoddy weapon placement etc.
However for single player blasting monsters and mindlessly chasing down keycards? Go DOOM!.
(Disclaimer: Massive MASSIVE Q1 DM fanboy, some level design EXP)
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
My personal opinion on this (and out of experience as a heavy fps-gamer, and a mapper), there is a nice balance between the two: I agree that in the haydays of Doom, the layout of the level itself was of greater importance than the visual
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
Basically I had already played that game to death 15 years ago. Redoing it with nicer levels didn't appeal to me.
So I went back to Battlefield 2 which instead provides a different game. Even though it doesn't look gorg
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
You're saying it has good textures then. Monster Closets and no lights are not good level design.
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
Re:On level design & Romero (Score:2)
Old news... (Score:2, Interesting)
inappropriate videos? (Score:5, Interesting)
Transcript (Score:5, Informative)
games.net Presents Behind The Screens John Romero.
What would you change about Doom?
So the thing I would have changed about the original Doom, erm, is to have a better design for all the levels in eposide 2 and eposide 3, and to probably hire someone who was a really great level designer, erm, because, er, Sandy Peterson, hes a, hes a, hes definitely a great game designer [clip of some Doom game I guess], but having that, having somebody who's whole job is placing textures, making sure that levels are, are not just 'hey, I'm just gonna make a level today, see what it turns out to be'. That's kind of what we were doing anyway, so it turned out kind of haphazard, which is kinda Doom 2 [too?] also turned out, that way with the levels, was like 'hey, let's make a buncha cool levels, we'll have [them?] put in the game.'
What was missing from Doom?
Well, I don't think there was anything missing from the original Doom. I mean it was, was, we pulled stuff out of the original Doom because it kind of violated the purpose that we had started to change the game [another clip of presumably Doom], which was kinda what we did with Wolfenstein. With Wolfenstein , we'd added a bunch of cool stuff in there, and it slowed the gameplay down, the pace down, and we didn't want that. So we pulled that out, and what you got was just some crazy running at somebody brings [might have been 'for instance'] a second game [didn't hear this well enough]. And so, with Doom we wanted, erm, a game that was the same kind of Wolfenstein feeling, but looked cooler and [had?] cooler monsters, but still had that super speed.
What if you were to make another Doom?
If I was going to do another Doom today, I would [possibly wouldn't] do a game that's like Pitch Black for sure. Erm, I wouldn't have predictable situations happening constantly every few seconds, and er, you know, I'd, I'd have something that, er, was kind of pushing the limits, [clip of some game starts here] that would be, I'd definitely take some cues from Half life 2 but, erm, also add in some cool ideas that, that, no one else is doing.
When did you know you hit it big?
It was, it was insane with Doom. When we put out Doom and it just, it went all over the place. The internet really helped. Erm, people have tp net [might been 'had the internet'?] and the software creations Bolternborg [didn't get this word] was awsome. When we saw the numbers that were coming in off, off of, Doom it, it was crazy. Erm, that's when I just, just, brought the test release [might have got this bit wrong]. I was just, that's it [laugh]. I'm buying it now.
What do you think about sequels?
In Return of Wolfenstein and Comandeer Keen, and, you know [laugh] [some clip starts here of unknown game]. Erm, if I was there those games wouldn't have come out, because I don't do like.. I do a sequel, then it's time to move on.
Dude talks like a stoned hippy anyway.. I got time to waste on other things that don't include translating a zillion 'erms' to a text file.
Re:Transcript (Score:2)
Original concept and engine, not game design (Score:4, Insightful)
If there is any doubt as to whether it was the FPS concept and engine or the details of the game, consider what happened next. Other FPSs were released -- licensing the Doom and then the Quake engines, not the Doom and the Quake levels.
Revisionist history? (Score:3, Insightful)
Or Ultima Underworld? It was a complex RPG and had a much more complex 3D engine too. It came out around the same time as Wolfenstein
Re:Revisionist history? (Score:2, Insightful)
Then you add the one and only thing that made Doom worth playing - network play.
I loved both UU games, but I went 13.5 hours without a toilet or food break in a Doom deathmatch.
(UU does pre-date Wolfe
Re:Revisionist history? (Score:2)
Poor coding then, because it's the same engine as System Shock, which was not at all slow.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Original concept and engine, not game design (Score:2)
Too Much Hype (Score:2, Flamebait)
Oh well, I guess we don't live in a perfect world. John Romero is still an extremely intelligent guy, and although the design intricacies of the Doom series are a little bit on the cobweb side of thing
And then? (Score:2, Insightful)
Carmack might be a bloody brilliant programmer, and that's what makes his early work so good, and that he had a brilliant design team to make his concepts into reality. Every product they made up to and including Quake 3 was off the charts good.
Everything since is just rubbish and not fun to play; it's just bad, rendering aside.
And Romero has nothing on his slate post ID that means anything; most of his work is the poster child of what not to do.
Carmac
Re:And then? (Score:3, Interesting)
Funny, what engine do all these new great games use? Often as not, something Carmack makes. He's an engine designer, and he's
Re:And then? (Score:2)
The only thing worth reading about Romero (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The only thing worth reading about Romero (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=25551&cid=277
If I could ask John Romero One Question.. (Score:2)
Alternatively, I'd ask him exactly how accurate the description of this event was written in Masters Of Doom. Shame they never made the doco film of that book.
Ahh, found it. (Score:2)
And it's Romero's fault... how? (Score:4, Interesting)
It wasn't Romero that decided to introduce the devil into the game, and it wasn't Romero that made that NPC summon enough demons to destroy the world. It was the GM. Plain and simple. It was the kind of spiteful GM action that occasionally nukes everyone's characters to make a point, or as a quick "I've got the power" trip, or just being tired of the existing campaign. We've all run into moments like that.
The fact is, the game was at all times under the control of the GM. If you don't want your players to nuke the world, don't lead them to a room with big red button that launches the nukes. If you don't want them to bring forth the apocalypse, don't lead them to a room with a big pentagram and written instructions on how to summon the four horsemen. Etc. If you choose to "test" them with an event that may destroy the world, don't be surprised if they push the big red button just to see what happens.
And if you really want to save the world, you can always twist the rules as you like. That's why you're called a Game _Master_. Maybe decide that that big red button needed to first be activated by the Pentagon, or could be overriden by the Pentagon, so the missiles don't launch. Maybe a bunch of soldiers charge in and try to arrest the party, shooting the cable from that switch in the process. Etc.
Or in your example, maybe the devil can be toned down so the party can win. Maybe, I don't know, an archangel descends and blasts the book into oblivion. Whatever. If you're the GM, you have the power to pull that kind of shit.
Basically if you're the GM and (A) you've lead the players to a situation where they can destroy the world, and (B) you let them do that, then just accept the responsibility. _You_ ended the game, not the players. It's ok, if that's what you wanted to do. Start a new campaign or whatever. But don't be a prick and act as if some player is a great monster that deserves all the blame.
Plus, it's just a freakin' game. Acting like Romero is some monster that destroyed the whole world, strikes me as (A) taking it waaaay too seriously, and (B) pretty damn unimaginative and contrary to the whole spirit of the game.
I mean, have you actually played a tabletop RPG? That's exactly what the players are supposed to do. In a sense, it's sort of like playing chess against the GM. The whole fun is trying to (A) personally be creative and (B) to challenge others to be creative, in response to some unforeseen twist. That's a _two_ way street: the GM challenges the players and the players challenge the GM.
Heck, even that Demonicron episode's tame stuff. Look at some episodes on Full Frontal Nerdity (same site as Nodwick) for some stuff that good gamers can pull. Stuff like someone choosing the "royal blood" trait just so later they can usurp the new king of the realm, and turn the whole campaign on its head. Now that's the good stuff. That's what good players _do_.
As long as it's not deliberately trying to annoy someone or prevent them from achieving their goals, acting unpredictably in a creative way is what RP is all about. Just following the campaign and acting in a predictable way is _boring_.
From there it's the GM's job to react. It may be some equally surprising twist, or just proclaiming it to not be possible, or somewhere in between. That's what the game is all about.
Re:And it's Romero's fault... how? (Score:2)
Bashing? count me in. (Score:2)
Romero (Score:2, Informative)
For the bashers (Score:5, Insightful)
His big problem wasn't the ads, the hype, or the lack of John Carmack. His biggest failure was that he had nobody there to keep him going forward on projects. That's what he needed to keep his projects focused towards a goal, and it's what he failed to find at Ion at any point. This isn't something he said to anyone, or something said to me or anything like that. It's just what I picked up on because I have the same issue when I direct projects. If you're an easily distracted director, you should have an assistant director or producer that's really good at putting their foot down when it's time to start work, and you should listen to them.
Romero didn't have that.
If Daikatana had released on time and not been mediocre (yes, I played a good part of it. My feeling was that it was hopelessly mediocre for the time it was supposed to have released at originally. Not bad, just nothing amazing.) everybody would have laughed with him about the ad, the hype, and there would have been peace and love in the world.
You wanna lump hate on somebody in the games industry? Smack Broussard around for his publically insulting other games and talking about how DNF will be better than them. Smack any jerk exec at EA (or any number of abusive publishers) around for raping their employees on hours and pay. Smack Ken Kutaragi around for being a fucktard. But c'mon guys, lay off Romero. He got over it and got on with work at Monkeystone and Midway, you asshats need to get over it too.
Re:For the bashers (Score:2)
No. You shouldn't be a director at all.
Romero wasn't a capable leader, you say as much yourself. Though it's quite possible he's changed since then it was his direction and flaky leadership that caused Ion Storm to hemorrage money and the game under his direction to be mediocre.
Ion Storm was the house that R
Re:For the bashers (Score:2)
People don't hate Romero, we just mock him. And we do mock Broussard and DNF. Indeed, we do it for exactly the same reason Romero earned his mocking: too much hype, too little shipped product. There is no hope that DNF will be good enough to justify the hype and the wait. Just like Diakatana failed to be good enough to justify the hype
Carmack. (Score:2)
I think there should be a law. John Romero should (Score:2)
I'm not saying Romero has no talent, but he's a level programmer, not a designer.
New Slashdot Meme (Score:2)
Re:it's empty (Score:4, Funny)
No he isn't (Score:2)
Re:Requires flash 8 (Score:2)
Re:Requires flash 8 (Score:2)
As opposed to... (Score:3, Informative)
Be it VLC, Windows DRM Player, an iPod, a PalmOS device, or whatever else...
which is supported in recent version of the ff codecs, and thus in VLC version starting from 8.5.0.
and also which is supported by Wine-wrappers on Linux.
Which is only supported in Linux using "libcoo
Re:hey mr "penguin"... (Score:2)
Re:This is why I love /. comments... (Score:2)
He *does* look like "Tom Tucker", doesn't he?
Re:Doom 3 (Score:2)
Re:Posts from Jealous Nobodys!!! lol (Score:2)
i recognize the name hitler as well