PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Doom III: Million-Poly Zombie Man-Boobs
May 30th 2002, 14:56 CEST by m0nty

This GameSpy interview with Robert Duffy and Jan Paul van Waveren gives a fascinating insight into what may become the new technical standard for 3D modelling in games, and make modding a significantly different ballgame.

In Quake 3 a model may have two or three thousand polygons, whereas the player models in DOOM III , the original art has probably close to a million polygons. That's been reduced down to four or five thousand for in-game use, but you have to have that million polygon model - you have to have a lot of polygons to generate the bumpmap data that makes it look like a high-poly model in game.


The original Doom popularised the fundamental concepts of modern 3D modelling, comprised of interlocking polygons filled with discrete "textures". These textures were merely graphical files, stretched to fit the polygon where needed. As the years have gone one, the poly counts have increased, and the resolution of the textures has increased, but the mechanics haven't changed that much. If the id boys are saying what I think they're saying, Doom III represents a significant step forward.

The concept of "renderbumping", mentioned by Duffy, seems to refer to the practice of generating textures not by getting an artist to create them, but by extrapolating them from higher-poly originals. Thus, when the model calls for zombie man-boobs, the texture on the in-game model has not been drawn there by an artist, but is patched in by the modelling tool beforehand, based on what the model looked like with an order of magnitude more polygons. Thus the human eye is fooled into thinking the model has a lot more polys than it actually has, or so the hype would have us believe.

For the layman reader, there are a lot of gaps hinted at in the interview which bear explaining. When Robert says "bumpmapping and specular effects, etc" make the in-game models look little different to the million-poly prototypes, what exactly does that mean? Will this new approach really remove forever the problem of low-resolution textures which are stretched far enough to see individual pixels? I am fascinated by how much of this technical jargon is actually understood by the average modder, or whether they will even need to know about much of it to use Duffy's tools. Also, there is no mention of the skeletal animation needed to make these beautiful-looking models move believably. How gracefully will this engine degrade? Will it require a 1GHz chip to even run? I am no expert, so I beseech the propellor-heads on PC to try to explain these things to us lesser mortals.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Doom III: Million-Poly Zombie Man-Boobs

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by Quicken
2002-05-30 14:58:02
gdunn@backmeup.net.au
First? no. couldn't be
#2 by "second"
2002-05-30 14:59:46
then i guess i cant be second
#3 by Ashiran
2002-05-30 15:00:03
Gay? Yeah, could be.

"And just ice for all" - Cey Arrakis
#4 by Ashiran
2002-05-30 15:01:51
And btw m0nty. Who are you calling a propellor head? Next thing we know is that all crappers walk around with an orange lollipop in their mouths.

Oh and regarding the Doom 3 tech. Yeah it's that good.

"And just ice for all" - Cey Arrakis
#5 by UglyBob
2002-05-30 15:11:13
Mmmm...  Man-boobs.

I'm kind of hoping that the extra complexity of these new modelling/level-making methods leads to a 'less accessible' mod community, for lack of better words.  My theory (flawed, maybe) is that the average grade or level-of-quality for the maps/models released for D3 is higher than other games around currently, as people will have to try harder to make decent content...  It might scare away some of the l33t d00ds looking for some attention...  Maybe.

Meh.
#6 by deadlock
2002-05-30 15:13:24
http://www.deadlocked.org/
Possibly. Or it's just mean more shite maps and fewer quality ones.

Jafd! Warren! Stop bickering or I'll be forced to change your opinions manually!
#7 by Sgt Hulka
2002-05-30 15:25:41
Each time a new id engine comes out, editing changes.  This is nothing new.  We'll have to relearn how to do it.  id has always been very good to the editing community, so even though there is yet another learning curve, plenty of people will learn learn it, although, there has been a decline in the sheer number of people doing it.  The same has happened between each version of the Quake engine. There are less Q3 mappers/coders than Q2, and we'll probably see this again with the Doomnesia engine.

What I'm also seeing is the costs involved.  To obtain the look and feel of the Doomnesia engine, you're going to have to invest in more software than ever before, unlike Quake and beyond which allowed more freeware/shareware tools.  C++ is much more complex than QuakeC, and each time they raise the bar, they raise not only the learning curve, but you must also possess a bit of experience with said language as well.

This is good and bad.  Yes, we'll see more professional mods/TC's, but fewer of them, and fewer people to share ideas, experiences and code.

DOOMED! - Videogames Turn Deadly.
#8 by "flamethrower"
2002-05-30 15:56:47
Moving from Quake-C to C++ destroyed the communities.

Where once it was anyone, and some of the best mods and ideas came from non-coders, only the tech heads could wrap out a Quake2+ mod.

Which fucking sucks.
#9 by Duality
2002-05-30 16:15:55
Dualipuff@yahoo.com http://stratoscape.ath.cx/
What this means is that we'll have even more idea men looking for coders/mappers/sound/etc because the skills will be in such high demand.

#10 by Max
2002-05-30 16:24:13
http://massivebraincase.org/
I didn't vote either way, but now that PC has a topic with "Zombie Man-Boobs" in it, imagine the quality of troll we're going to draw.  Makes me think of people who complain about anonymous posters while posting anonymously themselves.

I have nothing to add to the actual topic of discussion, of course. Don't mind me.

...a bowl full of dick-shaped bullets would be symbolic...
#11 by Post-It
2002-05-30 16:27:02
keithlee@speakeasy.net
The heer stupidity of the guys doing Postal 2 continues to amaze. Check out this screenshot to see what is used as a silencer for the rifle in the game.

"It's a bird!  It's a plane!  Oh shit, It knows we're home!"
-Chris Johnson
#12 by Sgt Hulka
2002-05-30 16:30:05
Heh.. I find their silencer amusing, unfortunately, I don't find their previous games fun.  Perhaps this one will be more fun, but I doubt it.

DOOMED! - Videogames Turn Deadly.
#13 by Sgt Hulka
2002-05-30 16:31:00
Post-It, you're icon reminds me of a film that doesn't exist, but if it did, it would be Nicolas Cage playing Tom Hanks as Ralph Machio in a Karate Kid movie.

DOOMED! - Videogames Turn Deadly.
#14 by Ashiran
2002-05-30 16:31:57
They are doing exactly as they should. Creating a total and completly ridiculous game. And that's the way I want that game.

"And just ice for all" - Cey Arrakis
#15 by Matt Perkins
2002-05-30 17:07:51
wizardque@yahoo.com http://whatwouldmattdo.com/
apparently that's the way they want it too.   And they aren't just creating a ridiculous game, they are creating stupid, as respulsive as possible game.  Where as SOF2 is going for the gore, they are going for the most offensive game they can make...  I just can't wait.  oh yeah, I can.

LPMiller - "I am not your signature whore, wizard!"
#16 by Caryn
2002-05-30 17:08:16
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
Hulka:

What I'm also seeing is the costs involved.  To obtain the look and feel of the Doomnesia engine, you're going to have to invest in more software than ever before, unlike Quake and beyond which allowed more freeware/shareware tools.


I'm a bit confused about this, probably because I'm only a dabbler when it comes to editing. How would costs go up? Carmack and Co. have said that the editor(s) are going to be available with the game, so you'll have those tools available. Are they using more advanced tools than what's available now (i.e., are they using something better than 3DSMax to edit?).

May be a dumb question, but remember there are no dumb questions -- only dumb people asking questions.

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#17 by Dinglehoffen
2002-05-30 17:20:15
Fanny Fungus
Whatever Doom 3 requires, it'll run on my machine, and that's what counts. P3 1Ghz, Geforce 3, 512 Ram. Morrowind runs beautifully. Let's see Doom 3 beat that. I don't care if I have to run the damn thing at 800x600. All these little "bumpermapping zippertit willygrappling" technobabble nuances mean nothing to me. I don't care if an eyelash can be seen or not.

I still play Doom 2 and Final Doom and have tons o' fun.

Now we're gonna make a new rule. When you hear me typing..."
#18 by Dinglehoffen
2002-05-30 17:41:44
Fanny Fungus
Can we fellas *group hug* please get different articles from a more broad perspective? Because I know you all love me, mOnty's POV is so predictable it has become a bombardment of stereotyped and canned text. Let's hear someone else's POV. The people on here have more lucid perspectives than mOnty's tongue-in-cheek babble. C'mon...!

Now we're gonna make a new rule. When you hear me typing..."
#19 by Post-It
2002-05-30 17:41:58
keithlee@speakeasy.net
Hulka:

Post-It, you're icon reminds me of a film that doesn't exist, but if it did, it would be Nicolas Cage playing Tom Hanks as Ralph Machio in a Karate Kid movie.


I'm not quite sure how to take that....

"It's a bird!  It's a plane!  Oh shit, It knows we're home!"
-Chris Johnson
#20 by Matt Perkins
2002-05-30 17:52:53
wizardque@yahoo.com http://whatwouldmattdo.com/
#18
I'd submit an article if I had something I felt needed an article to say...

If you want something different, you submit it.

LPMiller - "I am not your signature whore, wizard!"
#21 by chris
2002-05-30 17:53:12
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
Caryn -

3DSMax costs like 5000 bucks. Currently, you can model for Quake3 with freeware apps. Course, good modellers don't. They use (warezed) 3DS.

The level editor will be available, sure... but that's just a geometry and lighting placement tool. You still need a 3rd party modelling program to make said geometry, and the characters with which to populate it.

I suspect that, much like with new versions of the Unreal engine, you'll be able to produce a level largely by placing and lighting prefrabricated geometry... so making a "new" DOOM III level that looks like the other DOOM III levels won't be that hard. Making a totally new level will require extensive modelling, though.

Making characters is going to be interesting... I have trouble modelling a fucking *knife* in 3DStudio, let alone a 90k poly model. Suddenly, folks who've spent four to six years at art school learning the kind of 3D stuff they teach for film are going to be very popular in the mod community. We're looking at a time when the skills of the guys making Resident Evil Zero, and the guys making a DOOM III mod, need to be roughly comparable.

-chris
#22 by Matthew Gallant
2002-05-30 17:56:31
http://www.truemeaningoflife.com
Let's take a look at the zombie man-boob screenshot for an explanation of what's going on. See how the polygons are distinct along the silhouette of his cranium? Look closely. You can see the flatness. But his forehead looks smooth. That's because of the bump map.

How it works: Usually, lighting is calculated per vertex. Each vertex has a hypothetical arrow sticking straight out of it called a normal vector (think of it as a pin sticking out of a pin cushion), and that's compared with the vector of any directional lights and further modified by ambient light, etc. in a whirlwind of mathematics to find out just how much light is hitting that vertex. A polygon with three vertices will have light spread across it according to how much light each vertex is receiving.

With the bump map, the light across the polygon is further modified. It essentially gives each part of the texture its own normal vector. I made a small diagram of before and after, using only two vertices here.

If that bump map's values are calculated from the original high-poly model, light will play across the low-poly model in almost exactly the same way as if it were still high-poly. It's a trick of the light; when you see a polygon from the side, like in the Doom III screenshot, it looks flat because you aren't seeing any of the light hitting it. But when you see it more or less head on, the highlights and shadows of the bump map give the illusion that there's geometry there that really isn't. It's cheaper computing power-wise than using the high-poly model because of the way accelerators work and for other reasons.

What this means for texture artists: up until now, texture artists have been adding shading and highlighting to their textures manually. It's a pretty decent approximation, but can start to show the man behind the curtain depending on how light hits the model. This won't need to be done in Doom 3. Texture artists can just fit flat-lit textures onto the high-poly model and it will look decent. Everything does turn out looking sort of homogenously smooth and soullessly algorithmic, but because it will look just as good no matter how light hits it, it is a step up in realism, which is either cool or stupid.

Marketing is a crutch for mediocrity and a handicap to excellence.
#23 by Caryn
2002-05-30 18:21:09
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
chris:

3DSMax costs like 5000 bucks. Currently, you can model for Quake3 with freeware apps. Course, good modellers don't. They use (warezed) 3DS.

The level editor will be available, sure... but that's just a geometry and lighting placement tool. You still need a 3rd party modelling program to make said geometry, and the characters with which to populate it.


Okay, I think I've got it now. I guess I assumed that despite all of the advancements in the engine itself, the tools used to create the things in that engine would remain the same, but I suppose that wouldn't be true, would it? I guess I assumed that like the jump from Quake 2 to Quake 3, the freeware apps that would be out there would likewise make the jump in technology. Would this not be true as well? Was this not a problem going from Quake 2 to Quake 3?

I'm guessing the answer is "yes, but the leap here is much bigger". While I'm not a hardware and engine person, I understand a few of the advancements in the new engine, but I'm not completely understanding how the engine will be a problem with subsequent tools. Like you said, all good modelers warez 3DS, and as I understand it, 3DS is a tool you'll still be able to use with the new engine (aren't they using that now at id?). I don't know much about gmax, but since it's supposed to be a freeware version of 3DSMax and it's done by discreet, wouldn't you be able to use that (free) tool for the new engine as well? (Am I being dense?)

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#24 by Sgt Hulka
2002-05-30 18:21:55
#16 Caryn "I'm a bit confused about this, probably because I'm only a dabbler when it comes to editing. How would costs go up? Carmack and Co. have said that the editor(s) are going to be available with the game, so you'll have those tools available."


Chris pretty much summed up what I meant, but I'd also like to state that as far as the editor they include, this will most likely allow you to create levels using existing content provided by id. What I like to do is create additional content, and in order to do so, you'll most likely need expensive software in order to do so. I doubt id uses Milkshape for thier models like we do at Evolve, but maybe they're cheap asses and do. I don't know for sure, I'm just guessing.  I know nothing.

DOOMED! - Videogames Turn Deadly.
#25 by Caryn
2002-05-30 18:25:48
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
Hulka:

What I like to do is create additional content, and in order to do so, you'll most likely need expensive software in order to do so. I doubt id uses Milkshape for thier models like we do at Evolve, but maybe they're cheap asses and do.


Okay, that's what I was getting at (I know I'm being a little repetitive here): won't tools like gmax, at least, make the jump in tech to accomodate this? Will tools like Milkshape not be able to do this, and why not? (Is the engine so radically different when it comes to these tools that they're not going to be able to evolve accordingly?)

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#26 by chris
2002-05-30 18:33:46
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
Caryn -

Yes, but the leap is much bigger. =)

Quake2 = 1200 poly models.
Quake3 = 3000 poly models
DOOM III = 90,000 poly models (which the engine then whittles down to around 5k, granted, but you still need that initial 90k).

Gmax is potentially useful for DOOM, yes... unless you want to charge for your mod, which is where Hulka's mindset probably is. =)

For most modders, I don't think the issue is really software price (especially since you can warez any software you'd need, and I know it's a dirty subject, but there are countless people actively working in game development today who learned all of their skills on warezed programs). I think the issue for most people is that it takes an assload of time and talent to make a 90k poly model. DOOM is going to see a mod scene where the amount of quality material is a *fraction* of what it is for Quake III, which in turn is a fraction of what it was for Quake.

What you're going to see instead is people focusing on titles like Neverwinter, where the toolset doesn't require you to spend six+ years learning 3DStudio. Well, that and a WHOLE LOT of DOOM III maps that are just the same pieces, moved around and re-lit (usually poorly).

-chris
#27 by Darkseid-D
2002-05-30 18:37:32
rogerboal@hotmail.com
hey Hulka, Happy Birthday on PainKeep :)


Ds

Never argue with an idiot, theyll drag you down onto their level, then beat you with experience.
#28 by BabiG
2002-05-30 18:41:45
I find the method they're using interesting. I wonder...why not just make the low poly model in the first place and add the bump mapping later?

I guess they want to lighten the load on the texture artists, or there's going to be some Level of Detail system in the doom3 engine.

"God is dead." --Nietzsche, 1883
"Nietzsche is dead." --God, 1900
#29 by Bailey
2002-05-30 18:46:27
chris

What you're going to see instead is people focusing on titles like Neverwinter, where the toolset doesn't require you to spend six+ years learning 3DStudio.

Mind you, there's a good reason for that, as it's not very powerful and doesn't allow the user a terrible amount of freedom. Sure, there'll be shitloads of people fooling around with the NWN engine, but there will be very few quality projects, and it'll be even harder to find them floundering in a universe-sized sea of similar, mediocre products.

You're talking about opposite ends of the spectrum, and I can't endorse either extreme.

Dear Raven: I have some questions about your code - suggestions really, in the form of direct orders.
#30 by chris
2002-05-30 18:50:16
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
Babi - because it's easier to generate a bumpmap from actual polygons than from guesswork on the part of the texture artist. =)

-chris
#31 by chris
2002-05-30 18:54:37
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
Baily -

Oh, there's no endorsement happening here. I'm just talking about where the masses are going to go... and that's "to whatever's easiest".

Engine technology is rapidly reaching a point in complexity where it will cease entirely to be accessable to amateurs. What you'll get then is what we're starting to see: another layer of tech, which is build around the idea of placing prefabs. NWN or DOOM III... it's the same deal. Someone with one skillset builds the shit, and someone with another skillset places it.

-chris
(yes, obviously, there is some overlap)
#32 by Sgt Hulka
2002-05-30 19:05:03
Hey.. No Chris, I'm not thinking of selling a mod.  id frowns on that and would most likely sue.  I tried doing things the right way with licensing with id.  That was a disaster.  I don't see myself handing them another dime after what happened last time.  If anything, I'll just make a stand alone game. Provided I have electricity.

DOOMED! - Videogames Turn Deadly.
#33 by Bailey
2002-05-30 19:17:48
chris

Ah, okay, I was under the impression that the dumbed-down approach was the better, for marketing appeal if nothing else. My bad.

Hulka

What can I say, I saw this and thought of you. Also, I laughed, but that's only because I'm a soulless automaton.

Dear Raven: I have some questions about your code - suggestions really, in the form of direct orders.
#34 by BobJustBob
2002-05-30 20:14:46
from chris:
DOOM III = 90,000 poly models (which the engine then whittles down to around 5k, granted, but you still need that initial 90k).


Didn't they say that their initial models had around a million polys? Better add another zero there chris.
#35 by Phayyde
2002-05-30 20:23:58
Flamethrower is exactly right.  QuakeC -> Wendy's DLLs destroyed the community.

If programming and technical creativity are <b>good</b> endeavors, then it should be encouraged and enabled.  The more the better.  To complain that more bad art will result is an elitist attitude.  The trend toward inaccessible tools is a barrier which allows financial success of the few at the expense of the sociological effectiveness of the art form.

I have a strong faith that overall quality would improve if the tools were, cheap, accessible, and compatibility was not broken with every patch.  Too bad, though, there is no financial motive for a company to release tools that allow average people to express themselves in this medium.  

A number of factors must be true for someone to contribute game content.  Decisions which rarify these factors also rarify the population of contributors.  The fewer contributors there are, the less diversity.  Following this to the logical extreme, we then must pay more for less creativity.  

Maybe that's not so logically extreme.  Maybe that's the way the games industry is today?

Beat to fit, paint to match.
#36 by crash
2002-05-30 20:27:11
Phayyde:

The trend toward inaccessible tools is a barrier which allows financial success of the few at the expense of the sociological effectiveness of the art form.

okay, i'm not understanding this. this is the way every professional industry works, not just games. yeah, anyone can go down to the store and buy a 64-pack of crayolas for a couple of bucks to express themselves, and that's art. but expecting to buy crayolas and learn how to paint, oh, cars is a bit unrealistic. you want to learn to paint cars, you need the proper tools and equipment, and those are expensive.

so bitch that the car painting MAN is keepin you DOWN because you... can't paint cars with crayolas, because those are the most common tools?

am i missing something here?

Whoops, sorry, was my common sense showing again? -HoseWater
#37 by Phayyde
2002-05-30 20:28:05
Damn my Crap-fu is suffering...
sed s/<b>good</b>/good/g

Beat to fit, paint to match.
#38 by Phayyde
2002-05-30 20:32:41
I don't feel victimized at all.  But that car painting MAN analogy is hilarious. :)

Would you agree that more contributors in an art form typically results in more diversity?  Then would you agree that using .dlls again in d00m3 will decrease the number of contributors?   That's the heart of what I'm sayin'.

Beat to fit, paint to match.
#39 by Leslie Nassar
2002-05-30 20:35:56
http://departmentofinternets.com
The mod community killed the mod community.  Good riddence.

i like monkeys.  are you a monkey?
#40 by Phayyde
2002-05-30 20:39:27
Leslie, do you believe that game content should be created only by professionals?
 
Forget, for the moment, how annoying and silly hobbyists can be.

Beat to fit, paint to match.
#41 by Leslie Nassar
2002-05-30 20:40:46
http://departmentofinternets.com
Leslie, do you believe that game content should be created only by professionals?

Yes.

Forget, for the moment, how annoying and silly hobbyists can be.

If they weren't annoying and silly they'd be professionals.

i like monkeys.  are you a monkey?
#42 by Bailey
2002-05-30 20:43:12
How quickly we forget the .plan wars.

Dear Raven: I have some questions about your code - suggestions really, in the form of direct orders.
#43 by Leslie Nassar
2002-05-30 20:46:30
http://departmentofinternets.com
But the .plan wars ended (and look what happened to the careers of the participants).  The flood of shitty, derivative mods built upon ripped code shows no sign of receeding.

i like monkeys.  are you a monkey?
#44 by chris
2002-05-30 20:47:22
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
I'm just going to let Leslie write my posts for me from now on.

-chris
#45 by Phayyde
2002-05-30 20:49:03
Leslie
If [hobbyists] weren't annoying and silly they'd be professionals.


No, if they were getting PAID for their work, they'd be professionals.  In turn, they'd also act like it.  Subtle difference.  

Why should game content creation be restricted only to those financially interested?

Beat to fit, paint to match.
#46 by LPMiller
2002-05-30 20:53:21
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
Why should game content be made by people who can't afford it?

I'm sorry, where did the idea of a free lunch show up?

I believe I can fly......urk.
#47 by Matthew Gallant
2002-05-30 20:53:59
http://www.truemeaningoflife.com
I highly doubt there's going to be anything in the new model format that will make it so you can't use the same low-poly modeling programs. You'll probably be able to not attach a bumpmap at all and go with the old hand-shaded texture methods. There's no reason for it not to be that way. After all, not every model in Quake 3 has to have those sparkly shaders that Crash, Xaero, and Uriel have.

Also, mod-able games are a privilege, not a right. If all you can wrap your puny brain around is Quake C, then stick to modding Quake 1. People who want easy tools that magically generate cool stuff are the new idea men.

Marketing is a crutch for mediocrity and a handicap to excellence.
#48 by Caryn
2002-05-30 20:56:45
carynlaw@pacbell.net http://www.hellchick.net
No, if they were getting PAID for their work, they'd be professionals.  In turn, they'd also act like it.  Subtle difference.  

Why should game content creation be restricted only to those financially interested?


It shouldn't, but the non-professionals should also not have a sense of entitlement, which is what some of the mod community has become entrenched in over the years: the developers owe you tools, they owe you source, they owe you support for your mods. And they owe it all to you now, the moment your game is released and not a moment later. If the source isn't out three days after the game, petitions must be created.

Not all of the mod community is like that, but the ones that are are the loudest sometimes.

You'll have to speak up, I'm wearing a towel.
#49 by chris
2002-05-30 21:01:39
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
How did this become about money?

Modding (ie: the abilitiy to modify a game) will continue to be free... I don't think anyone's denying that. Software will continue to be warezeable. There's no monetary expenditure necessary.

But as far as a time/effort standpoint goes: Either suck it up and fucking learn the tools, or quite whining and go mod for something easier. Every time I use 3DStudio it makes me want to tear my own face off and eat it, but I keep working with it, because I have enough of a desire to make stuff for the next gen games coming out, that it's worth dealing with the horrible, unending pain.

-chris
#50 by LPMiller
2002-05-30 21:04:47
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
So...devs DON'T owe you anything!

Make a mod because its fun, or because you can. If you can't for that game, go to one you can. I mean, sheesh, work it out. If you don't have the skills, get them, don't bitch about it. No one cares if you don't have the skills to make yet another Matrix mod, or star trek mod that will get you sued, or convert old Duke maps, or add your favorite geek skin. No one.

I believe I can fly......urk.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Doom III: Million-Poly Zombie Man-Boobs

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]