Giger Encounter: Prometheus Built In Doom 3

By Craig Pearson on August 16th, 2012 at 9:00 am.


So the idea of building a mod all on your lonesome seems like folly, right? We all know mods are basically games that don’t have money or offices or rooms full of snacks. Please just agree with my blanket statement so we can move on to my real point. Anyway, if the very act of making mod is folly, what about making a mod based on Prometheus, when Prometheus is the folliest of follies? It was folly in 3D. It should have been called “Follytheus”. I’d say the act of a single person making Doom 3 Prometheus total conversion is folly squared, which is the right amount to get me interested.

At first I figured it would be inspired by the movie, or just show off a bit of it, but the Prometheus Movie Doom 3 mod seems to be an attempt to recreate everything in the movie, from the opening sequence through to controllable ships and buggies. How one person is going to have the time to model and skin all that is a mystery, but he’s trying, and documenting his progress in a series of videos. Obviously they constitute spoilers of the movie, so if you haven’t seen it you might want to pop yourself into a hyperspace sleep chamber, or just not hit play. For the rest of you, here are a few unspoilery nuggets from a series of early builds. He has the layout well captured, I suspect the difficulty will be polishing it up to an acceptable loveliness.

Brr! it’s the Cryochambers.

A Benny Hill tour of Prometheus.

No word on the release, but don’t expect it any time soon. The rest of the video, including the mildly spoilery ones, are here.

__________________

« | »

, , , .

55 Comments »

  1. RedViv says:

    Well, that could be a wild adventure we are head-ing towards.

    • Echo Black says:

      What’s with the acidic tone? It’s like the concept of fun is Alien to you

      • Flavors says:

        I dunno though; from the way this looks engineered, I don’t think I’d have a particularly fun time jockeying around the map.

    • TheIronSky says:

      That’s the best you’ve got? The Alien series is Ridley-ed with good puns. You could easily Weaver a few in here or there, but hell, if you think long enough, I’m sure you could throw them in all over Rapace.

      A pun thread like this could easily burst into something quite monstrous – just look at all the space we’ve got! I’m surprised it hasn’t already xenomorphed into the corniest thread in the universe.

      But then again, in space, no one can hear your awful puns.

    • RegisteredUser says:

      A pun thread?
      I’m so excited, my throat almost feels choked up.
      Prepare for your chests to burst..with laughter!
      I’ve given everyone a heads up, so I hope you are prepared and that there will be no flaming.

      Otherwise I will find something to make you cry, oh!
      There, I hope that gave that motion sense. Or?

    • Bauul says:

      We should wait until nightfall for the really good puns to begin emerging.

      That’s when they’re mostly around.

      Mostly.

      • CrookedLittleVein says:

        Yeah, they practically come out of the walls.

        I can’t really be bothered myself, I liked Prometheus but I’ve never been mistaken for a fan.

  2. Rivalus says:

    and three years later…

  3. stimpack says:

    Well, this is all Greek to me.

  4. FloorBelow says:

    Ever repeated a word so much it loses all meaning?
    Folly.

  5. bodydomelight says:

    It must have required a lot of blood, sweat and tears to recreate all those plot holes and massively nonsensical character choices.

    • baby snot says:

      I haven’t seen the film, but I don’t know why people were expecting anything worthwhile from the writer’s of Lost. They are the screenwriting equivalent of internet trolls.

    • AlwaysRight says:

      Yeah its rubbish isn’t it? Having to think about a film on more than just a surface level.

      Almost as if things like visual metaphors, symbolism and allegories exist.

      Almost as if some things are intentionally not explained directly through exposition.

      • Bauul says:

        True, but….

        Zombies? Giant squid things? Worm things? Black goo? Eye tadpoles? Near-xenomorphs? Statues of actual xenomorphs? Guy Pearce’s terrible makeup?

        Some things are just beyond metaphors!

        • AlwaysRight says:

          Ill give you Guy Pearce’s bad make-up, that was poo. My point wasn’t that the film isn’t flawed.

          The answers, interpretations and theories to the rest of your points can be found on a multitude of websites I suggest reading a few of them, even if they don’t come up with satisfactory conclusions for you they can point you to details you may have missed.
          Again I’m not saying it’s the perfect film, just one that rewards looking at it on different levels.

      • Subject 706 says:

        You’re trying way too hard, or the cognitive dissonance is strong in you. How do you metaphorize away the complete idiots for characters? The sloppy attention to details?

        • AlwaysRight says:

          There are many ways of rationalising the characters motives and actions (without having to try too hard).

          What if for example some of the characters are playing loose translations the roles of characters in the Greek Mythology of Prometheus? What if they are biblical characters (it is set at Christmas)? What if some characters are representations of certain emotions or concepts (such as faith, logic or pedaphobia?).

          This however is not the time or the place to argue such things. I respect your decision to completely disagree with me. I just think the film is more rewarding the more levels you view it from.

          • Subject 706 says:

            “What if for example some of the characters are playing loose translations the roles of characters in the Greek Mythology of Prometheus? What if they are biblical characters (it is set at Christmas)? What if some characters are representations of certain emotions or concepts (such as faith, logic or pedaphobia?).”

            The very definition of trying way too hard to rationalize bad scriptwriting. Here, let me present a more plausible alternative:

            “Director resting on old laurels teams up with bad writers, surrounded by yesmen, they create a bad script, full of factual errors and nonsensical characters. Tech-people prove their competence by creating beautiful vistas. People responsible for scenes/props are stoned/lazy at points and create some pretty odd discrepancies in some scenes. End result is beautiful vistas in a movie with a shit script and shit characters”.

          • AlwaysRight says:

            Like I said, its by no means perfect. But it does a lot of interesting and clever things that blockbuster films don’t have the balls or brains to do nowadays. Calling it lazy is inaccurate because they could have just played it safe and written an explosions and exposition film like everything else out there at the moment.

            My (and many others who enjoyed this film’s) points are perfectly valid and not sought out or contrived because there is evidence for them in there.

            You’re points however are mainly based on personal feelings and what you ‘reckon’ happened during the writing and filming of the movie.

          • Subject 706 says:

            “Like I said, its by no means perfect. But it does a lot of interesting and clever things that blockbuster films don’t have the balls or brains to do nowadays. Calling it lazy is inaccurate because they could have just played it safe and written an explosions and exposition film like everything else out there at the moment.”

            Such as? And yes, it IS lazy. How else would you explain away the multitude of factual errors in the script, that five minutes of reading would fix? Explaining away questions with an answer like “It’s what I choose to believe”?

            “My (and many others who enjoyed this film’s) points are perfectly valid and not sought out or contrived because there is evidence for them in there.”

            I’d say your points are contrived in the extreme. Metaphors in a movie should come organically, not be the product of internet discussions trying to explain away the obvious failings of a script, or the story just fails miserably.

            “You’re points however are mainly based on personal feelings and what you ‘reckon’ happened during the writing and filming of the movie.”

            Really? And your theories about possible metaphorical explanations for the characters bizarre actions, are fact? Or, you know, based on personal feelings and what you ‘reckon’ the director and screenwriter meant?

          • AlwaysRight says:

            It appears I just prefer to praise it for what it did well as opposed to decrying it for what it doesn’t.

            To be fair you can rip any film to shreds if you look hard enough and it is especially easy to do in a film that is based on philosophy and symbolism.

            In my opinion the fact we’re still debating this now proves the movie worked.

            Can we hug now?

          • Bauul says:

            No! You must fight to the death! With pillows!

          • Arglebargle says:

            Murky, haphazard. Plot holes, science holes, lackluster characterization. If it wasn’t part of the continuing downward arc of Scott’s career, more of case for it as a simple failure could probably be argued. Read the original script for his Robin Hood movie, vs the sad sack version that ended up getting shot, for another example of this.

            Face it, he’s got Lucas Syndrome.

          • Vandelay says:

            “It appears I just prefer to praise it for what it did well as opposed to decrying it for what it doesn’t”

            This is the angle I come at this film too. I certainly don’t think it was a great film and there are many issues with the plotting, as well as far too many obvious sequel hooks, but that didn’t stop me enjoying my time with it. The incessant moaning from people and overblown cries of “worst film ever!” just make me want to praise the film more for striving to be something far more then it really needed to be with the hidden Alien branding.

            It was also probably the most beautiful film I had seen in a cinema since True Grit, something I’m sure many missed if they ended up seeing it 3D. For that reason, it seems inconceivable to me that anyone would compare Scott to Lucas.

          • AlwaysRight says:

            Phew… I’m glad at least one person shares my view *brofist*.
            Its apt that you mentioned a Coen brothers film as their films are among my favourites and are usually chock full of symbolism, religious allegories and visual metaphors. I bet alot of the people who are overly critical of Prometheus would probably say similar things about movies like Barton Fink as the plot also plays second fiddle to its themes and metaphors (although the script, acting and characters are much much better).

            (Edit: I bet that’s the first time brofist and Barton Fink have been used in the same paragraph)

      • bodydomelight says:

        Well it is nice of you to imply that I cannot appreciate things on more than surface level because I claim a film has plot holes. Shout allegory and symbolism all you want, but those things don’t actually cover up said holes. They’re gaps in storytelling and character development logic, not unexplained motives and occurences.

        I have no objection to not having my hand held through a story. Many of my favourite films (Sunshine, Inception) leave aspects up to the viewer to decide on. Prometheus, on the other hand, had many characters whose actions did not seem logical or internally consistent. It also had MacGuffins aplenty and a hard sci-fi shell covering a gooey and tasteless B-movie horror centre. Unlike the original Alien, it had neither the writing nor the acting to cover that up – with the notable exception of Fassbender.

        Any number of supposed allegorical elements cannot fix a main character dying because they do not run twenty feet to the side within the space of about 60 seconds. Or having no safety precautions or logical procedure on the most important scientific mission mankind has ever embarked on. Or characters running terrified from their life one second and trying to cuddle up to a terrifying alien worm the next.

        Oh yeah, spoilers I guess. SPOILERS. RUBBISH SPOILERS.

    • Urthman says:

      Those are easily the worst scientists I’ve ever seen in a movie.

      • bodydomelight says:

        Given the casting, I was moderately surprised that there was no plot twist where they all revealed themselves to be underwear models posing as scientists in some far-future reality show.

  6. Matt says:

    But will I get to play a space flute?

  7. TheIronSky says:

    I’ve got a spot on my hard drive for this right here.

  8. Hazzard65 says:

    Too bad the film sucked terribly. Visuals were amazeballs. Everything else was utter, pretentious pap.

    • gshauger says:

      Pretentious? We’re talking about Prometheus and not Wes Anderson’s body of work

  9. Enzo says:

    Worst movie I’ve seen this year.

  10. John Connor says:

    Anyone know why the comments are closed on the post above this one?

    Afraid people are going to tear that shitty always-online “SimCity” a new one?

    • greenbananas says:

      Turn off yer adblock and refresh the main page, you’ll see why.

      Shouldn’t you have an “advertorial” sign of some sort when you’re gonna do things like this?

      Edit- Advertorial is such a pretty word. Cheers, baby snot.

      • RaveTurned says:

        So… the site has an advert for SimCity and the upcoming beta. The post is also reporting on the news of the upcoming beta, and a new trailer. Not sure how these related facts are a good justification for suppressing people’s opinions of the news, the trailer, or the game.

        Or are you suggesting comments are disabled because people might decide RPS are shilling for EA and kick up a fuss about it? I’d have thought the latter scenario would be made much more likely by removing people’s ability to comment on the article without an explanation about why they were doing it. :/

        EDIT: Comments now seem to be enabled. I assume a technical glitch of some sort – it’s not like it’s the first time!

      • felisc says:

        don’t be mean.
        i guess they just want to avoid another fight about always online.

        • greenbananas says:

          Not sure where you or the guy above got the idea I was being mean. Publicity made to look like real pieces is not uncommon in a lot of publications, and that was what I assumed it was since the comments were closed. Hence the question. Now they’re open, so it’s really a non issue.

    • baby snot says:

      If that’s the genuine reason then ‘Advertorial’ would be sufficient. But I don’t believe for a second that comments are off for that reason.

  11. Similar says:

    hm. Ever since the Quake 1 total conversion got shut down (by Fox, I think) it’s seemed a bit risky to base mods on anything Aliens related. Could be a lot of work for nothing.

  12. beema says:

    I love how people can’t get past bickering over the movie and just look at this mod for the amazing work that it is. This guy has done an incredible job. I really interested to see where he goes with it — whether it will just be a mapping project or if he plans to make an actual game/story around it.

    • AlwaysRight says:

      Apologies for contributing to that, this mod is the news and it really is an achievement.

    • Dervish says:

      I don’t think it looks amazing. It’s clearly a lot of work, but the result is still cheap-looking imitations of a visually rich movie. Textures, architecture, lighting–I honestly don’t see anything great here, unlike stuff like the Titanic recreation or that Monkey Island 2 environment in CryEngine 2. I don’t think anyone would give this a second glance if it weren’t for the subject matter.

  13. Bauul says:

    I gotta say, rewatching those videos, the Doom 3 engine really does still have the best in-game GUIs around.

    Fully interactive animated desktops as a texture on an in-game object? Yes please!

  14. gshauger says:

    Only the movie wasn’t a folly.

  15. Nazgul222 says:

    I really don’t understand the hate for this movie. I thought it was one of the better, and more ambitious, sci-fi movies I’ve seen in recent years. Too many people had their nostalgia lenses on while watching this movie. Alien is an amazing movie but is also extremely simplistic when compared to Prometheus. This was an extremely satisfying prequel that also stood on its own as a new, standalone, film.

    My expectations weren’t super high for this but I was very pleasantly surprised by the film and continue to think about it months after its release. Movies that have very conflicting views usually end up being looked upon as some of the better films of a generation.

    Ask someone to watch Blade Runner for the first time. They will probably say it is one of the most boring movies they have ever seen. It’s a great movie that examines what it is to be human but you have to really pay attention to it in order to understand its complexities. I felt Prometheus accomplished the exploration of human nature while still being an interesting and thrilling blockbuster film without the slowness of other “thought-provoking” films.

  16. Kefren says:

    Great videos, I admire the work that has gone into them. I had fun with lots of Doom 3 mods. Event Horizon and Phantasm spring to mind.