also @ TechSpot: Metro: Last Light Performance, Benchmarked

Doom III a 2004 game?

By

On July 23, 2003, 4:24 AM

[COLOR=royalblue]During Activisions's financial quarterly conference call, company execs updated their 2003 release calendar and the long anticipated id Software first person shooter Doom III was not among the games planned for release this year. During the conference call, the execs stated that for planning purposes they have Doom III pencilled in for the fourth quarter 2004 fiscal year (Jan-March 2004) but added that id Software, not Activision, dictates when the game will finally be released.[/COLOR]

Although this is not an official statement, it gives us a pretty good hint that next-gen Doom won't become available this holiday season... which would give us plenty of time to dedicate to Half-Life 2 still slated for this Sept. 30th. On a positive note however, it's been made clear that id guys have the call, I would expect a pretty solid game once it makes the store shelves.

No tags on this story

User Comments: 6

Got something to say? Post a comment
  1. Oh well. At least there was the leaked Alpha to prove that its not going to become another Duke Nukem forever...As long as HL2 comes out on time I miss Doom III too much until Jan 2004.
  2. won't hit the shelves till 4th quarter 2004.........geeeeez, i'm just gonna forget about this one [url]http://www.homelanfed.com/index.php?id=15762[/url]
  3. This is already posted on the front page of TechSpot. Anyway, it does say fourth quarter, but adds "Jan.-March 2004". Seems to me thats a strange fiscal year. Anyway, if that's right it's still closer that it sounds.
  4. i didn't see it on the front page, .........when i entered the post................is a fourth quarter, in a fiscal year, Jan-Mar?.........if so, i'd be a little more stoked........
  5. Yep, Jan-Mar, fiscal year is April-March (UK), though some companies may have different fiscal year. Not sure about US fiscal year.
  6. A lot of companies in the US also end there fiscal year in March, but in this case I thought it would be called end of 2003, even though it's actually in 2004. At least that's what the companies I have worked for called it.

Recently commented stories

Post a new comment

Social Login & Guest Posting TechSpot Members
Login here or sign up for free,
it takes about a minute.
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.
TechSpot on:

Subscribe to TechSpot

Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and breaking tech news.