Doom III a 2004 game?

By Julio Franco ยท 6 replies
Jul 23, 2003
  1. 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.

    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.
  2. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,730   +379

    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.
  3. JSR

    JSR Banned Posts: 592

  4. olefarte

    olefarte TechSpot Ambassador Posts: 1,345   +13

    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.
  5. JSR

    JSR Banned Posts: 592

    ole' one

    i didn't see it on the front page, .........when i entered the a fourth quarter, in a fiscal year, Jan-Mar?.........if so, i'd be a little more stoked........
  6. Nic

    Nic TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,549

    Yep, Jan-Mar, fiscal year is April-March (UK), though some companies may have different fiscal year. Not sure about US fiscal year.
  7. olefarte

    olefarte TechSpot Ambassador Posts: 1,345   +13

    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.
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...