Glad I got the Doom pack when it was on sale and I really don't see any point to the BFG edition.

Yup, sounds typical of Bethesda. Physical copies were always readily available around here, but others may not be so fortunate.

Ouch. Tough crowd. Have you considered that having ~10+ different DOOM products on Steam might be confusing to nostalgic gamers who saw an advertisement for the latest Doom rerelease? I got the id super pack a couple of years ago so that I could play Doom 2 again (I never had a personal copy). It took me a couple minutes to figure out which was which and I initially downloaded Final Doom in error. Having even more releases of Doom would surely make things worse.

Edit:
ID still offers DD versions of Ultimate Doom, Doom 2, and Final Doom on their webstore, though its expensive.

http://www.movie-censorship.com/news_en.php?ID=4069

They talk about the alterations to Resurrection of Evil here, but since Germany seems to be the sole (or at least main) reason for these changes one would assume that the same is true for the secret Wolfenstein levels.

This is almost guaranteed to be a FOV issue. Try running it windowed if it will let you, or force your graphics card to maintain the original aspect ratio. You can also try to sit a little further away from your monitor than usual.

hmmm, interesting... thanks, will try :)

After reading the issues this game has on PC I'm glad I still have my old copy of Doom 3.

Why so much attention for a game that was pretty shit X years ago and is still shit? Doom 3 did almost nothing right - from weedy weapons to corridor shooting, unsatisfying combat, predictive scripted spawning, too much darkness, not enough enemies to shoot at once, etc. etc. etc. It was the opposite of Doom 1 & 2 - it deserves to be forgotten, to be honest.

But that's just not true, Doom 3 was one of the best modern shooters I've played. It's not similar enough to Doom 1 and 2? So what? It's got absolutely perfect weapon balance, gunplay feels right, graphics design is near to perfect except for the 'metaly' feel of everything, flashlight vs weapons compromise I actually liked a lot, game was fairly atmospheric, every monster required different approach to defeat, everything was skill-based as opposed to luck etc. Yes, it's not fast paced. Ummm, so?

Ummm so you ignored the reasons I gave. I disagree on gunplay (and most people I know do so too) - the guns felt too weedy, deaths were nowhere near as satisfying, enemies were not numerous enough and corridor combat is generally considered to be a BAD thing for FPS games. It doesn't allow for tactics because there's no ROOM to apply any. Since it's all scripted to boot and enemies only appear after you run across an invisible line, it makes it very fake and uninteresting. Setting aside Doom 1 & 2, Doom 3 made so many mistakes against what you shouldn't do with a FPS that I can't possibly enjoy it. Good for you that you do, but there's countless better FPS games out there that do things far better.

Even id Software admitted that they were seriously limited by their engine - they admitted that they had to make the flashlight a separate weapon due to performance issues and only did it after exhausting all other options. They also admitted that larger rooms were just not possible for the same reason and that they couldn't add more monsters, again, for that reason. They basically admitted the game was crippled.

Ever tried Unreal 2? Normally I have absolutely no problem with the "bobbing" or even floating effects in shooters but Unreal 2 actually made me nauseous. At least you can regulate the intensity of the effect there (first time I played it I turned it all up without noticing - I felt like I was getting drunk from playing it). And after a long session of Mech Warrior 2 I'd walk like a pigeon for half an hour.

Doom 3 has many fans. It's plausible that they'd be interested in an update. It could just be trolling though.

I can do that too: "Most people I know are certain of existence of spaghetti monster, therefore it must exist" :-P

Corridor combat ... Yeah, not so good. As far as how guns felt, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I found Doom 3 to be a perfect example of weapon and enemy balance: Everything's had it's use in certain situations, and even the most powerful enemy could be defeated with no health loss whatsoever, and that's not because they would be too easy / insufficiently varied. There's only few FPS games that can do this. And that there weren't loads of them? How is that a disadvantage, every enemy's had a strength and every enemy posed a challenge in certain situation, that's what counts.

... In your opinon. I never really cared, thanks to great gunplay, I've actually finished the game about 4 times.

There's countless FPS games that do some parts of the gameplay better. In other parts, Doom 3 shines. Well it's about weapon balance, enemy balance and satisfying gunplay, but that's all I really do care about when I want to play FPS, and there's really a small ammount of good, slow paced FPS games.

I don't really care. Bigger rooms would be cool, that much is true. I'm not saying the game is flawless. But I genuinely liked light vs weapon choice.

I have a hard time believing it. I don't see how "flashlight + gun" is eating more of the performance than just either. Mods that were released shortly after the game's release added guns with flashlights, maps with higher enemy counts and bigger outdoor areas - they stressed all the supposed weaknesses of the engine and the game ran just fine even on my dated machine, at least not notably worse than the original campaign. Mods proved early on that the technology was perfectly capable of handling the gameplay the fans were actually expecting from Doom 3. I also read in the press that self-shadowing was removed due to performance issues but it could be easily activated with a simple console command. It didn't harm the performance much, it only looked awful. I always felt like many unpopular design choices made in Doom 3 were justified with made-up technical limitations for some reason.