Whiling away a Doom 3 preview

I was just perusing the impressions the gamespot folks had about the XBox version, and I came across this:

Doom 3 is, without a doubt, one of the best-looking console games we’ve seen. There are a lot of curved surfaces and bump-mapping to give the base’s interior a very realistic and amazing look

Do I draw the correct inference that curved surfaces and bump mapping = visual bleeding edge on the leading console of the day? Or is it just something they noticed and decided to mention but had nothing to do with touting the rendering engine’s advanced nature?
I’ve been considering getting one of the newer consoles (because my old PSX is long in the tooth and I’m sick of replacing power supplies on my Athlon rig), but if that’s the level of technical excellence I can expect, I might just reconsider.[/quote]

We’re currently at a spot on the console life timeline where PCs are going to look superior until the next round of consoles hit.

No disrespect meant to Jason, but I don’t think he’s the most knowledgeable man about the buzz words of graphics. Having been at the same event and seeing the same demo, I can tell you with a straight face that I was hard pressed to see any differences between Doom 3 on Xbox and Doom 3 on PC. I am absolutely amazed at how good it looks and how well it performs. Vicarious Visions did an amazing job with the port, and it’s going to run at 30fps at 480p. It’s almost impossible to believe that this is the same hardware that ran Halo at 30fps.

The lighting was still dynamic and per-pixel, the game was obviously making heavy use of pixel shaders (or whatever the OpenGL equivalent that Carmack is using is called), it had ragdoll physics and at least a rudimentary physics engine. On top of that, the sound was absolutely amazing.