Is Classic Doom/Doom2, well... Doomed?

NiGHTMARE said:

Peterson? Are you mad? Without him, Doom 1 and 2 would have been even better!

I think that Romero's more than proved that his presence isn't what made ID's games the success stories that they are.

As for Prince... yes, he makes excellent MIDIs, but have you heard his MP3s? They're awful. And before you suggest MIDI for Doom 3, let me just say 'no'.

heh yeah, peterson wasn't very good. but he did certainly do a lot for doom.. and people seem to like his map01 at least.

and how do you mean romero hasn't helped? because daikatana flopped? daikatana flopped because he was trying to do something creative and it didn't turn out well, partly because he didn't really have much in the way of a programmer. plus he's just naturally not a good project leader because he's lazy. and it would have helped if he had done some of the levels. i think he's about proven he's been id's best level designer ever.

although personally i'd still take daikatana to that prepackaged garbage called quake2 any day.

and about the music.. well, trent reznor's quake soundtrack was awful, although the sound effects were the best aspect of the alpha so i have some hope he'll do better this time around. and yeah, bobby prince is definitely far better at doing midis than mp3s :P but his style was a very important part of the original doom atmosphere.. considering reznor's style, doom3 might end up feeling more like a sequel to the original quake than as a new doom game.

I hate to say it, but Bobby Prince is pretty mediocre at best, overall. He did some good stuff for DOOM and DOOM II, but in general his abilities are pretty sub-par. He says it took him two years to figure out a particular "echo" effect (delayed notes at lower volume), which most people within, for instance, the tracking community figured that out really quickly - it's a very basic trick. Also, for one of his DOOM II maps, he decided to try his hand at jazz progression - and he still ended up meticulously planning out an extremely basic I/IV/V/I chord progression. This might sound like music snobbery to a lot of you, but if you're going to be a professional in the industry these are kind of things that are good, if not NECESSARY, to know and have almost mastered.

Not to mention that half of his DOOM music is blatantly ripped off from Metallica, Megadeth, Sepultura, Alice in Chains (listen to map 23 [Barrels O' Fun] in DOOM II and tell me that's NOT blatantly copied from Alice in Chains's "Angry Chair"), and so forth.

Ubik said:

I hate to say it, but Bobby Prince is pretty mediocre at best, overall. He did some good stuff for DOOM and DOOM II, but in general his abilities are pretty sub-par. He says it took him two years to figure out a particular "echo" effect (delayed notes at lower volume), which most people within, for instance, the tracking community figured that out really quickly - it's a very basic trick. Also, for one of his DOOM II maps, he decided to try his hand at jazz progression - and he still ended up meticulously planning out an extremely basic I/IV/V/I chord progression. This might sound like music snobbery to a lot of you, but if you're going to be a professional in the industry these are kind of things that are good, if not NECESSARY, to know and have almost mastered.

Not to mention that half of his DOOM music is blatantly ripped off from Metallica, Megadeth, Sepultura, Alice in Chains (listen to map 23 [Barrels O' Fun] in DOOM II and tell me that's NOT blatantly copied from Alice in Chains's "Angry Chair"), and so forth.

his music might not be good persay, but it certainly works very well within doom and does a good job of enhancing the atmosphere. gaming music is hardly meant to be all that great imho.

sargebaldy said:

his music might not be good persay, but it certainly works very well within doom and does a good job of enhancing the atmosphere. gaming music is hardly meant to be all that great imho.

You're right that his music goes well with and enhances DOOM; but really well-done game music can make the difference between a merely above-average gaming experience and an absolutely fantastic, unforgettable one. Would most of our old favorite NES games have been the same without their spectacular music? Would people be as addicted to RPGs if none of them had music above a mediocre range? Would REZ have been even remotely interesting if the gameplay weren't intricately linked with the music? Would Glove On Fight be as absolutely ludicrous as it is without its insane soundtrack? ;)

Music's one aspect of video games that a lot of developers neglect, especially nowadays; half of the really spectacular game musicians (e.g. my friend Virt) have a hard time making it in the industry because the cheap but mediocre musicians constantly undercut them, and flood a lot of newer games with terrible music. Or, the developers just get lazy and license music from already-established musicians.

sargebaldy said:

gaming music is hardly meant to be all that great imho.

OMG SUPAR MAHREO IZ 1337 YUO FAG

DOO, DOO, DOO, DOO DOO DOO DOO

But to be honest, Capcom music > Doom 1 >>> Nintendo >>>>>>>>>> Quake series

Graf Zahl said:

First it has to prove that it's indeed better (and that doesn't mean better graphics!)

Yes, I'm just 'asking' the big question. If Doom3 is truly better than the originals, why play them?

You could ask why anyone plays Doom 2 when the original is far superior.

sargebaldy said:

i can see how people might want to see a true doom sequel, and see it's by id so omg it must be a true sequel, just like quake2 was a perfect sequel to quake and quake3 was a perfect sequel to quake2, and RTCW was a perfect sequel to wolf3d. face it, id's been selling out for the better part of a decade now.

If I follow your "logic" correctly, a sequel can never be better then the original game, because the original game always gives you this nostalgic oldskool feeling.

Nostalgia is the reason I still play Doom1/2. But that doesn't blind me from judging the gameplay of newer titles.

Funny how in your opinion the level design in the Doom III Alpha is "meh", yet I don't hear you complaining about the leveldesign in Wolf3D.

NiGHTMARE said:

You could ask why anyone plays Doom 2 when the original is far superior.

who plays doom2? i play doom every now and then, loading up doom2 only when a mod calls for it.

Arno said:

Funny how in your opinion the level design in the Doom III Alpha is "meh", yet I don't hear you complaining about the leveldesign in Wolf3D.

well i try to be relative. the level design in wolf3d was pretty decent, considering the power of the engine. with the doom3 engine, the authours can pretty much do anything they put their mind to.

Arno said:

If I follow your "logic" correctly, a sequel can never be better then the original game, because the original game always gives you this nostalgic oldskool feeling.

no, i was saying id doesn't make sequels at all. quake2 is in no way related to quake, and quake3 is no way related to quake1 or 2. since romero left id in '97, id hasn't come up with one title or one true sequel to any games. it's sold out the rights of 3 of its popular series (quake, keen, and wolf3d) to independents and have of late just irritated me with its imbalance of technology with good design. the id i loved, the team that made the keen games and wolf3d and doom, is long dead for me. what's left is a bunch of slick marketing people, some excellent artists and that assclown carmack.

Shaviro said:

Why play Doom 1/2 if you have a better, newer version?

Because it's not a newer version, it's just a modern FPS with the same title.

sargebaldy said:

who plays doom2? i play doom every now and then, loading up doom2 only when a mod calls for it.

Umm, all you have to do is take a look at the demo sites to see that lots of people play Doom 2.

NiGHTMARE said:

Umm, all you have to do is take a look at the demo sites to see that lots of people play Doom 2.

well yeah, speedrunners do. i don't think they care whether a map is good or bad, so long as it's difficult.

sargebaldy said:

well yeah, speedrunners do. i don't think they care whether a map is good or bad, so long as it's difficult.

heh... no.

wow... some of you people are either blinded with nostalgia, have a phobia of new things or just incredibly dumb/stubborn.

First of all, the level design in D3 Alpha had to be linear because it was meant for a tech demonstration. If we look at the detail/layout, D3 Alpha has some of the best ever seen. They keep it simple, but beautiful.

Second of all, Doom3 is not a sequel! Doom 3 is a remake of Doom 1 which makes it a new version of Doom, end of story.

RTCW is a retelling of Wolf 3D, but that didn't affect the Wolf 3D community one bit.

NiGHTMARE said:

RTCW is a retelling of Wolf 3D, but that didn't affect the Wolf 3D community one bit.

Well RTCW wasn't revolutionary. Doom 3 'ought' to be.

Shaviro said:

Well RTCW wasn't revolutionary. Doom 3 'ought' to be.

if you compare the original wolfenstein to RTCW it sure is
revolutionary.

Noone is sticking to the original dooms for graphics. Everyone have their own reasons, nostalgia, gameplay etc, but they have one thing in common, they won't change just because there is a new cool game coming out that happens to be called "Doom 3".

No! NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!:p Classic Doom will live on!

As long as people keep playing/editing/modding for Doom, it will still be alive.

IMHO the original Doom community will live on long after the Doom 3 community is dead.

Brad_tilf said:

Do you think that the arrival of Doom3 when it occurs will be the dethnell so to speak of the original game?

Not at all. Do you? Why?

Shaviro said:

Why play Doom 1/2 if you have a better, newer version?

Naturally, whoever feels that way should try to move on to DOOM III. On the other hand, there's people wholly uninterested in what's offered by DOOM III.

Also, one of the things that makes a game a favorite is familiarity. After 10 years that isn't discraded just because some new game comes out, not does the older game become any less good cause a company releases a spruced up verion that they believe is better. People who are presently (or lately) saying "DOOM is good but..." might want to try DOOM III as a replacement since they are dissatisfied with the performance of DOOM and DOOM II, but those who really have fun playing the games and making stuff for them will naturally either meddle with both if they like to play around with many games (since they are definitely technically and even thematically different) or just ignore DOOM III altogether.

Erik said:

heh... no.

well, i mostly base that statement on the fact speedrunners seem to love hell revealed when it's an awful piece of crap.

NiGHTMARE said:

IMHO the original Doom community will live on long after the Doom 3 community is dead.

amen reverend

Erik said:

if you compare the original wolfenstein to RTCW it sure is
revolutionary.

Noone is sticking to the original dooms for graphics. Everyone have their own reasons, nostalgia, gameplay etc, but they have one thing in common, they won't change just because there is a new cool game coming out that happens to be called "Doom 3".

revolutionary? of course it's revolutionary compared to wolf3d, graphics wise, because it's most of a decade newer. but it certainly isn't as revolutionary relative to Wolf3d for the time it was made. RTCW offers nothing new or satisfying, and it has very little in the way of creativity. it's just yet another mediocre, yawn-inspring FPS.

Shaviro said:

Well RTCW wasn't revolutionary. Doom 3 'ought' to be.

why 'ought' it be? because it has a new graphics engine, has doom in the name, and bears the 'id' logo?

sargebaldy said:

why 'ought' it be? because it has a new graphics engine, has doom in the name, and bears the 'id' logo?

If you had done any research or if you were just a little bit openminded, you would see that Doom 3 has the potential to be as revolutionary as half-life or maybe even as revolutionary as Doom. And I do not only mean graphics! It seems you are afraid of good graphics... geez.


oh and please do not make 4 posts in a row. Put the different quotes and answers in one thread!

First-person shooters suck.

Shaviro said:

If you had done any research or if you were just a little bit openminded, you would see that Doom 3 has the potential to be as revolutionary as half-life or maybe even as revolutionary as Doom. And I do not only mean graphics! It seems you are afraid of good graphics... geez.

afraid of good graphics? no. i hope i don't see over-prettified graphics ala quake3 though. i only mention the graphics because with the exception of the lighting and 3d graphics, everything i've seen of doom3 looks completely uninspired and unoriginal, and at least in the alpha there was nothing remotely original.

sargebaldy said:

...and at least in the alpha there was nothing remotely original.

uhmmm... did we play the same alpha?
Here's a few original points:

1) The way the screen looks and moves when you are being attacked
2) The machines are very original
3) The way the monitors are interactive

And anyways, do NOT judge the game from an early alpha.