Grazza
Super Moderator
Posts: 11451
Registered: 07-02 |
CacoCaddy said:
The 3rd one isn't even playable.... Is it?
I only found it to be playable using Zdoom, and by running over the monsters' heads. That way it's rather easy.
However, I do recall someone claiming that it could be played properly too, by BFGing your way through the monsters and getting to the next power-ups before the first invulnerability wears off. I'd need to see a demo before I really believed that though.
I'm surprised to see Icarus being criticized here. I found it to have a pleasant appearance and excellent variety, but a good degree of continuity of themes (esp. for a multi-author megawad - something that many later ones have lacked). The only grumble I have about map01 is that it presents a nasty obstacle to any attempts to record a Nightmare movie run. Excellent starting map otherwise.
OK, so coming back to the original question, which I'll interpret as "Which of the technically good big Doom projects appeals to you least?". Hard to say, since there aren't really any wads of that type that I actively dislike. I suppose maybe Batman Doom and Daedalus - while I appreciate their creativity, their gameplay never especially appealed to me, to the extent that I have never played either of them through from start to finish. Also, I'd rank Requiem below some of the other classic megawads, whereas many people rank it near (or at) the top of the pack - just too uneven, and too many fillers (albeit alongside some individual maps that are works of genius). Still a top-20 megawad though, of course.
Also, I tend to get a little bored with E1 remake/tributes, and don't generally find that heavy scripting makes for enjoyable gameplay.
Graf Zahl said:
I vote for Alien Vendetta and Hell Revealed. Masquerading inefficient skill to create a good balance by overstuffing your levels with way too many monsters doesn't count as 'good design' in my book.
Here we go again. Do you not accept that many players (including exceptionally skillful ones) regard these maps as supremely well balanced? Do you acknowledge it as even a possibility that it is your judgement that is skewed? Or that the concept of "balance" is not an absolute one, and depends on experience, ability and perhaps taste too? Note that I'm not taking issue with the fact that you don't like these maps (which you clearly don't); it's your categorization of them as objectively bad maps, and of the mappers as having done a poor job.
|
11-06-04 05:06 
