Doom 2 In Name Only: An indepth review thread

[mouldy]

That thread needed to be shut down because it was descending into a childish back and forth argument over nothing. I see its still going now for some reason.

Let me break this down so we can see why exactly.

This is a community megawad with a mixture of decent and ok maps, with a couple dodgy ones perhaps. Pretty much what you'd expect from any such collection. So why has this particular one been singled out for its own "Support Group for Victims of D2ino" thread?

Two words:

tarnsman, antroid

Seriously, you could chop the wad out of the equation entirely and just have those two guys and their supporters arguing for eternity about "what makes a good doom map". The argument goes like this:

"I don't like this map because of reasons"
"Well I like it BECAUSE of those reasons "
"Well you are wrong because I am right"
"Elitist! You just can't accept other points of view are valid"
"No you're not agreeing with me so you're the elitist"

At this point others can smell the argument happening and join in, keeping the endless cycle going. Eventually this builds some kind of weird hype that elevates the wad into "something about which I must have an exaggerated opinion", and the 2 sides polarise into "doom-snob haters" and "precious mapping princesses". Everyone loves that kind of drama, and its self perpetuating.

But in reality, nobody else gives a shit. All the rest of the mappers are quite happy to hear criticism, we all criticised each others maps during playtesting and any problems were either fixed or not that big a deal.

Because the truth is, its not that big a deal. You can see that from how this thread is already collapsing into unrelated arguments, the wad itself just isn't that big enough a deal to support the weight of opinion that is now surrounding it.

[Antroid]

Eris Falling said:

Nah this one's valid. It didn't help though that the author basically posted his map and then was never seen again. Again, I'll disagree with the pluralisation of MAP11, but Courtyard is perfectly valid.

Maybe it's a russian thing, I can perfectly picture our word for "courtyard" referring to an unholy amalgamation of several courtyards.

Edit:

mouldy said:

Because the truth is, its not that big a deal.

You think that, but if those people are allowed to continue what they're doing, they will brainwash the entire community into making maps that I don't like!

[Da Werecat]

Phobus said:

As Tarnsman has stated, the complete irrelevance to the entire discussion is the problem, not that it's some kind of poor defence for something.

1. It's not a problem you usually yell about. Unless you're some kind of anal moderator.
2. The word "defence" is actually Tarnsman's.

Calling me out as un-PC is inaccurate due to irrelevance in this instance.

What is "un-PC"?

No, but the inability to handle them (hence shutting down all discussion) is very much just weakness and overreaction.

Well then, you can start accusing the forum staff of their inability to handle bullshit "the right way".

[Phobus]

Da Werecat said:

Did I actually accuse you of that?

It's how I interpreted your interpretation of how I interpreted ella guro's non-sequitur. As you hadn't picked up on my complaint being about the irrelevance, it basically had to be about the content, hence my assumption that your issue with me is that I wasn't being accepting of whatever it was he claimed to be.

[Da Werecat]

I see.

[40oz]

Wow this thread is all sorts of retarded. When I played D2ino I didn't really relate to many of the interpretations of the map titles (I was amazed at how little platform jumping and crushers and traps were in the gantlet until the very end) but all the needless bickering is out of control. If you think you can interpret map names better then do it yourself and release. People will play it.

no ones character should really be called into question here.

[plums]

Phobus said:

It's how I interpreted your interpretation of how I interpreted ella guro's non-sequitur. As you hadn't picked up on my complaint being about the irrelevance, it basically had to be about the content, hence my assumption that your issue with me is that I wasn't being accepting of whatever it was he claimed to be.

I have an issue with that. I get that you don't follow or care why ella guro brought up her gender the other thread, and I don't really care if you do. But the way you're talking about it is dismissive to transgendered people in general, not that I expect this is news to you, and I think you're being a real asshole about it.

[Phobus]

Do they deserve any special treatment, then? Would me not giving a shit about you being male be any better? I think you'll find the depth of my apathy towards this extends far beyond not caring about their feelings. It's still utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand, as is you feeling the need to tell me I'm a bad person and, indeed, this rebuttal.

[esselfortium]

plums said:

I have an issue with that. I get that you don't follow or care why ella guro brought up her gender the other thread, and I don't really care if you do. But the way you're talking about it is dismissive to transgendered people in general, not that I expect this is news to you, and I think you're being a real asshole about it.

Thank you for making this post so I didn't have to; I'd have probably been less polite about it.

I've become rather tired of seeing several posters on here repeatedly harass and ridicule posters about their gender identity. I recognize that Doomworld has always been a rowdy and opinionated place, but the degree of venom that's been shown towards certain members of this forum (not just in this thread) has no place here or anywhere.

@Phobus: Feel free to discuss whether ella guro's post was relevant to the context (I don't feel that it was), but try not to be such a shitty poster. Yes, this is a formal warning.

[Phobus]

Meh, I won't be missed.

[Tarnsman]

Eris Falling said:

Again, I'll disagree with the pluralisation of MAP11, but Courtyard is perfectly valid.

At least Map 06 and Map 11 both each have an eponymous Crusher or Circle of Death respectively. Map 18 fails in that regard. Again the big problem with the who plural thing is that it ties back into the idea of certain maps working as just the base concept and focusing on just that can lead to a more interesting map. Circle of Death comes close with the primary focus on traversing the central area but it does still have a bit of filler.

Phobus said:

It's how I interpreted your interpretation of how I interpreted ella guro's non-sequitur. As you hadn't picked up on my complaint being about the irrelevance, it basically had to be about the content, hence my assumption that your issue with me is that I wasn't being accepting of whatever it was he claimed to be.

By refusing to call her a she you are pretty much making it about your issue with her Gender Idenity. Essel is right there is some pointless hostility towards Trans people on these forums. If you don't like Trans people, fine, if seeing people constantly bring it up and base their entire identity around it really bothers you, fine. But approach it in a rational way. You're basically being that guy who knows someone prefers a nickname over their given name but you keep calling them the name they don't like because "fuck you".

Gender Identity had nothing to do with what was being discussed hence my question "what the fuck does that have to do with anything", bringing up irrelevant information like that should be called out, in the same way if I brought up the last time I got blown and the end of some discussion about dynamic map design or some shit. But refusing to address her with female pronouns is being pretty openly hostile about it in a way that's really dickish.

[234233424]

Antroid said:

interpret the project goal is the correct way? Was it ever written that a map needs to entirely consist of what is in it's name and nothing else?

I kinda thought that was the whole point of the megawad?

maybe take out the Only then in D2INO?

[Tarnsman]

SlashBane said:

I kinda thought that was the whole point of the megawad?

maybe take out the Only then in D2INO?

Haha don't be silly, Doomworld community projects never actually follow their name and half the time blatantly ignore the project goals.

[234233424]

Tarnsman said:

Haha don't be silly, Doomworld community projects never actually follow their name and half the time blatantly ignore the project goals.

Silly me!

How about Doom 2 in it's extended interpretation based on it which may or may not follow it's name.

Rolls right off the tongue. You're welcome.

[Tristan]

Tarnsman said:

At least Map 06 and Map 11 both each have an eponymous Crusher or Circle of Death respectively. Map 18 fails in that regard

Just in case there was some confusion, this is what I meant.

[Panzeh]

One thing I don't get, is why the hell are d2ino maps so long? I know this is a modern mapping thing, but if you have a good idea for a map you don't need to run it into the ground.

[234233424]

Panzeh said:

One thing I don't get, is why the hell are d2ino maps so long? I know this is a modern mapping thing, but if you have a good idea for a map you don't need to run it into the ground.

Remember when dead simple suddenly became not dead simple and lasted hours? Good times.

[Magnusblitz]

Antroid said:

My favorite maps (that are not mine) from D2INO are 01, 06, 07, 08, 09, 13, 14, 15, and 22, and if anyone says those are bad? Well fuck them, they are wrong.

Antroid said:

So take that ego and your idea that you or someone else knows "how things really are" and shove it.

Antroid said:

I'm not telling someone to shove his opinion, where the hell are you seeing that? I'm telling someone to shove his holy belief in the idea that his opinion is fact

You can't have it both ways, bud.

[duh]

[Panzeh]

XCOPY said:

To anyone complaining about map length, there are mapsets that limits themselves to 1024 map units, others uses 64 units (height is ignored).

I'm not looking for a claustrophobia mapset. I'm looking for a reasonable length. Id was pretty good at making maps not go on too long. It's been more than 20 years.

[purist]

@Magnusblitz: not taking sides here but to hopefully pre-empt a long rebuttal, having read Antroid's repeated point of view, I think he means 'if anyone says those are [objectively] bad...'

As in, he does not mean to deny anyone's right to dislike them - only that they cannot call those maps unlikeable (by virtue of the fact he likes them).

[Antroid]

SlashBane said:

I kinda thought that was the whole point of the megawad?

maybe take out the Only then in D2INO?

Tarnsman said:

Haha don't be silly, Doomworld community projects never actually follow their name and half the time blatantly ignore the project goals.

I like the idea that you understand the project goals and requirements better than the person who started the project, the project leader and all the participants.
Keep thinking that. Even when the very person who came up with the idea tells you what it was, even after reading the description in the project thread where the required strictness is specifically stated, just hold onto this belief that you and only you know what the project was required to be to fulfill it's duty to the community.

purist said:

As in, he does not mean to deny anyone's right to dislike them - only that they cannot call those maps unlikeable (by virtue of the fact he likes them).

See, this guy has alright reading comprehension! Thank you purist for saying what I wanted to say but better.

Panzeh said:

I'm not looking for a claustrophobia mapset. I'm looking for a reasonable length. Id was pretty good at making maps not go on too long.

By Jove, someone likes maps that are different in some aspect from the holy scripture that is the original games? Surely that can't be true!



Edit: also Tarnsman is a big fat jerk who doesn't reply to PMs

[ClonedPickle]

Antroid said:

I like the idea that you understand the project goals and requirements better than the person who started the project, the project leader and all the participants.
Keep thinking that. Even when the very person who came up with the idea tells you what it was, even after reading the description in the project thread where the required strictness is specifically stated, just hold onto this belief that you and only you know what the project was required to be to fulfill it's duty to the community.

Eris Falling said: [in the UDINO thread, granted, but if that's so radically different from D2INO then shit's fucked harder than I thought]
Same drill as before. Make vanilla compatible maps that represent the original title of the original level. For example, Mt. Erebus could be set on the side of a mountain, Unholy Cathedral needs to be set in a cathedral, you get the idea.

Emphasis mine; I don't get how that's so up to interpretation to you. If Unholy Cathedral needs to be in a (one. singular. uno) cathedral, why can The Courtyard actually be two courtyards? Why can Dead Simple be needlessly complex? There shouldn't be a debate about whether or not D2INO failed at its project goal by having a non-zero amount of maps fail to correctly convey their map title. That's not subjective. They failed to do so.

[mrthejoshmon]

My irrelevant opinions on the maps:

MAP01:

Now this map is nice but I would have done these things:

- The map would have been the beginning rocky cliff area (a bit extended though) all the way up until a building, then the map would end upon entering the building (The Entryway in other words), that would have been nice but it is ok as it is anyway.

- Less pinkies and more zombies would have been my priority, the guardian of the the Entryway could have also been a Hell Knight or 2

- The player would have only found these weapons:
Chainsaw
Shotgun

MAP02:

This was also an ok map, I liked it. Here is more bullshit I would have done that you don't even need to read lol:

- This didn't feel like an under hall, it felt more like some kind of power substation (and due to the constant holes in the roof revealing the sky my idea cemented like shit in summer). I would have used tech lights and torches for lighting and not holes in the roof revealing the sky.

- Where them Hell Knights at? Hell Knights are fun to fight as they actually pose a threat. I like fighting Hell Knights.

- Way too little specters in the water, I would expect the underhalls to filled with these little bastards, creeping in the dark corners and shit like that.

MAP03:

This map is so far the best (You know, out of the 3 I have played!). This level made me think PSX Master Levels (Attack and Virgil, IDK why). There is however one small failing to this:

- The demon trap deployed all of the monsters into the crusher, GG.

I will play the rest when I figure out how to create a cohesive demo via PrBoom that is tolerable to watch.

EDIT:

Phobus said:

Meh, I won't be missed.

I like your maps, don't go :(

[234233424]

ClonedPickle said:

Emphasis mine; I don't get how that's so up to interpretation to you. If Unholy Cathedral needs to be in a (one. singular. uno) cathedral, why can The Courtyard actually be two courtyards? Why can Dead Simple be needlessly complex? There shouldn't be a debate about whether or not D2INO failed at its project goal by having a non-zero amount of maps fail to correctly convey their map title. That's not subjective. They failed to do so.

Thanks Pickle this is perfect. Failed is the key word here.

[40oz]

XCOPY said:

To anyone complaining about map length, there are mapsets that limits themselves to 1024 map units, others uses 64 units (height is ignored).

yeaaaah! Lets get some Plutonia 1024 love up in here! Btw phobus' map submission is already locked in for it so you'll get one of his maps even if this thread does loser him :P

[Magnusblitz]

purist said:

@Magnusblitz: not taking sides here but to hopefully pre-empt a long rebuttal, having read Antroid's repeated point of view, I think he means 'if anyone says those are [objectively] bad...'

As in, he does not mean to deny anyone's right to dislike them - only that they cannot call those maps unlikeable (by virtue of the fact he likes them).

Antroid said:

See, this guy has alright reading comprehension! Thank you purist for saying what I wanted to say but better.

Fair enough, though I'd quibble with how he stated it (Antroid didn't say "these maps aren't unlikeable, I like them" he just said "if anyone says they're bad, they're wrong" which is pretty much the pot calling the kettle black given his other statements in this thread.

We are pushing pretty far into the "what measure is a critic's review" territory here. You can always find someone that enjoys something that's panned nearly everywhere else. I'm sure there's someone out there who likes Birdemic 2 (and just not because it's a "great bad movie") but that doesn't mean it's not bad.

I think that's partially what caused the whole argument to occur in the first place... a lot of people chimed in that D2INO isn't that good, and Antroid got defensive and said he couldn't understand why everyone hated it, so then Tarnsman came in and started trying to explain why... and it just got circular from there and devolved to the point of "well you can't say something objectively is bad because no one is objective" (basically).

[elic]

Some background on the creation of Map06:

Before I started working on the map I was read some thread where someone was splitting up the mappers here into two categories: those who made maps that pandered to the community's common perceptions of taste, and those who ignored the common consensus of what makes a good map and mapped with only they're personal preferences in mind. I was placed in the former category, which I found a bit annoying since I also had more respect for mappers choosing the latter philosophy. I then thought a bit about all the maps that I made and realized that they never deviated too much from the mainstream, and that my placement in the first group was justified.

I decided to experiment with creating something that would clearly fit into the 2nd category. I forget whether I made this decision before or after taking the map06 slot in D2INO, but in any case I chose it for my experiment. I purposely added things to it that I knew would create a polarized reaction - I love cryptic layouts, archvile mazes, and small doses of platforming, but I know that some people hate them all with passion.

The reaction to the map is exactly what I expected. Some like it, some love it, many hate it.

Success?

Of course I would prefer it if nobody hated it, but I know that there are some things that some players simply don't enjoy (which is cool for them - everyone is entitled to their own opinion), and when I made the decision to include these things in my map, I knew that it lost any chance of being liked by everyone.

[purist]

Agree that the words you quoted were not clear, that's why I made the point I did. In the context of his other posts I saw there was crossed wires and I thought this thread could do without another argument :-)

Re: critisism , do we still have to use the qualifier/disclaimer that it's an opinion only? Let's play grown ups and take that as given. Even if somebody says something is objectively bad or wrong, if I disagree I still accept that as the person's opinion.

[Gifty]

Having not played the wad, does everyone just feel the need to piss all over it because it got mainstream gaming press and they feel it was unjustified? Because that's how it looks from the outside.