Why I prefer Ultimate Doom WADs

Since the release of Ultimate Doom back in 1995, I have enjoyed following source ports and WAD releases. Sadly, I might not ever finish my own project, but I certainly enjoy following other projects. I have come to realize that I enjoy Ultimate Doom WADs far more than WADs released for Doom2. This thread is not a debate between the official levels of Ultimate Doom and Doom2, but rather the WADs that have come out for both games. I hope to inspire more people to map for Ultimate Doom. I'm curious if anyone else shares my opinion, or if most Doom fans are stuck on Doom2. Here is a list of my reasons why I prefer Ultimate Doom for WADs:

-Ultimate Doom has better weapon progression in most WADs. Doom2 WADs tend to hand out all the powerful weapons, like the Super Shotgun, plasma gun, and BFG in the first few levels. Ultimate Doom WADs often force you to use the pistol, chainsaw, shotgun, and chaingun for almost an entire episode. I prefer the latter, because the shotgun becomes useless in Doom2 once you get the SSG, and it's too easy to kill lower tiered monsters. The SSG takes out Cacodemons, Demons, and groups of imps too easily. This creates an imbalance that forces the mapper of a Doom2 WAD to place too many upper-tiered monsters. I do want to point out that I like the SSG, but mappers tend to hand it out too early. It should really be found halfway through a Megawad. Once you pick it up, you have it the whole game - unless you do a pistol start. Even with a pistol start, you will end up with an SSG too quickly since most mappers place one every level.

-Monster progression is also better in Ultimate Doom WADs. The lower-tiered monsters are found in most custom episodes of Ultimate Doom, and the upper-tiered monsters are used sparingly. I enjoy using weak weapons against lower-tiered monsters, and Doom2 WADs have very little of this. The occasional monster horde is indeed fun - but Doom2 mappers seem to favor hordes of Revenents, which is more annoying than fun. I much prefer a good fight against large numbers of Cacodemons with a trusty shotgun. This is rarely ever seen in Doom2. By the time you encounter the first Cacodemon in Doom2 WADs, you probably already have an SSG. Cacodemons are turned into boring masses of pus ready to be popped with the SSG in hand. They are far more fun to kill in hordes when you only have a shotgun. I wish Cacodemons were used more in Doom2 WADs, but the truth is they just aren't fun to fight when you have the SSG.

-The BFG is used far more in Doom2 WADs than it is in Ultimate Doom WADs, and I pretty much loathe the BFG. Alien Vendetta is the perfect example of a WAD that I found to be a let down around the halfway mark, and that is because of the mass amounts of plasma ammo for the BFG. Lower tiered monsters pretty much disappear in AV at a certain point, and the game becomes a BFG spam-fest against hordes of Revenents, Arachnotrons, Barons, etc.. The game can be just as challenging when you face hordes of Cacodemons, Imps, Demons, and Barons with only the shotgun, chaingun, and maybe a few rockets as your prime weapons. On the other hand, the game is a boring challenge when you have the same scenario with 600 cells with the BFG at your disposal.

-The texture themes chosen in Ultimate Doom are usually far better than Doom2. I understand that all the Ultimate Doom textures are present in Doom2, but the problem is that people tend to use the boring city and base themes in Doom2 more often than the Hell themes of Doom1. Some great examples of Hell-themed or Cave-themed WADS in Ultimate Doom are Death Tormention 3 by Paul Corfiatis & Kristian Aro, Inferno by Christopher Lutz and Phobos: Anomaly Reborn by Christopher Lutz. I personally have not seem any Doom2 WAD beat the level of detail using these particular themes.

-I have to admit, I am a huge sucker for heavily detailed WADs that use Hell or Cave themes. Paul Corfiatis, Kristian Aro, and Christopher Lutz created many WADs for Ultimate Doom that use these themes well. Doom2 has too many cheesy custom texture sets for various WADs that ruin the experience for me. Why is it that popular Doom2 Megawads often lean toward using some sort of silly Ancient Egyptian theme? Not only that, but I am quite disappointed by the level of detail in many Doom2 WADs compared to Ultimate Doom WADs. I really was looking forward to playing hyped up WADs like HR, AV, Cchest4, Plutonia Revisited, etc - but all of them were not my cup of tea. I don't know why, but I expected more. The only Doom2 WAD I really enjoyed was Whispers of Satan, and that is because Paul Corfiatis & Kristian Aro made it in a Doom1 style. They should have just created it for Ultimate Doom to begin with.

-Ultimate Doom mappers usually stick with stock content, which is another huge plus for me. The monsters, weapons, and textures of Doom work well, so why change it? There is no need for silly Ancient Egyptian texture sets, or new ugly monsters. A big advantage of mappers using stock content is that I can enjoy all the 3rd party high-res textures made for ports like Doomsday and Risen3d. It was a blast using Risen3d to play through Death Tormention 3, Inferno, Phobos Anomaly Reborn, 2002ado, Base Ganymede, and more using high-res textures in all their glory. The Hell theme looks amazing with the new high-res textures out there.

-Doom2 has 32 consecutive levels without a single break between them. Ultimate Doom has 4 episodes that each force you to start with a pistol. I know many people play each Doom2 level with a pistol start, but I personally like building up my arsenal of weaponry until the end of each episode of Ultimate Doom, then start over the next episode. This kind of gives a fresh start that Doom2 never has. All it takes in Doom2 is one level that gives the player too much ammo, and that ammo can last for the rest of the game. This often means too much BFG ammo. Why should I have to force myself to do a pistol start in Doom2 for balanced ammo? It is the mappers' responsibility to place the correct amount of ammo, and Doom2 WADs often have far too many rockets and plasma cells that ruin the rest of the game.

Well, that's the end of my rant for now. Does anyone have any opinions on this? I know many people will disagree with me on my favorite WADs of each game, but it's just my opinion. Also, if anyone knows of good Doom2 WADs that use the Hell theme or follow the classic Ultimate Doom style of play, let me know.

Cool. I like Doom 2 because you can't just sidestep all of the monsters' projectiles. Not many people can craft something like E4M2 that actually makes Doom's monsters a threat (and even there it's due to restricting the player's movement).

Dragonsbrethren said:

Cool. I like Doom 2 because you can't just sidestep all of the monsters' projectiles. Not many people can craft something like E4M2 that actually makes Doom's monsters a threat (and even there it's due to restricting the player's movement).

Shotgun Guys can be quite a threat when used properly. I think the Chaingunner is often over-hyped. Some of the Chaingunner traps I've come across in Doom2 are just unfair. Demons can make some of the best traps when used properly, but mappers rarely ever use them the right way in Doom2. The SSG also makes it too easy to shoot through several Demons at once. Facing a horde of Demons with just a shotgun can be intimidating, because they can corner you more often. The Demon trap in "Tricks and Traps" of Doom2 would actually be a challenge without the SSG. Just imagine trying to kill all those Demons with the shotgun only.

Hi, there was a bit of discussion going on in another thread about mapping for Doom vs Doom 2, maybe you saw that and it inspired this post or maybe it's just coincidence.

I'm assuming you're talking about the way wads usually have been made as opposed to things that are inherent in making a wad for UD or D2, and if so, I agree with you, to an extent. (I think you should emphasize this point, or you can expect a lot of posts talking about how Doom 2 levels don't need to use harder monsters or SSGs or whatever.)

Ultimate Doom has better weapon progression in most WADs.

Not sure how I feel about this; In UD the chaingun is a "premium" weapon, whereas in D2 it's quite expected and the SSG fills that role. I'm not too fond of pecking away at enemies with the pistol for very long, much of the time. You are right that the SSG makes UD enemies a lot less tough, and that it often comes too early. Even in doom2.wad, you can get it by MAP02!

Monster progression is also better in Ultimate Doom WADs.

Again, not sure I agree entirely, just because there are plenty of UD levels that, for lack of other mid-tier monsters, just place Barons everywhere in a way that makes them ammo sinks, but not otherwise too threatening. Picking off hordes of low-tier monsters is fun and I agree that UD wads often have more of this.

The BFG is used far more in Doom2 WADs than it is in Ultimate Doom WADs, and I pretty much loathe the BFG. Alien Vendetta is the perfect example of a WAD that I found to be a let down around the halfway mark, and that is because of the mass amounts of plasma ammo for the BFG.

I think the BFG is fun, but I agree it really changes the way the game works. But more on this in a bit...

The texture themes chosen in Ultimate Doom are usually far better than Doom2. I understand that all the Ultimate Doom textures are present in Doom2, but the problem is that people tend to use the boring city and base themes in Doom2 more often than the Hell themes of Doom1.

UD actually has a few textures that aren't in D2. Anyhow I'm not sure how much I agree with you here, UD has TONS of E1 STARTAN base levels, and D2's got a number of levels with Hell and Cave themes, at least lately.

Ultimate Doom mappers usually stick with stock content, which is another huge plus for me.

Agreed, though for different reasons. I think the hi-res texture sets are quite ugly. But I value visual consistency a lot, which is something that's guaranteed when sticking with stock content. I'm also already a bit tired of maps that lean so heavily on gothictx, or that try to look like Quake 1 and/or 2, and you don't really get that at all in UD.

Doom2 has 32 consecutive levels without a single break between them.

I think this is a HUGE problem with D2 levels. I've said this elsewhere but I think the 32-level megawad format is vastly inferior to the 9-level episode format, and I think this is the crux of a lot of other issues you have. Weapon progression, monster progression, maybe even themes... to me it all comes from the same place: 32 consecutive levels is too long to sustain any kind of continual development, in an FPS like Doom. Not to mention that I often feel burnt-out at the end of a megawad, even one I really like, because I like to finish one wad before starting another.

e: A 9-level episode is a good length, and it gives you one secret level and one mandatory boss fight (or two, in the case of E4M6). You can also just use an ExM8 spot for the boss effect. The only similar thing in Doom 2 is MAP07, and Mancubi and Arachnotrons aren't really the same class of monster at all. Plus so many MAP07s are just Dead Simple clones anyhow. Otherwise, if you want a mandatory boss, you've got to come up with some system that prevents players from just leaving early. (Though I suppose speedrunners probably dislike forced boss fights.)

I also like the Music in Doom a lot more than Doom 2, and since many wads don't provide their own music, it means listening to the stock music. D_E1M1 is a litte worn out at this point, but I could never hear D_RUNNIN again and I wouldn't miss it. At least there are a lot of good music wads for Doom 2.

Lastly I actually prefer UD over D2 when it comes to official content, but that's a bit of another discussion I guess.

I do prefer Doom 2 over Ultimate Doom, but I respect your opinion and I can understand why you feel that way, and I can agree with many of the points you made.

Doom 1 simply has much more consistent texture themes. Even when playing some of the worst Doom 1 PWADs, many of them have a better sense of place than most of the worst Doom 2 PWADs. Excepting the brown textures in Doom 2, many of them look highly out of place when used next to each other. Something about playing a sketchy 1994 Doom 2 wad that uses bricks /w windows, wood, firewalls, zimmer, slimefalls, and wolfenstein textures in a short level doesn't sit well with me, while some of the most awfully uninspired texture choices in Ultimate Doom can still look more like [/i]something[/i].

Another thing about Doom 2 that I don't like is that for an inexperienced mapper, it's pretty easy to exploit many of Doom 2's new monsters as "instant death monsters" as a simple monster closet with some chaingunners, an archvile, some revenants, a mancubus, or an arachnatron that opens up behind the player unsuspectingly can mean immediate death (or at least a shit ton of damage that could have been avoided) if the player doesn't have a big weapon, or megaarmor or an abundance of ammunition. This is different than Doom 1 as the hardest monsters before the Cyberdemon and Spider Mastermind are the cacodemons and Hell Barons, and even facing them in tight quarters, dealing with them is very survivable if the player AT LEAST has a shotgun with a good amount of shells or a berserk pack or something. Very rarely I play a Ultimate Doom wad that isn't beatable, even with very scarce resources. Doom 2 levels with hard Doom 2 monsters are extremely intimidating in tight hallways when the player only has a few shotgun shells to conserve, and can quickly be deemed as too frustrating or simply impossible, while many Ultimate Doom levels do not, even with some really haphazard thing placement.

I still prefer Doom 2 as there is very little that Doom 1 can do that Doom 2 cannot, and in the end, Doom 2's monsters are so dynamic and original and do pretty well at combatting circle-strafing, but after playing lots of D!Zone pwads for a few months, you can really see the disadvantages of Doom 2 for a new mapper trying to make something fun without a lot of experience.

Dragonsbrethren said:

Cool. I like Doom 2 because you can't just sidestep all of the monsters' projectiles. Not many people can craft something like E4M2 that actually makes Doom's monsters a threat (and even there it's due to restricting the player's movement).

This.

"Bigger weapons vs. Doom 2 enemies" isn't just "more firepower vs. more HP". The "bigger" weapons generally have unusual quirks that make handling them well take a bit more finesse -- the SSG has a very slow fire rate, so you have to make your shots count and plan your moves; the Rocket Launcher can be as fatal to you as your enemies if you aren't cautious; and then there's the BFG. Meanwhile, the D2 enemies have more complex (read: interesting) attack patterns, and require more varied tactics to defeat safely.

I like doom 2's beastiary and variety, but I also prefer UD's episode format.

I like the enemies added in doom 2 as it gives more challenge and a bit more variety in niche and behavior. However, the maps do need bigger breaks than a few intermission screens.

40oz said:

I still prefer Doom 2 as there is very little that Doom 1 can do that Doom 2 cannot, and in the end, Doom 2's monsters are so dynamic and original and do pretty well at combatting circle-strafing, but after playing lots of D!Zone pwads for a few months, you can really see the disadvantages of Doom 2 for a new mapper trying to make something fun without a lot of experience.

You make a good point I didn't even think of here, since most of what I've been considering is "good" maps. For a medium-quality or worse mapper, Doom 2 offers a lot more ways in which you can make something bad.

The biggest tangible advantages Doom the First has over its sequel are the 9-map episode format and SKINTEK. Everything else boils down to differences in mapping convention, which can be purposely bucked if desired. Though I suppose there's plenty to be said about D1's limitations breeding creativity, perhaps.

Doom 2 is great for the extra monsters and the SSG, but overall I prefer Doom 1 to Doom 2. It feels more atmospheric, and there's better integration and decent level/story progression (albeit subtle) in the Doom 1 levels. Episode 1 in particular is a masterpiece. Doom 2 feels much more haphazardly strung together, though I also feel the same about episode 4.

Xaser said:

The biggest tangible advantages Doom the First has over its sequel are the 9-map episode format and SKINTEK.

SLADRIP and SKINBORD, too. And the music, but I guess Plutonia's the best of both worlds there.

Only thing that grates me a lot in some Doom2 pwads: handing out super shotguns like candies.

Dragonsbrethren said:

SLADRIP and SKINBORD, too. And the music, but I guess Plutonia's the best of both worlds there.

Don't forget REDWALL1.

Actually is there anywhere to find a list of texture differences between Doom and Doom 2? Even better if it includes Plutonia and Evilution. It's something I've wanted for a bit. Maybe an experienced mapper can just list them from memory ;)

fraggle said:

Doom 2 is great for the extra monsters and the SSG, but overall I prefer Doom 1 to Doom 2. It feels more atmospheric, and there's better integration and decent level/story progression (albeit subtle) in the Doom 1 levels. Episode 1 in particular is a masterpiece. Doom 2 feels much more haphazardly strung together, though I also feel the same about episode 4.

Although that seems to be more of a comment on the core games rather than PWADs for them, I agree with all of those points.

BRB retooling Nex Credo for Ultimate Doom...

...actually, I'm in agreement with a lot of the points OP made. Though as a mapper, there is the temptation to offer something new every map; including weapons, which means the drip-feeding peters out at around MAP07 or 08 -- not even a third of the way through.

With my own projects (Sinister Intention previously, and Nex Credo currently) I try to go against the usual grain in various ways -- Sinister offering not a single collectible chaingun in 7 maps, and saving non-secret SSG until MAP06 (although secret ones can be found in the previous two maps). This is all, of course, speaking as a mapper -- but again, a point I can definitely agree on is the episodic nature of Ultimate Doom; it is fun to think of new ways to challenge a player from scratch, or introduce/drip-feed new things to them. It's one of my favourite things to do, and why I'm seriously considering telefrag/Icon exits for each of Doom 2's 'episodes'.

Cynical said:

This.

"Bigger weapons vs. Doom 2 enemies" isn't just "more firepower vs. more HP". The "bigger" weapons generally have unusual quirks that make handling them well take a bit more finesse -- the SSG has a very slow fire rate, so you have to make your shots count and plan your moves; the Rocket Launcher can be as fatal to you as your enemies if you aren't cautious; and then there's the BFG. Meanwhile, the D2 enemies have more complex (read: interesting) attack patterns, and require more varied tactics to defeat safely.

The Rocket Launcher is used in Ultimate Doom also, so that argument is not very valid. You say it takes more skill to use Doom2's weapons, but I say the opposite. It's easy to blast a horde of monsters with a SSG, despite the long reload time. How can you possibly miss with the large blast of the SSG? Demons can corner you much easier with a shotgun vs a SSG. And my point still stands about Cacodemons being too easy once you have the SSG. The BFG is the easiest weapon to use, and it is used more often in Doom2 WADs than UD WADs. In reality, I have yet to see a 32-map megawad for Doom2 that doesn't have the eventual BFG spam-fest. You are correct that Doom2 can be more challenging, but mappers end up making their maps challenging in the wrong ways. My idea of challenging is ammo conservation, a good number of lower-tiered monsters without the overpowered SSG, and a few hordes that don't include the BFG to win. I rarely ever see clever traps with Demons and Cacodemons in Doom2, and those two monsters can make up some of the best traps.

40oz said:
I still prefer Doom 2 as there is very little that Doom 1 can do that Doom 2 cannot, and in the end, Doom 2's monsters are so dynamic and original and do pretty well at combatting circle-strafing, but after playing lots of D!Zone pwads for a few months, you can really see the disadvantages of Doom 2 for a new mapper trying to make something fun without a lot of experience. [/B]

I absolutely agree that Doom2 can do all the same things that Doom1 can do, but unfortunately I have yet to see a Megawad for Doom2 that beats the game play, balance, and theme of UD WADs. In the end, Doom2 WADs feel far more unbalanced with too much BFG usage, too many hordes of upper tiered monsters, and an SSG too early in the game. Whispers of Satan comes the closest to being a balanced Megawad for Doom2 that has the themes from UD - but even then there are levels with too much plasma ammo, and an SSG that is found too early in the game.

I think Doom2 WADs could be superb if the mappers used the new tougher monsters sparingly, provided the SSG much later in the game, and relied more on ammo conservation and clever traps. The first 7 or 8 levels should be lower-tiered monsters with more SG, Chainsaw, and Chaingun usage. Even the Chaingun should have very little ammo provided. And I would like to see a Doom2 WAD with more UD Hell, cave, and natural themes.

Hi, there was a bit of discussion going on in another thread about mapping for Doom vs Doom 2, maybe you saw that and it inspired this post or maybe it's just coincidence.

Btw, this was indeed a coincidence. I have not seen that thread. I agree with most of what you said. :)

I prefer Doom over Doom II. I like the level design better, the monster and weapon progression, and I really like the "moody" and "atmospheric" music tracks. The music in Doom II sounds like they came right out of a Taco Bell commercial. Don't get me wrong, I like Doom II. The super shotgun is a nice addition, and the new monsters are pretty neat. But Doom, for me, is where it's at.

Lightning Hunter said:

How can you possibly miss with the large blast of the SSG?

At certain distance it becomes, well, a little too large.

Piper Maru said:

The music in Doom II sounds like they came right out of a Taco Bell commercial.

Try the NEW, SPICY, DEMON GORDITAS, with Hellspawn Hotsauce! It's like getting hit in the face with a fireball... of flavour!

* second half of D_STALKS plays in background *

With OPL, I love Plutonia's soundtrack: Doom 1 music through Doom 2's GENMIDI.

plums said:

Try the NEW, SPICY, DEMON GORDITAS, with Hellspawn Hotsauce! It's like getting hit in the face with a fireball... of flavour!

* second half of D_STALKS plays in background *

With OPL, I love Plutonia's soundtrack: Doom 1 music through Doom 2's GENMIDI.

Got the late night munchies? Blast your way through a literal demon infested generic UAC space base that you've seen a billion times before. You thought the demons from a literal hell had an insatiable craving for souls, you were wrong. The alien-demons have a craving for Doritos Locos Tacos and have murdered and zombified the staff to help them. Your mission is to recover the last chicken shredded smothered burrito and bring it back to operations command. But not before you give the demon-aliens a bad case of indigestion!

You enter the heavily infested star base, "Between Levels" from the Focus starts blaring, deafening you and making it difficult to listen to your surroundings. You go to options and turn that crap off.

"Those demonic aliens had better not get their flabby claws on my stuffed grilled burrito!" you mutter to yourself as you load your overpowered super shotgun.

Da Werecat said:

At certain distance it becomes, well, a little too large.

Obviously... But up close, it's hard to miss. It is rare that I don't hit monsters up close with every bullet of the SSG. It's not like it is a hard weapon to use. It is just about as powerful as a Rocket Launcher up close. I just don't understand the talk about the SSG requiring more skill to use, when I think it actually involves less skill.

I'll never understand the fascination for low tier monsters and weapons, for the most part a hitscan heavy game against slow-moving humanoïds. Just about every FPS after Doom went that route, and several of them improved the whole schtick.

That is, I can understand liking Doom for being the sum of a number of parts which would include level design, fast player speed, atmosphere, etc. and low tier monsters/weapons would happen to be part of it, but once you praise those later things in a vacuum... You lose me.

It doesn't help I can't find a single objective point in your post regarding those aspects. "it's too easy", "it's not fun", "this is annoying", "it's more fun", "there's too many", what kind of rhetoric is that? To even call your words arguments is a bit of a stretch, as it all boils down to "those things are bad because I don't like them, those things are good because I like them". To which all anyone can say is, well, OK, I respect your opinion, but that's hardly the basis for a discussion nor any convincing for anyone who isn't already on board with your particular point of view.

For example, fighting a horde of cacos with a single shotgun sounds like the definition of tediousness to me. Cacos only shoot in a straight line, making their projectiles trivial to dodge. They're big enough for you to score hits effortlessly with the shotgun, at most of the regular ranges you're going to fight from in Doom; and finally, the shotgun is weak enough it's going to take a long time to whittle down their numbers. So, you've got a fight dynamic that is low intensity on both offense and defense, and a timesink to boot.

Perhaps you could make such a fight interesting with clever level design and fine tuned balance forcing you to watch several directions and stay on the move to avoid being cornered. It would have to be extremely well balanced indeed, the nature of cacos vs single shotgun, taking 5 seconds to take out each one at best, limits the pressure you can put on the player at any given point *and* also means the fight risks becoming ridiculously easy once you've thinned the horde. I.e. if 20 cacos were swarming you in any given space, once you've taken out 10 cacos you've likely got plenty of room to move in that space and you still have a full minute of a mindnumbing cleanup.

I'm not even arguing against UD here specifically, because a caco fight can easily be made interesting with the RL or BFG. RL is straightforward; explosion radius reduces the space the player has to move, reduces the amount of pressure you need from monsters to keep things dangerous.

As for the BFG, your point claiming it's the easiest weapon to use is laughable, in light of many if not most players not even knowing how it works; and even for those who know, using it efficiently isn't a given in every situation. You've got a projectile coupled with a hitscan blast dependent on your previous orientation, current position and that first projectile colliding into something, all variables that make the weapon so much more complex and potentially volatile in damage output, and with that variation being almost entirely based on skill, not luck.

Of course, if you pit the doomguy with a BFG and essentially limitless ammo in the same given space and against the same given amount of cacos as you had when he had the shotgun, you're going to end up with something trivially easy. So you up the stakes. Which you've claimed is a bad thing, but haven't even tried to offer any reasons as to why. Here's two good things I've seen, again and again, resulting from higher monster counts used well:

- dynamic encounters. With more monsters there can be more directions to watch, a need to appraise and stay on top of the whole situation rather than simple point and shoot.

- predictability. As monsters take more shots (and, one would hope, you have proportionally more health and armor), the average damage you take is more likely to tend towards the average. Hordes of monsters move like flocks, any individual enemy taking a different path is less likely to influence the fight. Both of these things make the game less reliant on luck, and competent strategy and execution can be rewarded with (ideally) a perfect success rate.

Phml said:
It doesn't help I can't find a single objective point in your post regarding those aspects. "it's too easy", "it's not fun", "this is annoying", "it's more fun", "there's too many", what kind of rhetoric is that? To even call your words arguments is a bit of a stretch, as it all boils down to "those things are bad because I don't like them, those things are good because I like them". To which all anyone can say is, well, OK, I respect your opinion, but that's hardly the basis for a discussion nor any convincing for anyone who isn't already on board with your particular point of view.

It doesn't sound like you respect my opinion much at all, actually. :P

Aren't opinions what this is all about? You like open space BFG spam-fests, and I don't. I think that's about the gist of this conversation. You are correct that the BFG requires some understanding to use absolutely correctly, but then again, so do other weapons if you want to perfect their usage. A Chaingun is better in small bursts (like a sniper rifle), a shotgun is better closeup, a Rocket Launcher requires you to be a certain distance away from the blast, and a BFG requires you to be looking at the monster you hit. Any noob can figure out how to use a BFG though, and it is extremely overpowered. I still feel it is boring when mappers give out 600 cells to the BFG in Doom2 Megawads(like Alien Vendetta). Nothing you say will make me suddenly think, "oh, you are right, I enjoy those Doom2 BFG spam-fests!". And nothing I say will convince you either, so there is no point in further discussion. I have my opinion, and you have yours. There will be no winner that gets a star on his forehead for this discussion.

For example, fighting a horde of cacos with a single shotgun sounds like the definition of tediousness to me.

Isn't all of Doom tedious by this definition? It is also tedious running around a massive room full of 50 Revenents, Spider Masterminds, Arachnotrons, and Barons - firing the BFG and rockets for 5 minutes until they are all dead. And yes, you are correct that the battle has to be set up correctly. But when it is set up well, a Battle against Cacodemons is more entertaining to me than a BFG session. You are missing my main point of this thread, however. My point is that I've found UD WADs to be more well put together and entertaining than Doom2 WADs in general. I've given plenty of examples of such WADs. Perhaps you would like to retort with some better Doom2 WADs?

Of course, if you pit the doomguy with a BFG and essentially limitless ammo in the same given space and against the same given amount of cacos as you had when he had the shotgun, you're going to end up with something trivially easy. So you up the stakes. Which you've claimed is a bad thing, but haven't even tried to offer any reasons as to why. Here's two good things I've seen, again and again, resulting from higher monster counts used well

I never claimed that upping the stakes is a bad thing. I said that too many upper-tiered monsters in combination with too many overpowered weapons and ammo is a bad thing - and most Doom2 WADs have this. My reason? Because it's boring using the BFG all the time, and most people will agree (go read the negative posts in /IDGAMES about doom2's megawads, and you will find I'm not the only one who hates this). What kind of reason do you want? I'm sorry I can't provide scientific data and a theory. Only my opinion will do.

Phml said:

I'll never understand the fascination for low tier monsters and weapons, for the most part a hitscan heavy game against slow-moving humanoïds. Just about every FPS after Doom went that route, and several of them improved the whole schtick.

There's something extremely satisfying about shooting the shotgun into a horde of zombies and imps. Shot, kill, shot, kill, etc. It isn't really challenging, usually, and I wouldn't want the entire game to be like that, but sections that work that way are quite fun sometimes. I would argue in that case that many FPSs after Doom lose that appeal, due to better AI or more health on the low-tier units. Those aren't inherently bad things, it just makes for a different game.

It doesn't help I can't find a single objective point in your post regarding those aspects.

I don't agree with everything Lightning Hunter wrote, but in his defence, I don't think he was trying to make an objective argument at all.

Phml wins, he provides detailed descriptions explaining his opinions, while Lighting Hunter just says "this is fun and this is boring".

plums said:

There's something extremely satisfying about shooting the shotgun into a horde of zombies and imps. Shot, kill, shot, kill, etc. It isn't really challenging, usually, and I wouldn't want the entire game to be like that, but sections that work that way are quite fun sometimes. I would argue in that case that many FPSs after Doom lose that appeal, due to better AI or more health on the low-tier units. Those aren't inherently bad things, it just makes for a different game.

[/b]

Yes, you are correct. The fact is that Doom is fun for its simplicity. Why complicate it? The reason I haven't purchased a new game in nearly 10 years now is because I don't feel like learning anything new. I prefer the basics.

I don't agree with everything Lightning Hunter wrote, but in his defence, I don't think he was trying to make an objective argument at all.

Bingo. ;)

Memfis said:

Phml wins, he provides detailed descriptions explaining his opinions, while Lighting Hunter just says "this is fun and this is boring".

Go ahead and give him a star. He can proudly show it off to all of Doomworld. :P

Lightning Hunter said:

My idea of challenging is ammo conservation[...]

Limited ammo is one of the least fun ways to make a challenging map. It might seem perfectly balanced to the designer, but that's all going to fall apart when the player uses the wrong weapon in the wrong situation. This requires you to have foreknowledge of the map or go through a dumb trial and error phase where you die because you didn't use your rockets where you were supposed to and you're out of bullets for a close range encounter, or a hundred other similar scenarios.

Add the amount of ammo you need, then add more, because no two players are going to use the same weapon the same way in the same situation.

That's a cool opinion. I disagree with absolutely everything you said though because it clashes with my opinion.

Dragonsbrethren said:

Limited ammo is one of the least fun ways to make a challenging map. It might seem perfectly balanced to the designer, but that's all going to fall apart when the player uses the wrong weapon in the wrong situation. This requires you to have foreknowledge of the map or go through a dumb trial and error phase where you die because you didn't use your rockets where you were supposed to and you're out of bullets for a close range encounter, or a hundred other similar scenarios.

When I say ammo conservation, I'm not talking about giving the player 4 Shotgun Shells to kill 1 baron. I simply mean less ammo for the powerful weapons, and more ammo for the weaker weapons. I would rather have an overabundance of Shotgun shells and clips than rockets and plasma cells. I agree though; using fists or the chainsaw to kill anything tough is going too far. But most mappers tend to place far too much ammo. One big issue I've found is that mappers place too much ammo in secrets. Secret areas should have powerups and armor for balancing purposes. Having 20 boxes of rockets in one secret ruins the balance of several maps to come.

I've found that Doom2 mappers place too many Rockets and plasma ammo when compared to UD mappers.

About low tier monsters: playing Doom 1 can make you appreciate situations when you can kill almost anything with one shotgun blast. Because it's either that, or those caco encounters. Or barons.