Do you actually finish Megawads?

There are so many great Megawads out there but I find it hard to finish them. In fact, I've never finished a 30+ map PWAD, simply because there's so many to play that I want to move on and see what else the community has to offer.

I have 3 questions related to this:

1: Do you finish Megawads? why/why not?

2: Should more mappers aim to make smaller, more focused projects that are more likely to see completion by more people?

3: Does the Megawad format hold some value that a ~15 map wad would not?

1. 90% of the time, I don't, because excepting ones focused on small maps, it takes long enough that my interest ends up wandering somewhere else and then I don't go back.  I might vaguely remember that I was up to a particular level and -warp back at a later date, but that's usually it.

2. I would generally consider it a good thing, but I'm not much for dictating what mappers "should" do.

3. Properly ending instead of dumping you into the stock levels at the end in vanilla, although depending on what port you target this can be a non-issue.  (More of a problem with Doom 2, once again episode format FTW.)  For vanilla you can push all the levels to the end numbers and have the player -warp to the first one but that always runs the risk of "didn't read the TXT file" syndrome.

Love this topic. Says what I have been thinking for years :D

1. No (Lack of time)

2. Yes please.

3. Only if you have time to spare for hours.

4. (I made this one up) YES. A thousand times YES!

(My question is: Should anyone making an IoS ending to a megawad be boiled in oil, staked out in the desert with vultures eating their livers and what's left be burned at the stake?) LOL

1. Yes, always, abandoning something isn't in my blood. I don't start something if my goal is not to finish it from the very beginning.

2. Not really, there's plenty of wads out there that feature just a few levels, not the typical 30/32+ . I think people, if they do decide to drop them, do so for other reasons usually (stuff gets boring, repetitive, confusing, tiring, and so on. Basically it just gets worse).

3. No, as long as it's high quality and enjoyable the length is of no concern to me.

I go up to MAP30 and I stop, usually because most MAP30's are crap anyways. Otherwise I complete every map in a megawad fully.

1. Yes, if it's enjoyable enough for me to play through them I'm more than happy to do so. I've completed most every megawad I've played, and only so few have ever been left incomplete. I remember finding The Last Revenger a little odd and not to my tastes so I couldn't get through it, and Bloodstain I had fun with but for some reason never went back and completed it. Once in a while I return to playing Valiant but that one has been slow-going for me since I've been aiming for 100% completion (which to be honest I don't normally do) and I'll admit I sort of regret trying to do so since some secrets have taken me a long time to find.

2. I think maps have certainly grown much larger over time, and I mentioned it before in another forum post of mine. But I still remember some IWAD maps seeming pretty big for the time, and it amazes me looking back and thinking how small some of them seem now compared to a lot of the giants we see today. That's not to say they don't have a place in megawads, it all depends what the main goal of the megawad is. I don't think every idea for Doom should justify aiming for a 32-level megawad, and I think it helps to consider what a megawad should be when moving from map to map. If it's 32 Living End-style levels I probably wouldn't find it as interesting as 32 varying themes, but some people are into that. Ultimately it's up to the mappers in charge what they feel they should do, since we should always aim to please ourselves before others. When I create maps, I think about what I wish existed and I make that. Some people just want to make a megawad maybe because that's the closest some people would come to creating their own video game (I know in my case that was part of the reason). I think players have just as much responsibility over what they choose to play just as any mapper does over what they create, so I really think it works itself out.

3. I really wouldn't think it would matter. 15 levels is just as good a length as having 32, and maybe 15 would be more ideal for casual players who are just passing by, while others (like myself) can never get enough of Doom, so I always welcome more levels. That's not to say that every level set should be 32 levels, I know when making Eternally Yours part of me was tempted to keep making maps for it and extend it into a megawad, but I felt the character of the wad in itself is unique as it is, and I felt that where I ended it with MAP11 was enough of a conclusion that there really was no reason to keep it going. I have Doom Core and Reverie already for megawad players, and it was about time I did something that was easier to swallow than a full-game replacement.

2 minutes ago, Agent6 said:

2. Not really, there's plenty of wads out there that feature just a few levels, not the typical 30/32+ .

While I agree in principle, it's finding them that's the issue; Megawads get all the publicity.
Maybe we need a "directory of good, small mapsets" thread?

3 minutes ago, NuMetalManiak said:

 usually because most MAP30's are crap anyways

LOL, this :P

1. I play them until I stop enjoying them / cannot proceed without cheating, whichever comes first.  Sometimes that means I get to the end, sometimes not.

2. Mappers should map what mappers want to map.

3. Subjectively, for at least some people, it clearly does.  For others, it won't.

1) I at least try to finish them always. Sometimes I am planning to tell my friends about it or maybe writing a review on doomworld's file section. For this very reason, I want to at least experience the full wad, even if it means, that I have to cheat myself through the last couple of stages.

2) I generally would love to see smaller projects, because I am not 12 anymore and really don't have the time to play Megawads (and map my own things). It's a real shame, but when I play stuff like BTSX and get stuck on a map, it can take me up to 40 minutes to actually complete it, even if the map is not that big. Count this times 30 and, yeah... that's quite a big chunk of free time for an old fart, who was to work monday - sunday. ;/

3) I would say no. Things like "Going Down" probably have the very same impact and some megawads undoubtedly would even benefit from a little bit trimming. Yet, on the other hand, a smaller and / or more atmospheric map inbetween a huge Megawad - maybe even monsterless - can also greatly enhance the whole experience, imho.

I finished very few of the megawads i played, so it's almost a "no".

And for the smaller projects thing, it depends a lot on what the wad wants to accomplish. If you can do all what you want in a small project i think it's preferable, but you might as well do an epic 32 level megawad if you can manage it. Dividing the maps in episodes helps a lot too, i kinda feel more motivated finishing one episode at a time than progressing through a longer campaign.

Also i think we should have more The Ultimate Doom Megawads, those are cool

Do you finish Megawads? why/why not?

Yes, usually.  Unless there's some bullshit level with like 2000+ monsters active at once, then my PC slows to a crawl.  No finishing those.
I just like playing like a full campaign.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Should more mappers aim to make smaller, more focused projects that are more likely to see completion by more people?

Mappers should just follow whatever vision they have.  Only reason why I've never made a megawad myself is because I've always lost interest like... I dunno, four levels in.  If the mapper wants to go balls to the wall and make 32-something maps, go for it.

Does the Megawad format hold some value that a ~15 map wad would not?

A prolonged feeling of progression, usually.  Like, for me, it's not quite as fun to get every single weapon on a single map.  Kinda like to have it drawn out over a long period of time.  But, that's just me.

I started one megawad but I have only a few levels and some are unfinished.  It was basically my attempt to figure out Doom Builder 2.  Still can't make doors the way I want...

1) 90% of the time, unless i get bored or i don't have time because life rears it's ugly head.

2) Yes.

3) Yes, it's longer and has a better feeling of progression and escalation in difficulty than a 15 map pack, although a 15 map pack might have more interesting levels and less boring and filler ones.

1. If the quality is consistent throughout and it doesn't degenerate into another Hell Revealed exercise in elitist tedium.

2. I think so, since it's easier for players to finish, AND easier for the modders/mappers to finish. I released Midgard Outlaw as an 11-map episode instead of a 3-episode megawad precisely for this reason.

3. I suppose so, but I'm still more likely to play a smaller project to the end. I'd rather be left wanting more than have the wad outstay its welcome.

4. Let them contemplate their lack of creativity on the Tree of Woe.

1. Almost always, yes. Even if I drop the megawad for some reason, I make it a point to return and complete it. I treat them like individual games/expansion packs, so I try to see them to the end.

2. Map the way you want to map. Would I prefer smaller projects with sharper focus? Absolutely, but no one is obliged to make that for me. Mappers are like developers. They make whatever they want and once they're done, it's all in the hands of the players.

3. Episode and Megawad lengths are somewhat arbitrary themselves. Aside from technical (and time/resource) limitations, I don't see why the Episodes in The Ultimate Doom aren't 7 or 10 maps long, or the Megawad format is 50 maps long. Mappers can create as many maps as they see fit. Personally, I would love to see more maps in my favorite mapsets, and less in the ones I dislike.

I think megawads are more a consequence of Doom2.exe's hardcoded episodes/intermissions and secret exits than 32 being some "magic number" of levels. Doom saw plenty of 9 level episode replacements, after all. We might have a lot more small projects if overriding the level progression wasn't limited to the advanced source ports. I really wonder what today's Doom projects would look like if DOOM2.EXE read its episode progression from the IWAD.

Anyway, I have the Doomworld Megawad Club to thank for completing a lot more wads than I would have otherwise. Something about tackling a 32 level behemoth as a daily task alongside others really helps my motivation to keep going, even if I don't participate in the threads that much. Before the club started, I hadn't finished much of anything.

4 hours ago, Plusw said:

1: Do you finish Megawads? why/why not?

 

2: Should more mappers aim to make smaller, more focused projects that are more likely to see completion by more people?

 

3: Does the Megawad format hold some value that a ~15 map wad would not?

1. If megawad clicks on me, I'm trying to finish it no matter what how hours it takes to do that. It's like reading book or watching some kind of movie or series.

2. Well, I love when authors go with episodic approach and provide different way to play mapset. Valiant was good example on it, if you play it on eternity or zdoom family ports. Too bad that universal mapinfo never was finished, so no ways to set episodic things on boom by using doom II iwad(besides using death exi) or end mapset the way as you want. 

3. I don't think so, you can do all 32 maps and slap icon of sin at the end and ruin megawad or you can end mapset on map 15 with super cool boss end or atleast set credits map. There are so many things you know. 

1. Never. Because they're too long

2. Yes, because I can finish those

3. Probably for those still tied to the IWADs' 32 map format, but hey, nobody's going to ask their money back if there are only 5 maps.

1. Provided they are not Eternal Doom, yes, of course. The best maps of the WAD are usually at the end.

2. Well, I don't think they should feel in any way compelled to make a megaWAD, especially if they lack inspiration. I will expand on this in my answer to question...

3. I say that the megaWAD format potentially has something to offer that a (shall we say) miniWAD does not: the ability to take its time building to a climactic finish. Scythe is a good example (I know what you are going to say, Nine Inch Heels! :-P). The early maps are easy (probably too easy, lol); the middle maps are also easy, but the hell episode is pretty legit. You also build from small hell maps up to the mini-slaughtermap in map 26, to a more grand-scaled map in 27, 28 doesn't exist because it would ruin the point I'm trying to make, 29 is more grand yet, and 30 is a heroic struggle all the way through. Finishing it feels pretty darn good. Sunlust is another good example that comes to mind, except it's not "too easy" at the start.

The second Scythe is similar, except that it really loses steam after map 27, but that is because Erik Alm ran out of ideas and released it without the last 3 maps. Later on, he caved to community pressure to add 3 more maps. This is a good example of why authors should not feel compelled to make a megaWAD. Just make what your creativity can support. A similar thing seemed to happen to Speed of Doom.

It's sorta like music. I enjoy long songs. My playlist has a couple songs around 20 minutes long, several that are 8+ minutes long, and many that are 6+ minutes long. I find that longer songs (e.g. Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen, Ticking by Elton John, The Day that Music Died by Don McLean) have more time to say something profound musically. The artists simply have more room to work with. However... it is not true that longer=better in every case. The artist has to know how to use this time well. Long songs that are poorly written just grow tiresome (like, seriously Beatles -- "Hey Jude" was over at the 3 1/2 minute mark!). Similarly, there is potential for a 32 map megaWAD to use these maps well to "tell a story" (I don't necessarily mean using lore -- I mean moving from the simple, easy, and small to the complex, challenging, and epic). But it takes a special kind of artist to do this well, and I think in most cases it is not really done well.

True fact: When I first started exploring Doom WADs, I would always download anything with reviews that said "it was great until it turned into slaughter at the end." 'Cuz that meant it had an epic finish. ;-)

I make a point to finish what I start. I may even go through it a second time to see if it's something I'll definitely want to revisit in the future.

If I start a wad and never finish it, I'm left with is this nagging feeling like I may be missing out. In some cases I'm not, in other cases I certainly am. It just gives a little peace of mind when I do make the effort to get through one.

yes

I'm all in favor of 10-15 map sets rather than megawads. I tend to play on UV and many megawads turn pretty insane for my taste past level 20 anyway, so even if I try, I hardly ever finish the last 10 maps.

To me, there is nothing in a megawad that is somehow more valuable than two sets of 15 or three sets of 10 maps.

1: Usually not. After a couple of play sessions I usually forgot coming back and finish the wad haha 
A lot of megawads aren't also much my taste too, tbh. They usually features larger, grindy and/or too much action-focused maps.

2: Nah, it depends on the scope and the goal of the project...

3: Yeah, with megawads you can make more robust "journeys" and build-ups through levels where smaller packs wouldn't be able to offer. Not every idea needs to be expanded to 32-level mapset, though. Also, this doesn't mean that a megawad is naturally better than a smaller mapset, just a different thing that can be just as awesome.

1. Yeah, but the flipside is that I don't start them often.

2. Sure, but there's some sort of thinking that a project isn't "complete" unless it has 32+ levels. 

3. Technically, a 15+ levels was is a  megawad. 

1: I'll quit if I haven't been enjoying myself within the first 8 maps or so, bu that's rare.

2: It would be pretty cool to have more megawads consisting of short maps, but I certainly don't mind long maps.

3: If a mapper has enough good map ideas to fill up 32 maps, then there's no reason not to go for a megawad.

Megawads are just several 1-map wads put together in one file.

I don't get what's the difference between a, say, vanilla 15-map wad and another vanilla 32-map wad. They're both Doom. Once you finish one wad, you'll go play another wad, right? When you finish a 16-map and then play a different 16-map wad afterwards, you've basically just completed a 32-map megawad, they might play differently, but the Doom community has other millions of wads to offer, many that play the same and many different and unique ones. The cicle repeats. If you've just played three 32-map megawads, you can say it was one 96-map wad. All wads are just one big ass ongoing episodic megawad

1. No because after 3-5 maps I get bored with it for some reason unless they are small maps.

2. I guess.

3. I think so.

On 8/22/2018 at 7:03 PM, Plusw said:

1: Do you finish Megawads? why/why not?

Yes, always, under my methods of course. I pick one wad, and play only that til it ends. However, there have been maps I skipped for specific reasons (e.g. not built for the same compatibility of the rest), and I leave them for another time. My preference is to see a megawad or mapset as a continuous journey, hence why I generally don't legit pistol start but do my best to pretend I'm not carrying unintended weapons and understand the mappers' ideas. I can't fit this method in every wad, so there're exceptions where I treat them like a collection of individual maps, no problems with that. Do I get bored of the same long mapset? Only if it hasn't been entertaining at all, which never happened so far. I did gave up Scythe once mid first episode because it wasn't satisfying my needs at the moment (too short, basically), but after other wads I resumed where I left and had fun with it. 

On 8/22/2018 at 7:03 PM, Plusw said:

2: Should more mappers aim to make smaller, more focused projects that are more likely to see completion by more people?

Mappers can do whatever the hell they want. Whether it's focused on something in particular, innovating, or more of the same old thing, there's always audience for everything, as long as the mapper(s) specify what they did, somebody will click on the download link. Still, the balance between number of maps and length depends on the project's aim, for example the wad Preacher has fast-paced religious-themed maps using the concept of non-linear multiple ways to start, many atypical ideas together in 10 maps of varied length, which hits the right balance in my opinion. And we see community full megawads usually labelled "mixed bags", that is bound to happen when you join lots of concepts in one single wad. But then again, mappers have the right to express themselves however they want and it's up to the players to taste and judge, sometimes short wads have great stuff and stinkers at the same time, and megawads that get tons of 5/5 reviews.

On 8/22/2018 at 7:03 PM, Plusw said:

3: Does the Megawad format hold some value that a ~15 map wad would not?

Nah, not for me personally. I think I answered this in question 2. As cliche as it sounds, it depends on the person. And yea, excitement doesn't endure in all megawads, specially with 32 maps, that's when you make decisions, and I always keep playing until the end, sometimes one later map can be enough to bring me back to it. 

I don't know if anything of what I said made sense.