Do People Really Like Classic Doom For What It Is?

My first experence was Doom 95 in my Windows 98.

Like it, passed in a cd to a friend to play on a School Laboratory. Played Doom 1 and 2 and then go to others FPS, like Half Life, Halo, CoD, i was more a xbox and xbox 360 shoter guy.

Then in 2009 come back for Brutal Doom v18 i trink? Played that with TNT, got a good laughs, played more Cacowads games. And now i like more of wads that change the aestethics of maps instead of weapons, but some weapons just go on my heart (i remeber a 2004 M16 weapon .wad that sometimes still use)

BUT, last September, played a custom map Epic, on chocolate doom, and remeber the good old vainilla.

So..im in the middle :3
 

kb1 say: "Doom is not outdated, I'm sill healthy, and "retro" usually means "too lazy to make it nice, let's put a positive spin on it".

I totally respect emulating an old environment on more modern hardware. But purposefully downgrading the graphics, as if following some "cool, hipster" trend...that enters into the gimmick realm, as far as I'm concerned."

That is something that i dissagree, if that was true, games like Devil Daggers, Amid Evil, or Dusk, fall on a category of Niche games instead of Good FPS Games.

14 hours ago, EtherBot said:

I've made it pretty clear which parts I agree with and which parts I don't.

It's clear to you, because you wrote it. But you're not clear on my stance. But, that's ok.

Something extra seems to be driving you to tell your story, to make assumptions, and to push your message right past supporting and opposing views alike. Say what you have to say, and kindly leave me out of it. You're talking at me, not to me, and you're arguing with someone who largely agrees with you.

Offended? Here's what's offensive:

Taking a 50 Gb game development kit, drawing big solid color boxes on the screen, and claiming it's as cool as that 50 Kb 16-bit DOS app that busted it's ass in the '90s to deliver a decent frame rate on a 386 with 2Mb memory. That's not "retro", that just sucks.

I'm not saying that everything needs shiny new graphics. But claiming to have made a decision to make low-quality output purposefully, because "retro is cool"? That just doesn't do it for me.

1 hour ago, kb1 said:

Offended? Here's what's offensive:

Taking a 50 Gb game development kit, drawing big solid color boxes on the screen, and claiming it's as cool as that 50 Kb 16-bit DOS app that busted it's ass in the '90s to deliver a decent frame rate on a 386 with 2Mb memory. That's not "retro", that just sucks.

 

I'm not saying that everything needs shiny new graphics. But claiming to have made a decision to make low-quality output purposefully, because "retro is cool"? That just doesn't do it for me.

Care to mention a game like that?

On 11/1/2018 at 3:53 PM, kb1 said:

Something extra seems to be driving you to tell your story, to make assumptions, and to push your message right past supporting and opposing views alike.

Maybe this is hard to believe but I don't have a secret agenda. I genuinely just have thoughts about your thoughts. If I only cared about explaining my point of view, I wouldn't have bothered with the 'please correct me if I'm wrong' comments, would I?

On 11/1/2018 at 3:53 PM, kb1 said:

But you're not clear on my stance. But, that's ok.

What is your stance then? To me it seems like you think gaming as a market has gone downhill in general due to lazier developers creating games for fans that are harder to impress, two sentiments that cannot really coexist, imo. Either the market has gotten too easy to impress and will just buy anything these days, or the developers' real effort isn't being appreciated...you can't really have both.

I personally dislike the 'outdated' term because I* see it as a catch-all term used to stop discussing old things and that calling something 'outdated' and leaving it at that isn't productive.

But, as far as I can tell you don't share this sentiment. You seem to not like the term outdated because, in your opinion...nothing is outdated. Doom is still just as fresh and well designed even when judged against 25 years of game development. Doom is like an old car that only gets classier.

If I'm wrong about any of that, correct me.

On 11/1/2018 at 3:53 PM, kb1 said:

I'm not saying that everything needs shiny new graphics. But claiming to have made a decision to make low-quality output purposefully, because "retro is cool"? That just doesn't do it for me.

 

As far as I can tell, you're talking about things like iphone apps with vague 8-bit graphics and two month production cycles, which would be weird considering nobody actually likes those. You're also talking about them as if they're pretentious, claiming to be authentic but only using 8-bit graphics as a crutch, which would also be weird because no iphone app developer making games with vague 8-bit graphics and two month production cycles thinks they're being authentic, they're just trying to support themselves while building a portfolio of work so they can actually get a job somewhere.

Unless you aren't talking about low-effort iphone apps and instead talking about...something else? Again, correct me.

On 11/1/2018 at 3:53 PM, kb1 said:

You're talking at me, not to me, and you're arguing with someone who largely agrees with you.

I'm having trouble seeing where we largely agree. Other than the fact that Doom is still worth talking about, although we seem to disagree on why, we seem to disagree on just about everything else we've been talking about...

*EDIT: Typo. See kb1's reply.

Both, obviously. 10/10 stupid question

Trolling aside though, I would argue, like many others, that it's the ability to mod that is Doom's strongest aspect. Sure, I'll play the IWADs once in a while. But I wouldn't have continued coming back if it weren't for, at the very least, custom maps. And since we have much more than just user made levels to enjoy, to me that only strengthens the game. Sometimes I want the original experience, other times I want my dynamic lights and scripting and all the other bells and whistles. I loved Hexen and Strife, and I've enjoyed the hell out of some of the mods that significantly change the original doom gameplay. You can argue all day about which one is better, but if you have the option to do both, you don't have to argue because you can just play what you want!

Honestly, I'm kinda bored talking about this - it really wasn't worth this many posts, especially when communication is not happening.

I'll try to quickly answer, then I'm out.

On 11/1/2018 at 8:59 PM, EtherBot said:

Maybe this is hard to believe but I don't have a secret agenda. I genuinely just have thoughts about your thoughts. If I only cared about explaining my point of view, I wouldn't have bothered with the 'please correct me if I'm wrong' comments, would I?

I wasn't suggesting a secret agenda. Your annoyance with how you think I am treating art suggests that this isn't your first rodeo with this subject. I have tried to correct your your interpretations, but it doesn't seem to help...which suggests that you're being driven by something other than my comments themselves. That's my interpretation. I don't mind us having a differing opinion, just as long as we both know what were are disagreeing about.

On 11/1/2018 at 8:59 PM, EtherBot said:

 

What is your stance then? To me it seems like you think gaming as a market has gone downhill in general due to lazier developers creating games for fans that are harder to impress, two sentiments that cannot really coexist, imo. Either the market has gotten too easy to impress and will just buy anything these days, or the developers' real effort isn't being appreciated...you can't really have both.

Please don't mix the "retro" thing into this topic. I'll address that below. If we put the "retro" thought on hold, I can answer you:

• I don't see the developers as lazy, quite the opposite. The developers are killing themselves...working 80-100 hour weeks, trying to meet impossible deadlines.
• It *is* harder to impress many gamers these days. I am talking about these adrenaline-junkie super gamers - the ones posting poisonous comments about great games, often only hours after the game's release. These are the same people that call games "outdated".
• These gamers *will* buy up anything and everything, because they are starved for the next adrenaline boost. And, like junkies, they are "chasing the high", and quickly getting burned out. After one quick play-through, they have no appreciation left for the game, and they post about how boring the game is.
• These people don't enjoy games the way the rest of us do. Games will always be a poor substitute for actually living a fulfilling life. Therefore, people living to play games will inevitably be disappointed, and will post nasty undeserved reviews.

On 11/1/2018 at 8:59 PM, EtherBot said:

I personally dislike the 'outdated' term because you see it as a catch-all term used to stop discussing old things and that calling something 'outdated' and leaving it at that isn't productive.

I think you mixed "I" and "you" as a mistake. Please let me know what you mean here.

On 11/1/2018 at 8:59 PM, EtherBot said:

You seem to not like the term outdated because, in your opinion...nothing is outdated.

I have a problem with the concept of comparing apples to oranges.

On 11/1/2018 at 8:59 PM, EtherBot said:

Doom is still just as fresh and well designed even when judged against 25 years of game development. Doom is like an old car that only gets classier.

If I'm wrong about any of that, correct me.

I do have to agree with this. Let's say that Doom I is still the best Doom I, and Doom II is still the best Doom II.

On 11/1/2018 at 8:59 PM, EtherBot said:

As far as I can tell, you're talking about things like iphone apps with vague 8-bit graphics and two month production cycles, which would be weird considering nobody actually likes those. You're also talking about them as if they're pretentious, claiming to be authentic but only using 8-bit graphics as a crutch, which would also be weird because no iphone app developer making games with vague 8-bit graphics and two month production cycles thinks they're being authentic, they're just trying to support themselves while building a portfolio of work so they can actually get a job somewhere.

 

Unless you aren't talking about low-effort iphone apps and instead talking about...something else? Again, correct me.

 

I'm having trouble seeing where we largely agree. Other than the fact that Doom is still worth talking about, although we seem to disagree on why, we seem to disagree on just about everything else we've been talking about...

It feels fake to me to make something look old, as a selling point, vs. just making something nice. Some examples:

• Ready-worn jeans.
• Fake wear-and-tear guitars, where they pre-rust the pickups and sand off the paint (and then cover it with clear coat - heh).
• "Just like grandma used to make...", complete with polysorbate-80, Red #5, dipotassium phosphate. Yum, thanks, grandma.

Old things are cool, especially when they were taken care of. Fake-old is just that - fake - it's posing as something it's not.

I have no problem with ew games using 8-bit graphics, or a limited color palette... as long as the game is fun. But 32-bit graphics are always better, is there really an argument here? Claiming that the 8-bit graphics are better is marketing BS - it's just not true.

We can disagree. Let's just say that you are you, and I am right. :)

3 hours ago, kb1 said:

I don't mind us having a differing opinion, just as long as we both know what were are disagreeing about.

This is all fine, I'm pretty much willing to drop all of this.

3 hours ago, kb1 said:

• It *is* harder to impress many gamers these days. I am talking about these adrenaline-junkie super gamers - the ones posting poisonous comments about great games, often only hours after the game's release. These are the same people that call games "outdated".

Could you give an example of this? 

3 hours ago, kb1 said:

I think you mixed "I" and "you" as a mistake. Please let me know what you mean here.

You're right, that was a typo. Corrected it now.

3 hours ago, kb1 said:

I have a problem with the concept of comparing apples to oranges...Doom I is still the best Doom I, and Doom II is still the best Doom II.

I think I sort of agree with this to a point, but it's also worth mentioning that id Software were definitely *trying* to do specific things with Doom and Doom II that have been done better elsewhere.

3 hours ago, kb1 said:

Claiming that the 8-bit graphics are better is marketing BS - it's just not true.

Why not? What makes 8-bit graphics inherently inferior? They're less detailed for sure, but Doom is less detailed, and if I saw someone go out and make a new game aesthetically really similar to Doom I'd think it was really neat. And why on earth is it better if it's 32 bit? 32 bit is still outdated compared to modern day graphics. Why would making a 32 bit pastiche be more worth my time than making a 16 or 8 bit one?

On 11/3/2018 at 3:49 AM, EtherBot said:

I personally dislike the 'outdated' term because I* see it as a catch-all term used to stop discussing old things and that calling something 'outdated' and leaving it at that isn't productive.

I agree with this.

On 11/3/2018 at 3:49 AM, EtherBot said:

But, as far as I can tell you don't share this sentiment. You seem to not like the term outdated because, in your opinion...nothing is outdated. Doom is still just as fresh and well designed even when judged against 25 years of game development. Doom is like an old car that only gets classier.

If I'm wrong about any of that, correct me.

Some things are so good that they earn the right to not be quantified. A beautiful woman. Is there really the most beautiful woman in the world, past a point? At some point, beautiful is beautiful, and you can't really compare after that.

A band. There will never be another Led Zeppelin. Sure, there are great bands, and guitarists that can play more notes per second, and singers that can hit higher/lower notes, and drummers who can do tighter fills, etc., etc. But, at some point, you're just good - the comparisons break down.

Doom has also reached this plateau. Doom is good - not better than this, worse than that. Sure, I know this is all subjective and opinionated. But, by it's very nature, the word "outdated" is a comparison word, just like "better than", "colder than", "faster than". In your statement above, you say "...even when judged against 25 years...", at which point a comparison is suggested. *That's* my problem with the word. (Thanks, it took me this many posts to be able to verbalize exactly what my issue with the word was. Now I can!)

On 11/3/2018 at 3:49 AM, EtherBot said:

Why not? What makes 8-bit graphics inherently inferior? They're less detailed for sure, but Doom is less detailed, and if I saw someone go out and make a new game aesthetically really similar to Doom I'd think it was really neat. And why on earth is it better if it's 32 bit? 32 bit is still outdated compared to modern day graphics. Why would making a 32 bit pastiche be more worth my time than making a 16 or 8 bit one?

Only that 8 bits gives you a maximum of 256 colors on the screen at once, whereas 32 bits (really 24 - the other 8 are used for other purposes) gives you 16,777,216 colors (TrueColor). Again, my issue is with semantics: I have no problem with a developer/artist using 8-bit color. But to call it a "feature", compared to TrueColor is a bit silly.

1 hour ago, kb1 said:

I have no problem with a developer/artist using 8-bit color. But to call it a "feature", compared to TrueColor is a bit silly.

To me this is kinda silly itself. Sure it's more restrictive but that's part of the charm. It'd be like looking at abstract art and saying "Sure but it's certainly not very detailed." The appeal comes in the simplicity.

5 hours ago, EtherBot said:

Sure it's more restrictive but that's part of the charm.

Exactly. But according to kb1, it's wrong for them to write "8-bit charm" on the box.

7 minutes ago, magicsofa said:

 

Exactly. But according to kb1, it's wrong for them to write "8-bit charm" on the box.

Which I find weird. It's notable for sure, I'd like to know it was in 8-bit before I bought the game. It tells me a few things about the values of the game. Having that aesthetic can be sort of appealing if you like that kind of thing, so theres no reason why there couldnt be a market for it either. It takes an entirely different skillset to other types of art given just HOW abstract it is...etc. Idk why '8-bit charm' shouldnt be allowed to be a marketing tool for your game.

On 11/6/2018 at 8:42 AM, magicsofa said:

 

Exactly. But according to kb1, it's wrong for them to write "8-bit charm" on the box.

On 11/6/2018 at 8:49 AM, EtherBot said:

Which I find weird. It's notable for sure, I'd like to know it was in 8-bit before I bought the game. It tells me a few things about the values of the game. Having that aesthetic can be sort of appealing if you like that kind of thing, so theres no reason why there couldnt be a market for it either. It takes an entirely different skillset to other types of art given just HOW abstract it is...etc. Idk why '8-bit charm' shouldnt be allowed to be a marketing tool for your game.

I caught these replies a bit late. Anyway, here's my thing: By itself, "8-bit" is not a feature. If a game uses 8-bit, that's ok, but not great in and of itself. It's what you do with it that matters. To me, it's like saying "We only put one topping on our pizzas, isn't that cool?" Or, "Our cars have a max speed of 55 mph, isn't that cool?".

No, it's not cool. Now, if that pizza topping was incredible, the incredible topping is the marketing point. In the car example, great gas mileage, or protection from speeding could be the marketing tool. But not "max speed of 55 mph." That's not a feature...by itself, that's sounds like a limitation to me. The gas mileage and speeding protection are the features, right?

I enjoy a lot of 8-bit games. Doom is 8-bit. But they didn't use that fact as a marketing strategy, because who cares about that? It's the fact that they managed to get the incredible light shading to work reasonably well within that 8-bit limitation. That's what makes Doom cool: Not that it's 8-bit, but that it looks great.

It's just my opinion, guys and gals - my 2 cents.

6 hours ago, kb1 said:

 

I caught these replies a bit late. Anyway, here's my thing: By itself, "8-bit" is not a feature. If a game uses 8-bit, that's ok, but not great in and of itself. It's what you do with it that matters. To me, it's like saying "We only put one topping on our pizzas, isn't that cool?" Or, "Our cars have a max speed of 55 mph, isn't that cool?".

8-bit doesn't mean much by itself. There can be good 8-bit and there can be bad 8-bit. What actually matters is the quality of the 8-bit artwork, how well it is used. Good 8-bit artwork looks pretty good even these days, bad 8-bit artwork doesn't. 8-bit is justified as a selling point only if it comes with solid art direction and good quality for the artwork.

6 hours ago, kb1 said:

 

I enjoy a lot of 8-bit games. Doom is 8-bit. But they didn't use that fact as a marketing strategy, because who cares about that? It's the fact that they managed to get the incredible light shading to work reasonably well within that 8-bit limitation. That's what makes Doom cool: Not that it's 8-bit, but that it looks great.

 

It's just my opinion, guys and gals - my 2 cents.

Well, technically Doom is more 16-bit. Sure, it uses 8-bit colors but rest of it is very 16-bit. Doom was made in the era of 16-bit consoles and that's where the Doom technically fits best. Doom has great artwork, it uses it's 8-bit colors really well and that was what made the game so impressive. It is actually pretty amazing how good Doom still looks in much higher resolutions. 

2 hours ago, banjiepixel said:

By itself, "8-bit" is not a feature. If a game uses 8-bit, that's ok, but not great in and of itself. It's what you do with it that matters.

But that's not specific to 8-bit though. Any style of art isn't inherently good, just like how marketing your game as "photo realistic" doesn't mean it will look inherently good. Embracing minimalism has as much of a chance to go wrong as embracing exquisite detail...less, even, since its easier overall to create an aesthetically pleasing art style with less moving parts, if you're creative enough to do it.

9 hours ago, kb1 said:

That's not a feature...by itself, that's sounds like a limitation to me.

I don't know if this analogy works perfectly well. It's more along of the lines of "We built this car using entirely hand-operated tools!" or something along those lines. Unless you have a specific distaste for 8-bit graphics there's nothing on the consumer end that makes it 'technically inferior unless utilized right' like a car that can only go up to 55 miles per hour. That analogy also offers a trade-off between quality and some other feature, which I'm not sure is entirely applicable here.

11 hours ago, kb1 said:

It's just my opinion, guys and gals - my 2 cents.

I understand where you are coming from, but marketers don't care about the principles that I think you are talking about. If proudly stating that the graphics are lo-fi makes people want to buy it, then that's what will go on the ad. You may not like it, and perhaps you are a customer in their audience who is actually turned off by this sort of marketing, but hell, it works on me. If I see crunchy pixels I'm immediately interested. So for me, it is a feature. It's like a movie filmed in black and white even though color is available. I guess it's a bit cheesy to write something on a box that I'd expect to be made clear in screenshots anyway, but whatever. Cheesy marketers are cheesy.

On 11/22/2018 at 9:09 AM, EtherBot said:

But that's not specific to 8-bit though.

True.

On 11/22/2018 at 9:09 AM, EtherBot said:

Unless you have a specific distaste for 8-bit graphics there's nothing on the consumer end that makes it 'technically inferior unless utilized right'

Worse-case scenario for TrueColor is that it matches 8-bit quality. In all other cases, of course it's superior, as it is a superset of 8-bit. But we're on a tangent: My original issue was with the term "retro". To explain simply: In a few years, all of today's games could be called "retro", even though they would look identical to how they look today. How does a piece of software suddenly become great because it is old? I guess I just don't get it.

All I know is that the term "retro", when used indiscriminately, makes me cringe. (No issues with "DoomRetro", which is awesome!)

On 11/22/2018 at 11:28 AM, magicsofa said:

I understand where you are coming from, but marketers don't care about the principles that I think you are talking about. If proudly stating that the graphics are lo-fi makes people want to buy it, then that's what will go on the ad. You may not like it, and perhaps you are a customer in their audience who is actually turned off by this sort of marketing, but hell, it works on me. If I see crunchy pixels I'm immediately interested. So for me, it is a feature. It's like a movie filmed in black and white even though color is available. I guess it's a bit cheesy to write something on a box that I'd expect to be made clear in screenshots anyway, but whatever. Cheesy marketers are cheesy.

I dig crunchy pixels too - heh. Yeah, a good salesman can sell you dirt, and make you feel good for buying it :)

Another cringey term: "HD", as in "HD Sunglasses".

On 11/22/2018 at 6:47 AM, banjiepixel said:

8-bit doesn't mean much by itself. There can be good 8-bit and there can be bad 8-bit. What actually matters is the quality of the 8-bit artwork, how well it is used. Good 8-bit artwork looks pretty good even these days, bad 8-bit artwork doesn't.

Agreed.

On 11/22/2018 at 6:47 AM, banjiepixel said:

8-bit is justified as a selling point only if it comes with solid art direction and good quality for the artwork.

Nobody cares (or should care) if it's 8-bit, or 80-bit...if it looks good, it's good. The only exception is if there are technical reasons that support a need for a bit depth. Now, there's nothing wrong with saying that the game "looks good". But, "New and improved! 8-bit!"? Big whoop.

On 11/22/2018 at 6:47 AM, banjiepixel said:

Well, technically Doom is more 16-bit. Sure, it uses 8-bit colors but rest of it is very 16-bit. Doom was made in the era of 16-bit consoles and that's where the Doom technically fits best. Doom has great artwork, it uses it's 8-bit colors really well and that was what made the game so impressive. It is actually pretty amazing how good Doom still looks in much higher resolutions. 

Can't agree here. The 16-bit you mention here describes the CPU mode, or the number of parallel data lines coming out of it, which is a very different thing than "color depth".

Bit-depth in Video

When referring to bits, a bit is a single high or low state, often referred to as "0" and "1". 8 of these can be combined to create 256 different possibilities. In 8-bit video modes as used by Doom, each of these 256 combinations is mapped to a specific color, which allows you to paint every pixel with one of 256 different colors. In TrueColor, there are 3 sets of 8-bits, one for Red, one for Green, and one for Blue. There is a fourth set of 8 bits that is often used as an alpha channel. In TrueColor mode, each pixel's red, green, and blue components are set to a number between 0 and 255.

Bit-Depth in CPUs

Here, bit depth describes the size of the CPU's internal registers which are used to transfer and perform arithmetic, point to memory, etc. "16-bit" consoles have CPUs with instructions that manipulate data 16-bits at a time. In today's CPUs, the line is a bit blurred, as they use multiple data busses, both internally and externally. Bit depth is also used to describe programs that are compiled to run on CPUs that can handle these bit depths. In particular, Doom.exe is based a 32-bit program, with a 16-bit program tacked onto it (The DOS extender) that allows it to switch to "16-bit mode" to access DOS functions.

So, technically, Doom is a mixed 32/16 bit program that draws 8-bit graphics.

5 hours ago, kb1 said:

Now, there's nothing wrong with saying that the game "looks good". But, "New and improved! 8-bit!"? Big whoop.

I kind of struggle to think of an example of that style of marketing... Maybe it's just phrased weirdly. New and improved implies it's a remaster which probably won't be in 8-bit. Of course there's the case of the 16-bit Sonic Mania game, but that was a specific throwback which utilized the original Sonic's artstyle. I'm not sure what games market themselves as 'new and improved' and also 'newly 8-bit' 

13 hours ago, kb1 said:

Nobody cares (or should care) if it's 8-bit, or 80-bit...if it looks good, it's good. The only exception is if there are technical reasons that support a need for a bit depth. Now, there's nothing wrong with saying that the game "looks good". But, "New and improved! 8-bit!"? Big whoop.

8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit are real graphical styles that exist and they all are their own art form. 8-bit can be "new and improved" just like any other artistic style used in a video game.

13 hours ago, kb1 said:

Can't agree here. The 16-bit you mention here describes the CPU mode, or the number of parallel data lines coming out of it, which is a very different thing than "color depth".

No, I mention 16-bit as art style, and as a very loose description of the game's technical level. Sonic Mania is amazing example of a game that mixes 16-bit and 32-bit styles while Megaman 9 and 10 are great examples of 8-bit games. Video games are art and 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit are perfectly valid styles to create art. Doom fits best with 16-bit era style as it is too advanced to be 8-bit but too primitive to be 32-bit. Good examples of 32-bit games are Duke Nukem 3D and Quake.

1 hour ago, banjiepixel said:

No, I mention 16-bit as art style,

1 hour ago, banjiepixel said:

Doom fits best with 16-bit era style as it is too advanced to be 8-bit but too primitive to be 32-bit. Good examples of 32-bit games are Duke Nukem 3D and Quake. 

Doom, Duke3D and Quake's "art styles" are all quite explicitly 8bit art. Heck, you could make an argument that Quake was even less than 8bit (like... 4bit?) because most of the palette was used for light blending rather than colours. 

4 minutes ago, Edward850 said:

 

Doom, Duke3D and Quake's "art styles" are all quite explicitly 8bit. Heck, you could make an argument that Quake was even less than 8bit (like... 4bit?) because most of the palette was used for light blending rather than colours. 

Quake has very similar look as many early ps1 and saturn games, it is basically the look of early 32-bit consoles. New game made in similar style would be compared to games from that era. Palette or how it is used isn't as important as the basic look of the game and what the engine itself does. Sega Genesis/Megadrive has so much more limited palette than Super Nintendo but both are still 16-bit consoles and both of their games have that much loved 16-bit look.

Lets not get sidetracked with semantics.

The "new and improved" was a joke. Advertisers put "New and improved" on a bottle of laundry detergent to make consumers think they're getting cleaner clothes. Usually it means "we figured out how to make this product with cheaper materials, saving us a few pennies". It meaningless buzz and hype. "8-bit" and "retro" seem like the same thing to me - hype.

I can appreciate people that dig earlier styles. But you gotta check out the product, not just believe the hype. The older games are cool - it's neat to see just how they accomplished making a fun game with less resources. For example, the early '80s arcade games. Many of them offer full screen moving graphics, nice sound effects, and fun games, all accomplished with tiny, slow processors and specialized sound and graphics hardware. But no first person shooters.

If you call them "retro", how can you also call Doom "retro"? See what I mean? The term is meaningless without providing some other reference. It's a term you can't trust - you have to see the game, and decide if you like it, each time. Don't buy the hype.

19 hours ago, kb1 said:

I can appreciate people that dig earlier styles. But you gotta check out the product, not just believe the hype.

Again, I don't disagree, I just fail to see how thats specific to 8-bit style graphics in any way.

19 hours ago, kb1 said:

For example, the early '80s arcade games. Many of them offer full screen moving graphics, nice sound effects, and fun games, all accomplished with tiny, slow processors and specialized sound and graphics hardware.

To be fair, a lot of 'retro' styled games made nowadays still do this. AM2R, The Last Door Collectors Edition, etc take advantage of graphical effects that couldn't be replicated on, say, an SNES, but still have generally 'retro' feeling aesthetics.

19 hours ago, kb1 said:

But no first person shooters.

 

If you call them "retro", how can you also call Doom "retro"? See what I mean?

I don't understand this point to be honest. Retro is a bit more vague than you make it out to be. People refer to games like Strafe and Dusk, Quake-clones as being faux-retro in the same breath they'll refer to Pico-8 games as being faux-retro. In the same breath, even, they'll say classic 80's hatwear is retro. That doesn't make the term ill-defined or whatever, its just a broad concept.

I do get that it's so broad a term that just having 'retro' isn't the be all and end all of how good your product is, and I think most people wouldn't see a box on the store shelf with no art other than the word "RETRO" and actually buy it. That being said, neither would they pick up a game with nothing to go off of except the words "High Definition!" None of this has been specific to retro so far.

To me, it feels similar to when parents try to remain "cool" by latching on to their kid's lingo or fashions, invariably screwing it up, and making it embarrassing and awkward for everyone involved.

"Look at me - I'm still hip, Daddy-O. Let's hang in my crib and play some groovy retro video games. Can you dig it, homeslice?" Ugh - cringe.

Anyway, I'm out. That's my take on it, and I'm probably wrong.

Well I don't think we like doom because it's "retro." We like it because it's awesome. We like it for what it is.

1 hour ago, magicsofa said:

Well I don't think we like doom because it's "retro." We like it because it's awesome. We like it for what it is.

 

And for luck of all, Doom can be Original, Vainilla, Chololate, HD, 3D Models, With Open GL, with DirectX, VR, etc.
Always be open to all, if we start to set a starndar for what is better and what is not, can sound pretty bad.

9 minutes ago, jamondemarnatural said:

And for luck of all, Doom can be ... 3D Models, ...

7 hours ago, magicsofa said:

Well I don't think we like doom because it's "retro." We like it because it's awesome. We like it for what it is.

 

Amen, brother!

I think we like Doom because it is a great game but more than that because the people behind it knew they were making something fresh and not derivative which makes it a bigger labor of love. It is exactly the same reason why bands like Led Zepplin or Queen are iconic. Not because they were the best that has ever lived, but because they were given the opportunity to do something new and succeeded, and changed music forever because of it.

I'd say game developers are much more talented these days to make some of the most insanely big AAA productions available and the whole creative indie scene as well. Modders have gotten real jobs because there's an education for it these days. The output is technically much better but less iconic because the market is more saturated so game-changing iconic developments like Doom doesn't really happen as such in this world. There's simply too much great entertainment for people to gather around one thing anymore. And more than that it's hard to match the talent of a 200 people development team as a singular person, your idea might be better but if you can't match the production value to commercial levels people aren't gonna care because it's not accessible enough for them in the short time frame they have, and can you blame them? Life is short after all, who wouldn't wanna do as much as possible?

I think if something new is gonna be as iconic as Doom it has to happen on another platform. Like make a VR game that redefines gaming.

14 hours ago, FractalBeast said:

 

That video's terrible.