Remember when Doom was SIMPLE?

2 minutes ago, ZALGO said:

 

Yup, pretty much the mentality of this forum. It's not really fun digging for info and remaining hyped when you gotta sift through some of these comments.

I wouldn't say its the Forum in general. A lot of people are hyped for the mew Doom games. Just a few im perticular who just stick around one part of the forums to wave their "purist" flag

8 hours ago, D88M3R said:

It becomes a chore very quick, it drags, is boring, is VERY repetitive, the arenas suck, the lock downs suck

 

except stuff like the Foundry .

Yeah, letting you tackle the nests and parts of the level at any order you want was a nice break from the railroaded arenas the rest of the game, definitely felt more open compared to the rest of the levels.

I don't have much to say about Eternal, I think they're trying to improve and expand on Doom 2016, arenas aren't gone and that was kind of a bummer, we'll see how it'll turn out post-release.

1 hour ago, Foebane72 said:

 

Well, it seems that everyone, absolutely EVERYONE here is champing at the bit for Doom Eternal, no naysayers at all. Prove me wrong.

 

There's no point arguing with you if you aren't going to use your eyes. 

39 minutes ago, Foebane72 said:

 

I'm on the fence. If I could play it with GeForce Now, reliably, I'd be satisfied. At least I could try it first.

 

And spare us your feigned indecision. 

Ok boomer.

The game looks fun and that's that. It isn't like this is replacing the original doom games. If anything people could argue that Doom and Doom 2 are and will outlive Eternal. If you want a "new simple doom game" literally go play SIGIL or Eviternity. Or hell, any new WAD for that matter.

To be fair, these threads wouldn't reach this state if people just learned to not feed them and ignore them, complaining about the same thing all the time gets annoying, but so does complaining about complaining lol, ignore them and they'll give up.

6 hours ago, sluggard said:

To be fair, these threads wouldn't reach this state if people just learned to not feed them and ignore them, complaining about the same thing all the time gets annoying, but so does complaining about complaining lol, ignore them and they'll give up.

normally yeah, this specific guy though makes darn sure you know he doesn't like it as he made a bunch of posts dedicated mainly to hating on this game. 

2 hours ago, ZALGO said:

normally yeah, this specific guy though makes darn sure you know he doesn't like it as he made a bunch of posts dedicated mainly to hating on this game. 

I sure hope you don't mean Touchdown or myself, because it would be really retarded to think we're hating on this game.

40 minutes ago, Antroid said:

I sure hope you don't mean Touchdown or myself, because it would be really retarded to think we're hating on this game.

I'm on the fence about it, so I'm not strictly a hater. However, I've heard that GeForce Now, the paid service, is a 12-month minimum subscription, and that's a no-no for me.

2 minutes ago, Foebane72 said:

 

I'm on the fence about it, so I'm not strictly a hater.

Some of these people seem to have such a personal connection to the game that isn't even out yet that when someone criticizes a few of the game's specific aspects, in their eyes they become a full-blown "hater" because I guess there's no room between the two extremes? And the existence of the very easily separable threads where the criticism is contained somehow prevents these fragile people from reading the very easily separable news/leaks/spoilers threads. Truly fascinating.

Continuing on from the topic of the above post, from my perspective it's just infuriating to see people feel the need to hate something before they've had a chance to even try it for themselves. I don't see where a sense of joy can be had from being so aggressively closed-minded about something, it only invokes a negative response from people who sit on the other side of the fence, so to speak.

2 minutes ago, Dragonfly said:

Continuing on from the topic of the above post, from my perspective it's just infuriating to see people feel the need to hate something before they've had a chance to even try it for themselves. I don't see where a sense of joy can be had from being so aggressively closed-minded about something, it only invokes a negative response from people who sit on the other side of the fence, so to speak.

OK, sure, I'll go ahead and spend £160 or so on a graphics card for a game that I'm not sure I'll even like, because there's absolutely no other fucking way in hell I can even try it out otherwise. And if I don't like it? I'm in debt, saddled with a £50 game I don't want, especially since I am simply not interested in any other game out there.

If I do like it? Fine.

See my drift, now?

Not liking something = being aggressively closed-minded, apparently?

That's one of the stupidest things in this thread.

You know what's actually annoying? People repeatedly calling criticism and discussion "hate" and leaping to the defense of any aspect of a game that isn't even out yet.

42 minutes ago, Antroid said:

 

You know what's actually annoying?

People who misconstrue my message about the general population as targeted attacks on themselves.

Get over it lol.

44 minutes ago, Foebane72 said:

OK, sure, I'll go ahead and spend £160 or so on a graphics card for a game that I'm not sure I'll even like, because there's absolutely no other fucking way in hell I can even try it out otherwise. And if I don't like it? I'm in debt, saddled with a £50 game I don't want, especially since I am simply not interested in any other game out there.

 

See these are fair arguments, but at the same time your message comes with an overly bitter tone that will provoke people to argue against it whether it is right to do so or not.

The comments that get on my nerves is the "its not what I think doom should be" or "not in the spirit of Trv Doom" which is considered a measurable flaw somehow.

Yeah the devs didnt make it an HD version of ultimate doom with new graphics and a new weapon or two is that an objective flaw though?

I can see the issue with arena fights, but even that isn't objectively bad when done correctly as with the case for Doom 2016.

7 minutes ago, Dragonfly said:

People who misconstrue my message about the general population as targeted attacks on themselves.

Good thing that didn't actually happen then, huh? Meanwhile, describing someone not liking something about a game as "being aggressively closed-minded" isn't getting any less stupid.

1 hour ago, Antroid said:

when someone criticizes a few of the game's specific aspects

These are not "a few" aspects. 

19 hours ago, D88M3R said:

 

I recently finished D16 for the second time after a while that i had finished for the first time.
Like, even less than halfway through the game, you already seen everything it has to offer.
It becomes a chore very quick, it drags, is boring, is VERY repetitive, the arenas suck, the lock downs suck, except stuff like the Foundry part the level design (which actually kinda feels like Doom) shines in its absence. 
Very soon in the game you already got all the good mods for the weapons, the others are there just because, and they still force you to get them 
They take ages to give you stuff that you should have at the start of the game, like the double jump, in fact the whole idea of upgrades is just out of place in a Doom game, or at least it seems that way because it was not well implemented. 
The unskippable cutscenes are boring. 
The game is pretty and loud but dumb, you need no strategy to do anything, in the originals if you went Rambo style you died, as simple as that, but here is the exact opposite and the only way of approach, i had to force myself to finish the game because i just did not felt like it, because the game has nothing to hook you with.
The design of the enemies mostly suck, is too long, more than what it needs to be, it has no replay value, and i could go on and on.
Is a very well made, boring game.

20 hours ago, D88M3R said:

Doom and 2016 are way, WAY more related to fan wads, Brutal Doom and the infamous comic book than the first two games.
They are like one big and expensive teenager power fantasy fan fiction which uses a lot of Brutal Doom and modern fps games mechanics as influences instead of the original games, with the tone of the comic book out of all things.
An ideal modern Doom would be a balanced mix of Doom 2016 with Doom 3 to put it briefly, instead they went too much towards one side, they went too over the top in some aspects.
And i get what they are trying to do, but it just does not work, it does not feel like the logical evolution of the franchise but like a big and very dumb thing that thinks of itself as totally badass but is actually kinda meh and boring, not to mention repetitive.
They are not bad games, they are just not Doom, we are not getting that quality ever again.

Oh, and they are trying to please everyone at the same time, all kinds of the fanbase, going as far as contradicting the own game mechanics and story that they want to give, a good example of it is the ridiculous "we make fun of the ridiculous exposition scenes in games where you have to stand still and get bored until they end, while we do that exact same thing at the same time".

 

Is just impossible to please everyone, but they made a lot of questionable choices in mechanics, level design, aesthetic, etc, and personally i need something else than just pretty graphics to keep me playing, there is a reason why Doom is still being played 20 years after its release, that is gonna be played 20 years after now, and that is not something that is gonna happen with the new Dooms.

You look at that and tell me it's mere dislike for something. 

8 minutes ago, Super Mighty G said:

You look at that and tell me it's mere dislike for something.

It is mere dislike for something. I like Doom 2016 a lot and I still agree with pretty much all of that. It's nowhere near "hating".

1 hour ago, Antroid said:

It is mere dislike for something. I like Doom 2016 a lot and I still agree with pretty much all of that. It's nowhere near "hating".

Thats more than mere dislike.

Stating Doom Eternal is nothing more than a fan game made Official and it being such is an objectively bad thing or claming that it objectively has no longevity is just hating. Sorry to tell you

All i saw on that post is "this sucks that sucks im right nu doom sux" as if its fact and doom can only be good if its a mix of Doom 3.

4 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

Stating Doom Eternal is nothing more than a fan game made Official and it being such is an objectively bad thing or claming that it objectively has no longevity is just hating. Sorry to tell you

 

All i saw on that post is "this sucks that sucks im right nu doom sux" as if its fact and doom can only be good if its a mix of Doom 3.

Check your eyesight then? I dunno. I saw a list of things that I also found lacking in 2016, though not to the point where I didn't have fun with the game. If you so completely glazed over it all and could only see a reductionist caricature of the post, that's on you.

And no, that aint hating either. You should indeed be sorry to tell me that because it's wrong. Such dilution of the meaning of the word "hating" will make it pointless. Newsflash: even disliking most things about something and stating it on the discussion board about said thing isn't hating. When you label someone a "hater" you make them out to be some obsessed, irrational person. Everyone here has had a basis for their opinions about the new Dooms which had root in their tastes in videogames. And it was expressed on the discussion board dedicated to it. Calling a non-vanishing amount of posts here "hating" is ludicrous.

This thread should be in post hell right now.

5 hours ago, Antroid said:

Check your eyesight then? I dunno. I saw a list of things that I also found lacking in 2016, though not to the point where I didn't have fun with the game. If you so completely glazed over it all and could only see a reductionist caricature of the post, that's on you.

Its not even about the complaints itself but about the attittde ofhow those particular things that are "lacking" makes it the game objectively bad "not doom" as if they have authority on what Doom should be.

EDIT: Though i will admit to being super defensive with this so apologies.

I too had issue with Doom 2016 but im not going to go to every Doom Eternal post how everything i didnt like about it makes the game Objectively bad.

Though Imgoing to expect a new thread about how Doom Eternal is bad because it doesnt use Metallica riffs cuz its "what Trv Doom is about not nu metal shit".

6 hours ago, jazzmaster9 said:

Though Imgoing to expect a new thread about how Doom Eternal is bad because it doesnt use Metallica riffs cuz its "what Trv Doom is about not nu metal shit".

I was gonna make a thread about how Doom Eternal is bad because when you meathook small zombies and imps you still get propelled towards them, even though they're like 5 times lighter than you are and should be pulled towards you instead, and it's dumb and makes no sense, but I realized some people would take it seriously.

6 hours ago, Egg Boy said:

This thread should be in post hell right now.

I'm trying to bring post hell back.

1 hour ago, Antroid said:

I was gonna make a thread about how Doom Eternal is bad because when you meathook small zombies and imps you still get propelled towards them, even though they're like 5 times lighter than you are and should be pulled towards you instead, and it's dumb and makes no sense, but I realized some people would take it seriously.

Also need to make a thread about how Doomguy can survive a 30 foot drop and just shout OOF

2 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

Also need to make a thread about how Doomguy can survive a 30 foot drop and just shout OOF

No, that's fine, they print "IMPACT COMPENSATION" on screen when that happens, it explains it sufficiently.

But in all seriousness i do have to apologize for my overt defensive replies here. Its just the "matter of fact" attitude most of the post here feel when talking about how Arenas Sucks and all that which irked me, though i did go over board 

With that being said. I did like how some of the monster design for Eternal did become more simplified than their Doom 2016 counterpartd

S'cool. Though of all the complainst to object to I wouldn't expect the arenas to be the one you pick. I though it was like the most universally not-loved aspect of Doom2016.

Kinda agree about the designs. I liked the 2016 zombies a lot and will probably miss the weird surreal face hole dudes and that style, but the new designs are quite cool-looking too, in their own ways.

When it comes to various additional systems in an otherwise simple game I always ask a few of questions. Are those systems supporting the core gameplay or are they detracting from it? Do they make sense in the context of the intended experience? Are they working in harmony with other gameplay systems? Do they make the gameplay more interesting or are they just an unnecessary complication?

You don't want to feel like the game tries to be action-oriented but then there are traces of other, completely different games tacked on on top of it. However spicing up the experience with additional systems isn't inherently bad - it's just a matter of adding those things in the right places and in the right amounts.

I felt that DOOM4 was mostly successful at that. The melee executions did a wonderful job at encouraging the player to play more aggressively. High mobility and verticality helps to make the combat more dynamic. Weapon mods were a cool addition thanks to the fact that almost all of them were really fun to use. The rest of the upgrades served as nice extra progression system adding a bit more variety to the campaign. Plus they encourage exploration to look for hidden cells / bots / elite guards, which is always great.

In some ways I see the upgrades in DOOM4 as an evolution of the oldschool progression system. You could say that in DOOM picking up a new weapon is sort of a permanent upgrade to your "character", same as a backpack. Even Quake II had health upgrades that you could find. The difference is that now you have more of them and there's a bit more control over what you get and in what order. It really is very simple and I consider it to be a good thing. It's just an extra layer allowing you to tweak your avatar, no complicated skill trees.

Where I feel DOOM4 has failed a bit are mission challenges, weapon masteries and rune upgrades. Those are exactly the type of arbitrary things that do not really add anything and instead they semi-force you into doing something you'd not normally do (because obviously you want more upgrade points). They don't really teach you anything or show you cool things you might have missed - most of them were just gimmicks. So I'm not happy to see those things returning in Eternal.

Going forward, I like pretty much all the gameplay changes introduced in Eternal. Weak points are a good example. One of the problems in arcade shooters is that people often get too attatched to a single weapon, effectively making things hard for themselves because they don't use the appropriate weapon for the given situation. Weak points encourage players to pay attention to what kind of monsters are on the battlefield - when they see a Cacodemon they instinctively switch to grenades, when there are soldiers with shields they know it's a good idea to pull out the Plasma Rifle. It's not mandatory, you can still improvise and use remote detonation, ice bomb or whatever else. But the presence of this system ensures that people remember that they have more than two weapons in their arsenal.

Obviously there are a few controversial decisions such as being able to get all resources from the enemies. With this one I remain positive but I'll have to play the game to properly assess whether it's a good or a bad thing. Some people are concerned that items in the world will get less important because of this but hey, it's not like you can spam the flamethrower or the chainsaw. We'll see about this one.

There's also platforming but I already made a whole thread about it so I won't repeat what I said there. In short: I love it.

I don't think those things detract from the simplicity of the game. There are a few extra layers here and there but at the end of the day it's still you skillfully using the environment, weapons and resources. I see those systems as a spice to the main dish, not something that completely changes the flavour.

Whenever something like this starts up I cast my mind back to Duke Nukem changing from a 2D platformer to a FPS and wondering what sort of shitstorms would kick up if it had to do that with modern internet discourse.

5 minutes ago, Rampy470 said:

Whenever something like this starts up I cast my mind back to Duke Nukem changing from a 2D platformer to a FPS and wondering what sort of shitstorms would kick up if it had to do that with modern internet discourse.

Thread: is Duke 3D the death of Duke Nukems true core gamplay spirit??

"3d is to complicated to provide the subtle nuances of 2d platformers and ruins the classic feel" FACT s/

24 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

Thread: is Duke 3D the death of Duke Nukems true core gamplay spirit??

"3d is to complicated to provide the subtle nuances of 2d platformers and ruins the classic feel" FACT s/

"The plot of Duke used to be so simple; bad guy bad, go stop him! Now he's trying to save WOMEN and shit, wtf!"