Hugo Martin: "There's probably more Doom 3 in Doom 2016 than we realised"

Must explain why I like it more than Doom Eternal, then. Doom 2016 has bags of atmosphere, like Doom 3 did before it, and it was pure Doom. I've grown to fully appreciate 2016 now, whereas I find I'm bored of Doom Eternal even before I've completed it. Boredom and frustration, more like, because of the difficulty level, even on easiest difficulty. Sorry, id, but you put too much arcadey game stuff into Eternal, and it is bloatware. Looks like Yahtzee was right. Even though the visuals on Earth look GORGEOUS and the combat can be fun a lot of the time.

2016 most certainly took a lot of notes from Doom 3. Imps doing wall climbs, the design of both the plasma gun and Hell Knight, and in general the look of the UAC bases, are all right out of Doom 3. 

IMO, I think Eternal does a better job of marrying the chosen aesthetic with its game play though. 2016 had that realistic look going, but super quick action and serious (graphical) tone that ALMOST felt at odds with the game itself. (I say almost because it didn't really end up bothering me much). Eternal feels more consistent with itself to me; the look, the game play, and the audio all seem to agree on what the overall tone of the game will be. 

Personally, I like Eternal more. I might have leaned towards 2016 if the game was as "serious" as Doom 3, with its visuals the way it is, but like I said... Eternal just feels like everything is mixing in together in a cohesive, non-split direction. 

Remember that reveal trailer? They must have been trying to make it more action-oriented without completely abandoning Doom 3's style.

One of my favorite things about Doom 2016 is how it intelligently reuses a lot of what visually worked about Doom 3, and lifts those good ideas into the framework of a stronger game. They could very easily have postured away from any trace of Doom 3 in an attempt to kowtow to what "the fans" want, but they recognized that a lot of shit in Doom 3 really worked and was worth keeping.

They did eventually recolor the monsters after complaints about them being too grey.

I really liked that Doom 2016 payed some homage to Doom 3. It partially succeeded in combining the horror aesthetic of Doom 3 with a more over the top, colorful, somewhat retro style. But I didn't like how they pushed it more and more towards that retro direction. For example, the early Imp design in Doom 2016 was much better IMO - eyeless, creepy, with a grey-greenish skin tone. Then they shoehorned glowing eyes in it's head and repainted it brown, to make it more reminiscent to the original goofy monster.

There's tons of it. For example, you can play as much 'Turbo Turkey Puncher III' as you like

There's a Soul cube prop somewhere there.

Doom 3 DNA is splashed all over Doom 2016.

13 hours ago, User Name said:

Doom 3 DNA is splashed all over Doom 2016.

Ditto.

In addition to what was already said, there's also that chapter... whatever its name was, with all the lava everywhere. The Doom 3 vibes are very strong there, plus iconic sequences such as the one with the hologram HK ripping someone else in half.

18 hours ago, sluggard said:

There's a Soul cube prop somewhere there.

Yes, it's in Olivia Pierce's office.

29 minutes ago, seed said:

there's also that chapter... whatever its name was, with all the lava everywhere.

It's called The Foundry

To me Doom 2016 practically felt like Doom 3 with brutal doom and a little of the comic book also in there.

I prefer Doom 2016's aesthetic to Doom Eternal too.

I don't, honestly. I mean, the UAC base and Mars was cool, that I kinda prefer over Eternal too, but Hell... no, just no. Hell in 2016 was far too underwhelming and bland IMO. Not in terms of gameplay, sure, but visually, absolutely.

In fact, I think 2016's take on Hell was the weakest so far.

Hugo Martin: "There's probably more Doom 3 in Doom 2016 than we realised"

@Foebane72: Source for this quote?

1 hour ago, Gez said:

Hugo Martin: "There's probably more Doom 3 in Doom 2016 than we realised"

 

@Foebane72: Source for this quote?

At 37:02 Hugo Martin says the title of this thread ;)

16 hours ago, seed said:

I don't, honestly. I mean, the UAC base and Mars was cool, that I kinda prefer over Eternal too, but Hell... no, just no. Hell in 2016 was far too underwhelming and bland IMO. Not in terms of gameplay, sure, but visually, absolutely.

 

In fact, I think 2016's take on Hell was the weakest so far.

To be fair, UAC Base/Mars environments only appear in one level in Eternal, compared to it taking up about two-thirds of the game in 2016, so there wasn't as much opportunity to develop the world-building in that area.

Really, I think that sums up the one advantage I see with DOOM 2016's aesthetic; that being a more natural progression of the environments. Even then, it resulted in some serious repetition and lack of variety that eventually made the UAC bases more dull than anything (which also happens to be a problem I have with DOOM 3, albeit to a much greater extent). While you often just use a portal to get between Eternal's levels, it meant there was an excuse for having such drastic changes in the level's theme, which I felt made the campaign much more consistently interesting up until the end.

I don't recall what youtuber I heard say this, so if somebody knows I appreciate your sharing.

But the comparison made I think is an apt one: Doom 2016 is very much like Doom 2. Doom Eternal is more like Quake 3.

@SulfurOccult Gmanlives?

I think Doom 2016 felt more like a Quake experience. Still haven't played Eternal yet.

The thought occurs to me that after Doom 3 came out, there was division in the fanbase at first, namely for the "it's too dark" and "there's no duct tape on Mars" blahblahblah that went on, but that didn't stop the remnants of the development of Doom 4 (which was a direct sequel to Doom 3) morphing into Doom 2016 with more action-oriented combat, but still in an atmospheric and moody and (I'd say) realistic setting, also like Doom 3, but much more positively received by everyone. In fact, Metacritic shows almost unanimous support for Doom 2016.

BUT, then I'm thinking that Hugo Martin thought that Doom should go back in the opposite direction, back to the purely action-based game Doom was, with more arcadey graphics and more obvious videogame mechanics... and look what happened with Metacritic: more polarised User Reviews.

What I'm trying to say is that I'm thinking that people were starting to get used to the moody, atmospheric and realistic tone started with Doom 3 and carried on with Doom 2016, before Hugo Martin made his ill-advised turn.

On 4/26/2020 at 3:34 AM, chemo said:

Even then, it resulted in some serious repetition and lack of variety that eventually made the UAC bases more dull than anything (which also happens to be a problem I have with DOOM 3, albeit to a much greater extent). While you often just use a portal to get between Eternal's levels, it meant there was an excuse for having such drastic changes in the level's theme, which I felt made the campaign much more consistently interesting up until the end.

UAC bases are the bread and butter of Doom, and their designs are all excellent. Hell is a different kettle of fish, but whereas Doom 1-3 to 2016 kept it simple, Eternal has suddenly introduced other places that I have no idea what's going on, and I refuse to read the codexes. I mean, is Exultia and Nekravol in Hell, or some planet with lava? Is it Earth? I have no idea, not to mention the other places with the gothic architecture.

3 hours ago, Foebane72 said:

 

UAC bases are the bread and butter of Doom, and their designs are all excellent. Hell is a different kettle of fish, but whereas Doom 1-3 to 2016 kept it simple, Eternal has suddenly introduced other places that I have no idea what's going on, and I refuse to read the codexes. I mean, is Exultia and Nekravol in Hell, or some planet with lava? Is it Earth? I have no idea, not to mention the other places with the gothic architecture.

 

The Exultia level is a mess and it wasn’t until my second play through that I realized the second half of the level is in Hell and that the large building in the background of the Hell portion is Nekravol.

I agree with you about the various Gothic maps in Doom Eternal that are supposedly set on the Sentinel planet—not sure why those couldn’t have been set on Earth where it is also frequently cloudy and mountainous, etc.

7 hours ago, Foebane72 said:

 

UAC bases are the bread and butter of Doom, and their designs are all excellent. Hell is a different kettle of fish, but whereas Doom 1-3 to 2016 kept it simple, Eternal has suddenly introduced other places that I have no idea what's going on, and I refuse to read the codexes. I mean, is Exultia and Nekravol in Hell, or some planet with lava? Is it Earth? I have no idea, not to mention the other places with the gothic architecture. 

 

How does the simple act of adding more environmental variety make things too complex? How is the idea of using the same two locations of UAC Bases and Hell in every game not going to get dull eventually? Even if it doesn't make sense from a narrative standpoint, it allows for more unique scenarios and eye candy, which is beneficial to such a gameplay-focused series like DOOM. Just because it's the series norm to largely use the same two environment types in every game, doesn't mean that it isn't a weak aspect of it.

Moreover, I had absolutely no trouble understanding the context of these locations without reading the codex. This is what can be gathered just by what's told in-game:

- Hell on Earth: The base of operations for the Hell Priest Deag Nilox, and also the location of the citadel where the Priests and the Khan Maykr hold gatherings

- Exultia: A city within Argent D'Nur where the King of the Sentinels resides, which features a portal leading to the outskirts of Hell, where the Betrayer of the Sentinels resides with guilt

- Cultist Base: A high-tech yet gothic base within the arctic region of Earth where the Hell Priest Deag Ranak resides to fuel his cause and create unholy works of science. While many of the rooms within the Cultist Base don't make much sense at first glance, it can easily be inferred that it's that way to deter intruders such as the Slayer, and it's not like the layout matters to the Demons themselves.

- Doom Hunter Base: Ditto, though specifically this is the "heart" of the base where the Doom Hunters are made and is the specific area where Deag Ranak is found within the flesh

- Super Gore Nest: The heart and origin of the invasion on Earth, being the most corrupted location on the planet (this is all said directly by VEGA at the beginning of the level)

- Arc Complex: The location on Earth in which the ARC HQ resides, which itself is basically a "Neo UAC" given that Hayden leads the organization, for one thing

- Mars Core: Starts out on a massive UAC planetary defense on Phobos, then eventually leads to an ancient Sentinel city within the core of Mars

- Sentinel Prime: A massive coliseum within Argent D'Nur. This is also where the final remaining Hell Priest, Deag Grav, goes into hiding

- Tara Nabad: One of the largest cities within Argent D'Nur and where a massive battle between the Sentinels and Demons once took place, though it has since been overrun by the Demons

- Nekravol: A massive citadel within Hell that harvests human souls (seriously, how isn't it obvious that this Hell? Even just going by the visual imagery alone?)

- Urdak: The Maykrs' homeworld

- Final Sin: A district on Earth within the path of the Icon of Sin's rampage

Following along with narrative context of the these environments isn't that hard.

22 minutes ago, chemo said:

How does the simple act of adding more environmental variety make things too complex? How is the idea of using the same two locations of UAC Bases and Hell in every game not going to get dull eventually? Even if it doesn't make sense from a narrative standpoint, it allows for more unique scenarios and eye candy, which is beneficial to such a gameplay-focused series like DOOM. Just because it's the series norm to largely use the same two environment types in every game, doesn't mean that it isn't a weak aspect of it.

 

Following along with narrative context of the these environments isn't that hard.

Newsflash, Chemo: I don't give a DAMN about the "narrative context" of these random environments, I don't give a DAMN about this stupid lore that's been added (it was pushing it in Doom 2016, but I saw parallels with the simple story of Doom 3) and this is why I don't like modern gaming, that has to add several movies' worth of backstory to justify what should be very simple action, because some players don't want to watch movies anymore, they want their games to BE movies, and that is BULLSHIT.

5 minutes ago, Foebane72 said:

 

Newsflash, Chemo: I don't give a DAMN about the "narrative context" of these random environments, I don't give a DAMN about this stupid lore that's been added (it was pushing it in Doom 2016, but I saw parallels with the simple story of Doom 3) and this is why I don't like modern gaming, that has to add several movies' worth of backstory to justify what should be very simple action, because some players don't want to watch movies anymore, they want their games to BE movies, and that is BULLSHIT.

 

So, you don't care about narrative context, but complain that you don't know what's going on with these locations? What?

6 minutes ago, chemo said:

So, you don't care about narrative context, but complain that you don't know what's going on with these locations? What?

I complained about the new "lore" in a thread a couple of months back, and I was told I could ignore it completely. Bit difficult to do so when lore is being shoved in your face every five minutes, through the look of the locations and the cutscenes.

2 minutes ago, Foebane72 said:

 

I complained about the new "lore" in a thread a couple of months back, and I was told I could ignore it completely. Bit difficult to do so when lore is being shoved in your face every five minutes, through the look of the locations and the cutscenes. 

 

Cutscenes that are no more prevalent than the HL2-esque "walking around doing nothing" sections in DOOM 2016? Aside from Sentinel Prime, all they do is provide basic contexts for each level.

And simply the look of the locations shoves too much lore into the player's faces? How on earth does that slow the gameplay down when you can just, you know, continue on through the level?

6 minutes ago, chemo said:

And simply the look of the locations shoves too much lore into the player's faces? How on earth does that slow the gameplay down when you can just, you know, continue on through the level?

Cos unlike 2016, these locations don't FEEL like Doom should be. And if this is the way Doom is going, then I'm no longer interested.

Foebane have you decided to return to your bad habits again?