Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Dr. Nick

The new steam update for doom 1 and 2 are bad

Recommended Posts

bethesda recently updated the original doom 1 and 2 on steam with a new emulator/port. It is not very good. They entirely changed all the menus, so now whenever you open it it advertises bethesda.net, and the first time you open it it will try to get you to sign in. I think they changed the movement too but i'm not 100% sure. 

 

Luckily you can still access the dosbox version (or whatever source port you use) by choosing "launch dos version" when you play, but launching from a desktop shortcut (or any shortcut i think) will open the new port.

Share this post


Link to post

Also I did try to log into bethesda.net a few times to see if that improves it but i kept on coming up with error messages.

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, Dr. Nick said:

bethesda recently updated the original doom 1 and 2 on steam with a new emulator/port. It is not very good.

Except it is in terms of feature improvements.

42 minutes ago, Dr. Nick said:

Luckily you can still access the dosbox version (or whatever source port you use) by choosing "launch dos version" when you play, but launching from a desktop shortcut (or any shortcut i think) will open the new port.

So atleast there is a option, right? And you arent sure yet if movement is changed or not

 

So the overarching issues are:

  • Advertizes Bethesda.net
  • Changed menu

What do you think of the improvements/additions?

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know about your guys, but with Bethesda.net i just entered the email of my slayers club and it's not a problem like some people says. Never opened again ever.

Share this post


Link to post

i think the new bethesda version is actually pretty good, well except the fact that you have to log in with bethesda.net to access add-on menu

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Dr. Nick said:

whenever you open it it advertises bethesda.net, and the first time you open it it will try to get you to sign in.

This is optional, as with the case of PS4/Switch/Xbox console ports after 1 month.

 

2 hours ago, Dr. Nick said:

I think they changed the movement too but i'm not 100% sure. 

No, you are wrong. It is just an illusion by the game having an entirely revamped UI.

 

2 hours ago, Dr. Nick said:

Also I did try to log into bethesda.net a few times to see if that improves it but i kept on coming up with error messages.

Bethesda.net is for installing curated mods only. Whatever error messages you are encountering (repeatedly) must be on your end.

 

I stand by my opinion that some of you guys (including you OP) are still giving these ports too much flak. This version is solid, it is basically what if nu-id/Bethesda decided on making their own version of Crispy Doom. Great for players who are not familiar with PC and its file structure, and for playing with mods in general. We have source ports, that doesn't mean we can trash this update because of the past controversies and for its inferiority in general.

 

Also, hypethetically, if Bethesda decided to make a dick move and remove the original IWADs, we still have GOG.

 

@Old-Doomguy It is more like a limit-raising source port, which allows more modding flexibility and a wider range of curated community content.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, FabulousDoom said:

Source ports are always the way to go.

Yeah, *removed, im being a ungreatful jerk haha*

Edited by CyberDestroyer

Share this post


Link to post

Ok well if it isn't forced upon us in any way there's no real reason to care about it. 

 

Those who choose to use it must be able to enjoy it without people bashing them for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, CyberDestroyer said:

Yeah, i dont understand how people can even play with the bethesda port

image.png.f804e3913031c78fb6bcabb8a3a74f7e.png
As a side note, I am an early adopter for the Bethports when it was still new on Switch. The differences then and now is like night and day.

Bottomline is, the port is optional, you can still launch vanilla as you see fit, you have source ports on PC.

Share this post


Link to post

i heard something about you get free Final Doom, No rest for the living II and Sigil in the sourceport trough the addons option but i dont know if that true.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Z0k said:

i heard something about you get free Final Doom, No rest for the living II and Sigil in the sourceport trough the addons option but i dont know if that true.

Yup, it's true. And you get Final DOOM even if you don't own DOOM II, you can run it from DOOM 1.

Share this post


Link to post

Why do people always find a new way to complain? It's just something fun the ID team through together. It isn't the end of all days. 

Share this post


Link to post

I really dislike the new Bethesda port... it's even worse than the BFG Edition port. But I guess if you're a neophyte in the Doom religion, you can use this port if you don't understand computers, or if you choose to play on console. But let's be perfectly honest here: it's not that hard to download a sourceport. If you can use a computer, if you can use the internet, you can use a sourceport.

 

Basically, the new port is just a half-baked sourceport designed to allow console gamers to play wads. Don't use it on PC... just say no.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

I really dislike the new Bethesda port... it's even worse than the BFG Edition port. But I guess if you're a neophyte in the Doom religion, you can use this port if you don't understand computers, or if you choose to play on console. But let's be perfectly honest here: it's not that hard to download a sourceport. If you can use a computer, if you can use the internet, you can use a sourceport.

 

Basically, the new port is just a half-baked sourceport designed to allow console gamers to play wads. Don't use it on PC... just say no.

say no to the bloat!

 

heh.... because its bloatware... hahaa...

....and bethesda starts with a b?

*unfunny joke*

Share this post


Link to post

You can still take out the iwad and use a sourceport, no need to complain when bethesda's version is completely optional

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

half-baked sourceport

Well, looking at the release date being just from the past year, and knowing that most sourceports have a long running development time, its hard to compare them.
I tried some sourceports when they were first released and they had a lot of bugs and things that were not even related to doom, but to coding.
Some of this port doesn't come to offer a proper gameplay until a good long time after their first release.

Also the developers of this new unity port made new releases, with new features and fixes month by month, so i think it will fix most of the problems it has in no time.
Its the first official way to play Doom on modern consoles/modern PC since it was released in 1993.
And so, one must understand that this is a port that tries to be conservative.

Just adding a few new features so new players can have a taste of what the community made after 26 years, and join to it if they want to, and for those that just play on console to know that there is a much more for Doom out there.
 

Share this post


Link to post

I think the Unity port does it's job (giving unexperienced Doom players a stable way to play it) well, and they DID keep the original stuff for the veteran players to use.

 

The settings are limited to the basics so you don't have to deal with settings you know nothing about, it SEEMS to run at 60fps+ now (remember seeing somewhere about how the game is originally limited to 30-35fps), it's got controller support including DualShock 4's, Final Doom is free now via addons, Bethesda's site thing is optional (when I first tried the port, I was able to close that and just play the game), controls are configurable for M/K and controller, etc.

 

Even if it's not perfect, the Unity port does what it's meant to do and is optional.

Share this post


Link to post

Sometimes i really feel half of r/Doom has come over here and make some quality threads, right here :/

54 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

I really dislike the new Bethesda port... it's even worse than the BFG Edition port.

Can you please elaborate? Because the one thing i can think of that's actually a proper minus with the new update is the vastly increased size, but that's mostly for the .ogg recordings.

54 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

Basically, the new port is just a half-baked sourceport designed to allow console gamers to play wads. Don't use it on PC... just say no.

Half-baked is what i call your post, not the Bethesda port. Its far from flawless, but atleast explain why the unity port gets the classification that you give it.

Share this post


Link to post

It's easily the best official port in existence as of now, after a few hiccups at launch it has evolved into something worthwhile with extra features and the Master Levels, Plutonia, TNT and NRFTL on top of other officially approved megawads it is quite easily the most complete version too.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

Half-baked is what i call your post, not the Bethesda port. Its far from flawless, but atleast explain why the unity port gets the classification that you give it.

 

It offers pretty much no customization whatsoever... even though it could. It runs wads. Wow. It's a groundbreaking example of modern technology!

 

No, it's severely unimpressive. Or maybe underwhelming is a better word. It's an attempt to commercialize the innovative sourceport work of others... to hide their shame that the original DOS games run on DOSbox, which is also non-commercial. Maybe they wanted to seem hip to the modding community? I honestly can't say. It's just a workaround for using DOSbox, and it is simplified compared to DOSbox. But I'd use DOSbox only because it's an authentic representation of DOS Doom to begin with. If I was serious about playing? I would probably use a sourceport, and applaud the work of these unpaid gents all the while.

 

I'm not applauding Bethesda. No matter how hip they try to act. BUT, I will admit, it's a service to console gamers who don't have computers to play wads. Some people are like that. I'm not like that. But some people are. I'm all about the customization offered by sourceports, perhaps even spoiled, you might say. I can't even imagine playing the unity port on PC.

 

Edited by Hellektronic

Share this post


Link to post

It's actually fine if you have never played Classic Doom, much better than having an ancient build of DOSBox with bad audio emulation, but idk why to me it feels like those bootleg ports you can find on the Windows Store (not quality wise, it's nowhere near as bad as those), something just feels "off" about them, and i didn't got that when i played the XBLA version, despise being aware of the bugs.

 

The best part though, is no longer having to buy Doom 3 BFG edition to get No Rest for the Living legally, and the music isn't broken for the episode.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

 

It offers pretty much no customization whatsoever... even though it could. It runs wads. Wow. It's a groundbreaking example of modern technology!

  

No, it's severely unimpressive. Or maybe underwhelming is a better word. It's an attempt to commercialize the innovative sourceport work of others... to hide their shame that the original DOS games run on DOSbox, which is also non-commercial.

 

What shame? No, really, what shame? DOSBox is there because if you even tried to run Doom.exe by itself these days on today's computers without messing about in anything it won't even run.

In what terms do you look in customization?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Hellektronic said:

It's an attempt to commercialize the innovative sourceport work of others...

How so? Is there any proof that Bethesda (EDIT: more accurately, Nerve or id, the developers) used code from other source ports in this port? Because it is my understanding that this port is developed solely by Nerve Software. Using code from the vast majority of modern source ports would be a violation of the GPL license since they don't include source code.

 

Quote

to hide their shame that the original DOS games run on DOSbox, which is also non-commercial.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with distributing that program in a commercial purchase. The GPL allows it, and they include the source code in the release as the license requests.

They are selling you the original DOS executables and IWAD files. They include DOSBOX so people don't need to go and set it up themselves.

 

Quote

1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
along with the Program.

You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee.

...

3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

    a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
    source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
    1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange;

...

 

 

Edited by TheMightyHeracross

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, AlektorophobiA said:

it feels like those bootleg ports you can find on the Windows Store

Speaking of bootleg, ive played a shitty chromebook quake/doom clone

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

It's an attempt to commercialize the innovative sourceport work of others...

...But I'd use DOSbox only because it's an authentic representation of DOS Doom to begin with.

 


How is it an attempt to commercialize the work of others?  Because it runs in Windows natively?  Because it uses a modern renderer?

Also, please explain how a Windows-based application is less authentic than a DOS-based application running in an emulator.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×