Something I wrote on Aesthetics and Gameplay.

I wrote this document about aesthetics and gameplay because I think Hell Revealed is better than KDiZD.

Quote

The classic artstyle of Ultimate Doom and Doom 2, along with Plutonia and Hell Revealed, is one of the reasons I like them so much. Ultimate Doom and Doom 2 weren’t very complicated in artstyle because they were the first WADs, ever. Plutonia had some aesthetics, but the focus was on the gameplay, specifically the challenge. Hell Revealed was a 90’s wad, and during this time people were trying to figure out how to make proper maps. I think that maybe we should try following the idea of gameplay first and aesthetics second, like many wads, and at least balance them out, like Sunlust, Sunder and Ancient Aliens, along with Valiant and Vanguard.

 

Detail is cool and stuff, with GZDoom HD stuff and Dynamic Lighting and all of that, but I think that a wad can not be as pleasing to the eye as most WADs and still be liked for gameplay. (Ironic coming from the person who rushed a megawad with poor design and equally poor gameplay, but I still like Waves of the Undead because it’s an achievement for me).

Basically, what I wrote is that you can either have good gameplay, or have both equal gameplay and design. For example, Sunlust is eye candy, and it's gameplay is equally important.

11 hours ago, AtticTelephone said:

Basically, what I wrote is that you can either have good gameplay, or have both equal gameplay and design. For example, Sunlust is eye candy, and it's gameplay is equally important.

What you're asserting depends on how you define "gameplay". For "classic" DooM gameplay I would agree that it would generally take precedence over aesthetics. [Although, as many authors have proved, you can have great gameplay and great looks.] However, source ports have allowed mod creators to explore other aspects of gameplay where aesthetics might play a significant role in the game, and eliminating the aesthetics might diminish the overall experience. For example, a mod might focus on exploration and/or puzzle-solving, where visual clues are provided by the environment. Another example, is where the author is striving for a realistic-looking game (see Reinchard's Dawn of Reality, or, if you are looking for a vintage mod, Roger Ritenour's Earth).

1 hour ago, ReX said:

What you're asserting depends on how you define "gameplay". For "classic" DooM gameplay I would agree that it would generally take precedence over aesthetics. [Although, as many authors have proved, you can have great gameplay and great looks.] However, source ports have allowed mod creators to explore other aspects of gameplay where aesthetics might play a significant role in the game, and eliminating the aesthetics might diminish the overall experience. For example, a mod might focus on exploration and/or puzzle-solving, where visual clues are provided by the environment. Another example, is where the author is striving for a realistic-looking game (see Reinchard's Dawn of Reality, or, if you are looking for a vintage mod, Roger Ritenour's Earth).

Ah, I see. Puzzle wads are great, like Epic and others, and aesthetics play a great role in supporting the gameplay for the puzzles. Also, sort of unrelated, but the moving floor functions in Boom, while technically are gameplay mechanics, they can be used to add to the visuals of a map. For example, flowing liquid.

7 hours ago, AtticTelephone said:

.... the moving floor functions in Boom .... can be used to add to the visuals of a map. For example, flowing liquid.

Yes, there are excellent features of source ports that can be put to great use to enhance the look and mood of a game. And there are some very cool features/bugs in native DooM that can be exploited to create innovative visuals/tricks.