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

Slaughterfest WADs: Pro or Anti?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

just play ribbiks maps that aren't slaughter

Which ones aren't slaughter?  Crumpets is coming up soon on my to do list.

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, guitardz said:

Which ones aren't slaughter?  Crumpets is coming up soon on my to do list.

There are non-slaughter maps by ribbiks in SunLust or the Stardate sets, obviously I'm not gonna go through all the mapslots here for the sake of being lazy :P

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

There are non-slaughter maps by ribbiks in SunLust or the Stardate sets, obviously I'm not gonna go through all the mapslots here for the sake of being lazy :P

Sunlust looks amazing, I might just go through the whole thing on HMP, I'm sure it will still be plenty hard...it's ribbiks.

Share this post


Link to post

I mentioned in a previous post that I generally think that enemy placement makes gameplay more interesting (for better or worse), but I don't mind slaughtermaps if they're done well. 

 

Take Map09 of Vanguard (one of the best fan made levels ever, BTW). It incorporates design that makes it super replayable: enough space to maneuver, not an overload of ammo (which makes ammo management a key aspect in terms of strategy), great use of enemies (he doesn't spam the shit out of AVs, sorry Ribbiks), and the level also seems made to have benefited speedrunning. 

 

On the other hand, if you make a slaughterWAD, the gameplay becomes extremely redundant and soon it's just boring (Slaughterfests 2011 and 2012, especially the former). Also, if the level consists simply of a BFG, tons of energy cells, LOOOOOOOOADS of room and suffers from a serious case of "dumb-monster-density" syndrome, then it's usually gonna suck (a couple of partial exceptions are the Twilight Massacre levels from SOD and Resurgence).

 

That's my two cents. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Poncho1 said:

I mentioned in a previous post that I generally think that enemy placement makes gameplay more interesting 

 

Agreed! That's why slaughtermappers do lots of enemy placement :D

 

I'd also like to note that if slaughtermaps made by people who don't normally make (read: have experience making) slaughtermaps are your intro to the genre then you've done yourself a great disservice.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Poncho1 said:

I mentioned in a previous post that I generally think that enemy placement makes gameplay more interesting (for better or worse), but I don't mind slaughtermaps if they're done well. 

 

Take Map09 of Vanguard (one of the best fan made levels ever, BTW). It incorporates design that makes it super replayable: enough space to maneuver, not an overload of ammo (which makes ammo management a key aspect in terms of strategy), great use of enemies (he doesn't spam the shit out of AVs, sorry Ribbiks), and the level also seems made to have benefited speedrunning. 

 

On the other hand, if you make a slaughterWAD, the gameplay becomes extremely redundant and soon it's just boring (Slaughterfests 2011 and 2012, especially the former). Also, if the level consists simply of a BFG, tons of energy cells, LOOOOOOOOADS of room and suffers from a serious case of "dumb-monster-density" syndrome, then it's usually gonna suck (a couple of partial exceptions are the Twilight Massacre levels from SOD and Resurgence).

 

That's my two cents. 

 

Would be wary of generalizing personal preference into principles that are meant to stand on their own -- a lot of people will have different opinions based on their own preferences and capabilities and experience, and their principles will look the opposite of yours.

 

To enumerate a bunch of ways tastes can vary:

 

Spoiler

If I were to list things that make maps replayable, I'd sooner list qualities like 'variability' and 'non-linearity' and 'conducive to problem-solving' and so on (those are just examples -- the list goes on), rather than all those.

 

Having space to move can be fun, but cramped stuff can be fun too.

 

Tight or measured ammo can be cool, but so can ammo spam (also, even when maps spam ammo, e.g. cells, there is still a strategic and tactical element in actually picking it up midfight while firing the BFG.)

 

Also I'd say that Vanguard 09 is pretty liberal with ammo (which is fine). You won't come close to running out unless you basically try to split up the infighting that more or less automatically breaks out with the cybs. 

 

As far as enemy usage, Vanguard 09 is a satisfying fodder slaughterlite map if you are into that but hardly anything nuanced in terms of enemy placement. More suited to run 'n' gun fun. 

 

And a lot of people like archvile spam. 


I am a speedrunner, but I draw a distinction between maps I like for runs and those that I just prefer to beat saveless (or use for practice) at my leisure (there are only 24 hours in a day, so running hard maps (or maps that are highly variable like slaughtermaps can be) for me is like 'okay I'll do that when I decide not to do much of anything else Doom-related over a certain time period').

 

So in sum, that you like what you like is fine, but don't present it as objective truth about what constitutes good or bad design. 


P.S. 'SF11 and SF12' is a really loose category. Not too far removed from saying 'a bunch of slaughtermaps made in 2011 and 2012' -- because there is a wide range of styles and quality in there. 

Edited by rdwpa

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Poncho1 said:

Take Map09 of Vanguard

Wait, is this considered slaughter?  I just played through that last week, I spent a lot of time getting through that map but it was really great, highly enjoyed.

Share this post


Link to post

I might do some slaughter map someday too, though it will definitely suck haha *gotta hide these 500 revenants behind some corner*

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, rdwpa said:

 

Would be wary of generalizing personal preference into principles that are meant to stand on their own -- a lot of people will have different opinions based on their own preferences and capabilities and experience, and their principles will look the opposite of yours.

 

To enumerate a bunch of ways tastes can vary:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

If I were to list things that make maps replayable, I'd sooner list qualities like 'variability' and 'non-linearity' and 'conducive to problem-solving' and so on (those are just examples -- the list goes on), rather than all those.

 

Having space to move can be fun, but cramped stuff can be fun too.

 

Tight or measured ammo can be cool, but so can ammo spam (also, even when maps spam ammo, e.g. cells, there is still a strategic and tactical element in actually picking it up midfight while firing the BFG.)

 

Also I'd say that Vanguard 09 is pretty liberal with ammo (which is fine). You won't come close to running out unless you basically try to split up the infighting that more or less automatically breaks out with the cybs. 

 

As far as enemy usage, Vanguard 09 is a satisfying fodder slaughterlite map if you are into that but hardly anything nuanced in terms of enemy placement. More suited to run 'n' gun fun. 

 

And a lot of people like archvile spam. 


I am a speedrunner, but I draw a distinction between maps I like for runs and those that I just prefer to beat saveless (or use for practice) at my leisure (there are only 24 hours in a day, so running hard maps (or maps that are highly variable like slaughtermaps can be) for me is like 'okay I'll do that when I decide not to do much of anything else Doom-related over a certain time period').

 

So in sum, that you like what you like is fine, but don't present it as objective truth about what constitutes good or bad design. 


P.S. 'SF11 and SF12' is a really loose category. Not too far removed from saying 'a bunch of slaughtermaps made in 2011 and 2012' -- because there is a wide range of styles and quality in there. 

Yeah, I'm sorry. I should've made it more clear that this was my personal opinion. Good level design is different to different people. 

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, Sparktimus said:

Just an average day on Doomworld.

 

I would say that this thread is wholeheartedly not average for Doomworld, at least given the history of discussions about the merits of slaughter. And that is a pleasant surprise.

 

So far, we're about at the midpoint of page 4 and this thread has yet to devolve into a flamewar between the people saying that slaughterwads are horrible unplayable pieces of garbage that should be buried and the people saying that slaughterwads are the levels that are the pinnacles of human creation and should be held up as the things that give life meaning and without which life is utter meaningless darkness.

 

I'm being a bit over the top intentionally, but the fact remains that other than the briefest of diversions (which was quite mild and quickly self-regulated), this discussion has stayed very reasoned.

Share this post


Link to post

^ Indeed, considering past threads you could say it's a record that this one has remained mostly civil for 4 pages now.

 

Let's keep that going.

 

(Until someone makes a highly inflammatory statement and everything goes downhill afterwards).

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, Agent6 said:

(Until someone makes a highly inflammatory statement and everything goes downhill afterwards).

kys fagit XDDDDDDDDDDD

 

Seriously though, I agree.

Share this post


Link to post

This is a question mostly for those most familiar with slaughter: would Speedmaster be considered slaughter? Some of its maps are insane, like map 30 (which is still one of the best maps I have played.)

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×