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

Does anyone else think this game is going to suck?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Foebane72 said:

 

And I thought I was the only one thinking like that and being criticised for it.

 

 

and IMO rightfully so.

 

arena FPS and other hardcore genre's have diminished into irrelevance because of our rigidity towards change. Any fanbase needs influx of new players to survive, considering the fact that all of us are old af and playing lesser day by day. Hell, the Souls-bourne RPG playerbase might be bigger than us with the exception of newer D16 playerbase.

And we don't even count the fact that STILL id is working towards keeping us happy despite being owned by a company such as bethesda

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, D88M3R said:

 

I said it several times: To me D16 and Eternal feel like a blend of the comic book, brutal doom and memes. 
I see little that makes me go "yeah that is Doom right there", it has become a cartoonish over the top power fantasy with way too much modern game concessions to casuals because since it cost too much money they have to appeal to everyone. Bleh.

Just out of curiosity, what would make this "Doom" enough for you? Not to say there aren't things I might prefer to some of the things they've done with the game, but it still is a Doom game either way and I personally, along with a lot of other people who played the original games when they were new (since that's a thing that seems to matter to a lot of people shitting on the modern reboot), think it looks like a blast. And why wouldn't they modernize the game in modern times? It's a big name franchise and it would be kind of silly for it to stay locked in the past just to please fans of the older titles imo. People do the same thing with bands. If it doesn't stay sounding like the first couple of albums then it's not "insert band name" anymore and it's garbage. It's still the same artists doing the same thing but a more evolved version. Same thing applies to Doom but it's a new group of devs bringing a somewhat dead franchise back into the light. Would it be better off not coming back at all? Not a dig at you or anyone else who doesn't like the direction the series has taken, just curious to hear what would have made this more of a Doom game to those who aren't into the new stuff is all :)

Edited by MrDeAD1313

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/8/2020 at 9:53 PM, jazzmaster9 said:

You found another reason to be disappointed in nu-Doom 4 years later? i'm surprised 

 

I've removed that comment, as I've reconsidered. It still actually looks quite good, considering its age.

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Foebane72 said:

I've removed that comment, as I've reconsidered. It still actually looks quite good, considering its age.

 

And you're still missing the point - a cutting-edge game cannot look dated in just 4 years after launch. Worse than Eternal? Perhaps, because technological advancements are made very fast, but it is in no way dated. Out of curiosity, what do you think of a game like Crysis 3? If that also looks "dated" to you then I seriously don't know what to make of it - unless you're trolling again.

 

14 hours ago, MrDeAD1313 said:

Just out of curiosity, what would make this "Doom" enough for you?

 

Absolutely nothing, as clearly indicated by posts such as this one. Classic Doom is the only Doom, everything else is a lame imitation.

 

14 hours ago, Super Mighty G said:

The problem has always been arguments that are presented as objective when they are not. The difference between "This is objectively ugly" and "I think this is ugly" are miles apart in tone, yet people can't differentiate. If people would just take the time to word things properly they wouldn't get nearly as much blow back. And sometimes they don't understand that or just refuse to do it. THAT is what makes people angry. 

 

And rightfully so. No one is jumping guns at anyone over their preferences and opinions, what some don't seem to get is that pushing an opinion as a fact is what triggers people (and arguments made in bad faith. There was a post somewhere which read something to the effect of "new-Doom is not Doom because it's not made by the old id, the true id Software").

Share this post


Link to post

What I don't get is why people are willing to write off actual good criticism and personal preferences as "nitpicks", they're aware not everyone's going to like the game right? I never said anything about Classic Doom nor am I an oldbie and yet they still call me " hater, nitpicker....etc" (eg)

 

Some people have such a personal connection with this game that when someone criticizes anything about it they instantly become a full-blown hater, like, I am sorry I don't like things exactly the way you do /s

Edited by sluggard : typo

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, seed said:

And you're still missing the point - a cutting-edge game cannot look dated in just 4 years after launch. Worse than Eternal? Perhaps, because technological advancements are made very fast, but it is in no way dated. Out of curiosity, what do you think of a game like Crysis 3? If that also looks "dated" to you then I seriously don't know what to make of it - unless you're trolling again.

 

I've noticed that a game doesn't usually look dated until its successor comes out, like Half-Life (to me) didn't look dated until Half-Life 2 came out, for example. Such is the way of progress.

 

Crysis 3 looked impressive when I saw a PC gameplay video of it just now, and was even more impressed when I then discovered it was released in 2013.

 

Some games date faster than others, but it depends on the engine and game assets. To me, Doom 3 still looks great as well, although of course Doom 2016 refines and adds to the tech used. As I said, progress.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Foebane72 said:

I've noticed that a game doesn't usually look dated until its successor comes out, like Half-Life (to me) didn't look dated until Half-Life 2 came out, for example. Such is the way of progress.

 

Yeah, but we're talking about a day/night difference here, you see, when technological advancements were HUGE between installments. HL1 ran on a heavily modified version of the Quake engine, whereas HL2 ran on a completely new engine which added support for a different lightning system, physics, everything was basically completely different in Source vs GoldSrc.

 

4 minutes ago, Foebane72 said:

Some games date faster than others, but it depends on the engine and game assets.

 

Pretty much so, but I feel like dated is not exactly the same as "aged". Some games age much worse than others, both visually and gameplay-wise.

 

19 minutes ago, sluggard said:

What I don't get is why people are willing to write off actual good criticism and personal preferences as "nitpicks", they're aware not everyone's going to like the game right? I never said anything about Classic Doom nor am I an oldbie and yet they still call me " hater, nitpicker....etc" (eg)

 

Where exactly? I see no such reply to you on that page.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, seed said:

Where exactly? I see no such reply to you on that page.

I'm reading too much into the ones that followed and these recent replies, that's my issue yikes.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, seed said:

whereas HL2 ran on a completely new engine which added support for a different lightning system, physics, everything was basically completely different in Source vs GoldSrc.

That isn't completely true. John Carmack said that bits of Q1 code remain in Source. Vestiges of GoldSrc still remain; the impulse command from Q1 still exists in the Orange Box release of Half-Life. Otherwise, everything else is different.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Cacodemon345 said:

That isn't completely true. John Carmack said that bits of Q1 code remain in Source. Vestiges of GoldSrc still remain; the impulse command from Q1 still exists in the Orange Box release of Half-Life. Otherwise, everything else is different.

 

I'm well aware of that, but the leftovers from GoldSrc/Quake engine are basically insignificant, so I didn't think there's much point in mentioning this.

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/11/2020 at 1:12 AM, jazzmaster9 said:

There is a difference between "I dont like it" and "this is badly made"

Huh...even so!? Okay then. Lets take something else, more simple for example than theme related to this very forum.

As a most popular example, whats wrong with lasts/new Star Wars films?
Are they badly made? No, they looks ok, 12 Michael Bay from 10.
Or stupid fans of previous parts just dont like them, because its not first three/six films (depending of "hardcorness" of fan)?

In case you wonder, I dont like Star Wars, I dont hate Star Wars (both old and new), I dont think about Star Wars, I am NOT a Star Wars. I just watch new films with my gf, then wait until my friends watch them, then discussed them with my friends and we came to a common opinion that....there are something wrong with them. More specific "they looks ok, CG artists really tried, but main plot very simple and silly in some places".
 

I know to where this, probably, can lead, and its NOT the point of this example.

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, Kronecker–Capelli said:

I know to where this, probably, can lead, and its NOT the point of this example.

Just what exactly is your issue here? your comments seem like ramblings and your your loose grasp of english makes it even harder to get your point across.

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, sluggard said:

Just what exactly is your issue here? your comments seem like ramblings and your your loose grasp of english makes it even harder to get your point across.

 

Ye, I was trying to understand what was the point that was being made, but... I don't actually understand anything, apart from "I am not a fan of Star Wars" and "does new-Star Wars really suck?"

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, seed said:

I don't actually understand anything, apart from "I am not a fan of Star Wars" and "does new-Star Wars really suck?"

I have a feeling he's trying to be sarcastic after that post I made (strawman argument if you will), but I'm probably reading too much into it again rofl, this topic is really becoming something, I'm surprised it survived this long.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post

Can we all just wait another 7 days before making more posts and threads on why D:E or parts of it will suck, pretty please?

That said, I would really love to know how many of the people complaining about D:E actually liked 2016 to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Kronecker–Capelli said:

As a most popular example, whats wrong with lasts/new Star Wars films?
Are they badly made? No, they looks ok, 12 Michael Bay from 10.
Or stupid fans of previous parts just dont like them, because its not first three/six films (depending of "hardcorness" of fan)?

I dont understand what you are saying. Your english is hard to understand 

 

If you are saying the new Star Wars is objectively bad then, no they arent.

Are they flawed, absolutely.

 

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, ptoing said:

I would really love to know how many of the people complaining about D:E actually liked 2016 to begin with.

A better question would be "do people complaining about D:E like 2016 so much"

 

E: Actually scratch that, this discussion isn't going to lead anywhere so let's just agree to disagree lol, and yes they're not objectively bad despite their flaws.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, this game is going to suck because its not a carbon copy of Doom 1993. Like wtf? I need Windows 10? Why cant I run it on DOS???

Share this post


Link to post

Good to see reddit-tier strawmanning is still relevant here.

14 hours ago, SirJuicyLemon said:

The motherf*cking Icon of Sin has returned to claim your soul, dude!

Damn

Edited by sluggard : correction

Share this post


Link to post

I mean most of the comments about Doom Eternal being bad is that "it has not to do with how Doom is in the 90s"

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, jazzmaster9 said:

I mean most of the comments about Doom Eternal being bad is that "it has not to do with how Doom is in the 90s"

I see that comment thrown around more often as an easy way to write off any and every criticism the game gets even when they have nothing to do with Doom Eternal not being authentic to Doom '93 or something.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, sluggard said:

I see that comment thrown around more often as an easy way to write off any and every criticism the game gets even when they have nothing to do with Doom Eternal not being authentic to Doom '93 or something.

Most of the complaints are about how "it doesnt feel like real Doom"

Sure there are legitimate criticism being made but the majority of the folks who want to be give their "hot takes" on Dum Eternal is that "it feels nothing like the originals" or "the originals did it this way"

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/14/2020 at 3:22 PM, jazzmaster9 said:

"it feels nothing like the originals" or "the originals did it this way"

Yeah that's a pretty weak reason.

Edited by sluggard : re-worded

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/9/2020 at 1:18 AM, jazzmaster9 said:

I swear most of these "2 Old School 4 U" people who hover in the Doom 2016/Eternal threads are most likely 20 or so year old kids who played Doom 1 in doomsday and pretend to be "2 Retro 4 Call of Dooty"

Note that they played Doomsday, not Vavoom or Risen3d because...reasons? 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Quiver said:

Note that they played Doomsday, not Vavoom or Risen3d because...reasons? 

Some people do it just for the sake of being contrarians and looking 2kool4skool.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/14/2020 at 4:25 AM, sluggard said:

I see that comment thrown around more often as an easy way to write off any and every criticism the game gets even when they have nothing to do with Doom Eternal not being authentic to Doom '93 or something.

 

tbh like half the comments i see defending the newer game from any and all criticism are just weird canned arguments that always run everything back to a handful of talking points. For all the talk about how people are hating on it, just about anywhere on the internet, criticism of D2016 or Eternal is usually met with fanboys dogpiling on you while addressing the things that you say in the least substantial way possible.

 

People have this image in their head of why someone doesn't like their favorite game and they just can't muster any nuance beyond it

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, Reaverbot said:

criticism of D2016 or Eternal is usually met with fanboys dogpiling on you while addressing the things that you say in the least substantial way possible.

It's all silly and a bit immature, if both sides can't agree to disagree and put no effort or thought into what they say, true spirit of the internet...

Edited by sluggard

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

×