Am I just alone in wanting something...more retro?

[NiGHTMARE]

2 hours ago, ReaperAA said:

@warman2012

I also recommend to try "Ion Fury" if you haven't played it before. And of course when mentioning Ion ion other Build Engine  like Duke3D, Blood and Shadow Warrior.

 

Don't forget Exhumed/Power Slave!

 

PS "crafting survival games" slightly predate Doom (see UnReal World, circa 1992) so in their own way they're retro too.

Edited January 22, 2020 by NiGHTMARE

[wheresthebeef]

OP you should try Doom 3, it sounds right up your alley

[Egg Boy]

The only thing separating your vision of a doom themed "retro" fps seems to be just that, the theme. Just play Dusk and pretend its Doom lmao (I hear its getting an SDK). There are games out there that cure the itch for a pure old school experience. Its great that the newer titles are experimental and distinct. It's an evolution on Doom's concepts rather than its actual mechanics, and I appreciate that, especially since new id is not old id. It just seems restraining to chain a developer to a genre which is already receiving a swarm of new titles. Besides that, you wouldn't want the market to be over-saturated, like military shooters in the early 2010s, would you?

[seed]

Honestly I think the new Doom games have just the right amount of retro in them. There are some elements in them that I'm not really a fan of, such as the glory kills system, but that's optional, so no need to do that if not desired.

 

And they have to be modern, after all there wouldn't be much point in making new games if they get stuck in an endless cycle of recycling the old, but run on a new engine. For that, well, might just as well play the old games and the tons of wads and TCs available, they aren't going anywhere.

[warman2012]

1 hour ago, Egg Boy said:

The only thing separating your vision of a doom themed "retro" fps seems to be just that, the theme. Just play Dusk and pretend its Doom lmao (I hear its getting an SDK). There are games out there that cure the itch for a pure old school experience. Its great that the newer titles are experimental and distinct. It's an evolution on Doom's concepts rather than its actual mechanics, and I appreciate that, especially since new id is not old id. It just seems restraining to chain a developer to a genre which is already receiving a swarm of new titles. Besides that, you wouldn't want the market to be over-saturated, like military shooters in the early 2010s, would you?

Lord God, don't I remember when the fish that must not be named destroyed the retro scene for a long span of time. If anything, I do owe 2016 for it's part in the retro shooter revival.

 

By the way, that fish and the toxic spawn it created (teen brats) can get dumped into a shredder, metaphorically speaking.

[Aurelius]

@warman2012 If you think the publisher for a triple A studio is going to let the developers make a mainly retro styled game in this day and age, I'm wondering whether you have followed any triple A games that have come out, well, ever. It's always about pushing boundaries, and the crowd you spoke of is expecting fancy graphics, fast action and plenty of gore, all of which seems to be delivered judging by the available preview content. The classic Doom community is not the main target audience. And, as listed in the previous responses, there are a plethora of retro FPS style games that you can play at your leisure, not to mention all the content you have for classic Doom. 

 

I'm guessing what bothers you is that it's the "official" Doom going in a direction you don't like, rather than retro style FPS games not being available. You couldn't replicate the feel of classic Doom without just making a copy with fancier graphics. And why would you? The designers behind this game (and any game for that matter) want to bring something new to the table. That's the sign of a good developer. Do you think Doom would be better off like the Fifa or NHL franchises that churn out the same game over and over again, just with fancier graphics? (Then again, people actually pay for those.) And like I mentioned previously, it is basically the point of triple A to feel like triple A. The audience will appreciate the beautiful vistas and solid gameplay resulting from high production values. If the massive amount of resources and time these projects consume would not be necessary, why on earth do we have a problem where many studios are putting their hundreds of employees through crunch? It's a massive industry, and the products of said industry are expected to be as such.

There is no way the people in charge for the overall of design of the new Doom game would think that it could be as long lasting as classic Doom. Games cost bazillions to make, so publishers approach them as experiences consumed for a short time, before moving on to the next. We wouldn't want a microtransaction Doom where you can buy hats for the Doom Slayer or dress up your pet bunny. 

For me it's most likely going to be a game of mindless fun for maximum of two playthroughs, after which I will return to other things. If modern FPS games want to be long lasting, they need one or more of the following: 

 

1. RPG elements / "Choose your own adventure" -type gameplay

2. Crafting / Base building

3. Engaging multiplayer

Doom style high octane multiplayer definitely isn't what's hot today. What's hot today seems to changing rapidly, from MOBAs to battle royales to whatever the new fads will be. FPS genre has been doing the realistic cover based squad multiplayer for ages now, and it seems to gather a much larger audience than the classic, Doom and Quake style fast paced arcadey play.

[idbeholdME]

I played Doom 2016 and all I can say is that I will most likely not be buying Eternal. Let them do whatever they want and I will happily keep playing the original Doom.

 

And just to people saying Glory Kills in 2016 are optional, they might be, but you are severely gimping yourself by not doing it. Firstly, you are denying yourself the resources and secondly (and more importantly), all enemies have a safety threshold so that you don't accidentally kill them before glory killing them. If you don't kill them before they recover, they regain a part of their health. And this can happen multiple times, resulting in an enemy being much tougher than he should be just because they keep presenting you with an option to Glory Kill. Just try killing a Mancubus with an un-upgraded pistol on Nightmare. You will not be able to do enough damage to him before he recovers from his "GLORY KILL ME NOW" animation, so you have to do it like 5 or 6 times before he finally dies from you just shooting him. And some other enemies can also take a decent amount of work to kil in their staggered state.

 

This "safety catch" is one of the most annoying things to me in Doom 2016. Things just don't die when they should.

[UncleTito]

New thing bad, old thing good. 

 

Cynicism aside, I dislike NuDoom too. Although, I'd rather point your (and my) complaints towards the NuDoom subforum.

 

But eh, for what it's worth, the initial D4OM concept was much, much worse and thank God that got scrapped in favour of what we have now. 

 

On a side note, anyone saying "glory kills are completely optional" obviously hasn't tried playing Nightmare without using glory kills/chainsaw at all. The game is literally balanced around you having to pop enemies open like health/ammo crates. Nothing wrong with liking them (although I think it breaks the pacing of the game hard), I just find it BS how that is used as an actual argument.

Edited January 22, 2020 by UncleTito

[[McD] James]

I like glory kills.

[Tartlman]

From what i've seen glory kills are much more polished in Eternal. Even the cyberdemon (well, mini cyberdemon, anyway) has a fairly quick glory kill animation. I think that glory kills were a good mechanic to make new doom more accessible to people are used to playing ye olde generic CoD clone shooters.

[deepthaw]

I like glory kills. They encourage keeping you close to enemies, and reward you for it. The entire game is designed around keeping you in the demons' faces at all times.

 

I think even @warman2012 would concede it's better than regenerating health/shields like other modern shooters.

[mb34823]

I hate glory kills. I think they're stupid. Me personally I just don't think it's fun. I understand why people like them. It sounds cool on paper, you can punch someone's head off or whatever. But to me it's just an animation that plays. It's like the Gears of War chainsaw. Here's the thing though, because of that it was really annoying to play the game and it telling me the whole time to do glory kills. It's like the whole game is based around it, making the guns feel really weak along the way. That's why I didn't like Doom 2016. Also everything else about it I thought was really dumb and generic, and totally safe. Sorry for being very very negative.

[snapshot]

Do people really hate glory kills all that much? I thought they were perfectly fine, they were very brief they felt like a natural part of the gameplay.

[Rainne]

Of all the things the old guard would look down their nose at Doom 4 for, it's glory kills? And not the arena lockdowns, weapon/suit upgrade system that you have to figure out to remain relevant, non-secret BFG, unskippable cutscenes, trying to take the Doom Comic seriously, playable "Nightmare" difficulty, fat Cyberdemon, or those damn shield guards? 🤷🏻‍♀️

 

Everyone complained about Doom 3 so they went the other direction. Everyone likes Doom mods so they took inspiration from one of the more popular ones. I dunno what people expect.

 

I thought Doom 4 was pretty good (even the shield guards can be sorted out with a plasma stun), but it's its own game and goes its own way. If you like it, go with it, and if not, get one of these other retraux FPSes coming out lately. Or just keep playing classic Doom, which will always be around, just the way you like it.

[deepthaw]

5 minutes ago, mb34823 said:

I hate glory kills. I think they're stupid. Me personally I just don't think it's fun. I understand why people like them. It sounds cool on paper, you can punch someone's head off or whatever. But to me it's just an animation that plays. It's like the Gears of War chainsaw. Here's the thing though, because of that it was really annoying to play the game and it telling me the whole time to do glory kills. It's like the whole game is based around it, making the guns feel really weak along the way. That's why I didn't like Doom 2016. Also everything else about it I thought was really dumb and generic, and totally safe. Sorry for being very very negative.

 

It's not okay to like something. To expound on what I said above, I like glory kills because it means that when the player is low on health or ammo, instead of retreating from combat, they're encouraged to press forward into more combat. There's no backing off to find pickups you left behind. The animation also serves a purpose - while short, they still give you a brief pause in the action, letting you reassess the situation.

 

It's admittedly fairly different from the more arcade-y flow of classic Doom, but it also rewards risk-taking which in turn, makes the player feel more powerful.

[Tartlman]

On that note, when we finally figure out how to connect our brains directly to VR headsets the first game i'd like to see an adaptation for is doom 2016/eternal, so you can do the glory kills yourself

[idbeholdME]

23 minutes ago, Rainne said:

Of all the things the old guard would look down their nose at Doom 4 for, it's glory kills? And not the arena lockdowns, weapon/suit upgrade system that you have to figure out to remain relevant, non-secret BFG, unskippable cutscenes, trying to take the Doom Comic seriously, playable "Nightmare" difficulty, fat Cyberdemon, or those damn shield guards?

Those are many of the things I didn't want to write an essay on.

 

And you also forgot to list checkpoint only saving, which makes risky exploration extremely annoying.

[banjiepixel]

2 minutes ago, deepthaw said:

I like glory kills. They encourage keeping you close to enemies, and reward you for it. The entire game is designed around keeping you in the demons' faces at all times.

 

I feel glory kills themselves is pretty good mechanic but needed rest of the gameplay system to be designed better to balance it. I feel that they were too overpowered and gave very little reason to do anything else but to stay in the demon's faces. The gameplay system worked pretty well but became pretty boring eventually because it lacked in variety. Doom Eternal seems to flesh out the gameplay system much better.

 

4 minutes ago, Rainne said:

Of all the things the old guard would look down their nose at Doom 4 for, it's glory kills? And not the arena lockdowns, weapon/suit upgrade system that you have to figure out to remain relevant, non-secret BFG, unskippable cutscenes, trying to take the Doom Comic seriously, playable "Nightmare" difficulty, fat Cyberdemon, or those damn shield guards? 🤷🏻‍♀️

 

I didn't mind arena lockdowns and weapon/suit upgrade system because those things exist also in Devil May Cry games and I love those games. I did hate shield guards but what always bothered me more was the enemies staggering and glowing when in low health and ready to be killed. I would had preferred the whole glory kill system be more skill based where you actually need to do something to stagger the enemies instead of being based on how much health enemy has. But playing just without the glow effect works pretty well too because you have to learn to read the animations of the enemies.

 

Doom 2016 seemed little bit confused about what it wanted to be, first person shooter or a character action game but Doom Eternal does really add alot more elements of a character action game and more depth to the gameplay. Many character action games have had their own glory kill-ish system, Bayonetta being one of the better examples.

[Tartlman]

12 minutes ago, banjiepixel said:

Many character action games have had their own glory kill-ish system, Bayonetta being one of the better examples.

On a brief off topic point, i'm still waiting for Metal Gear Rising 2.

 

I feel like the biggest limiting factor on Eternal being closer to classic is the enemy count. Sadly, modern graphics aren't too lenient with that.

 

edit: what if platinum made a game in the doom setting? hmm... hmm.

[_bruce_]

The new Doom looks cool, but as with Doom3 it's not Doom per se. What I like is the quality of artwork... it's more of a thing I love watching in a model viewer than care for in game though.

 

If the industry wasn't so invested in the death spiral of "successful" franchises then a new one could have been created, letting the old legends rest in dignity.

 

Games are just one dimension of this "eternal" dilemma.

 

[Linguica]

The good thing about classic Doom is that it still exists and will continue to still exist, so Doom Eternal can do its own thing without fear of erasing the original. If anything Doom Eternal seems like it might be a little too self-satisfied and open-handed with the fan service. So sayeth I, a guy who started a fansite called "Doomworld"

[Edward850]

Good news OP, Doom64 comes out the same day as Eternal. You explicit demands for strictly "retro" games have already been met. 

[Hcoop111]

Super turbo turkey puncher ...3!

[banjiepixel]

Modern Doom is really great but it would be really awesome to have also a retro throwback Doom game, something similar to Sonic Mania but for the Doom series.

[Tartlman]

2 minutes ago, banjiepixel said:

Modern Doom is really great but it would be really awesome to have also a retro throwback Doom game, something similar to Sonic Mania but for the Doom series.

So another official IWAD then?

 

I honestly don't think more official IWADs are needed... besides, isn't SIGIL kinda official?

[xvertigox]

Personally, I like Doom 2016 with regard to how it handled itself as a game and how it informed the current state of FPS games. It's brought Doom back into the mainstream and has shown publishers/developers that there is a big draw for more classic styled FPS games. The evolution of the Doom series is necessary and inevitable.

 

If it was made in the 'retro FPS' style and used a less impressive engine I'd be disappointed - there's plenty of other games out there that tick all those boxes. Who else is making games that even come close to Doom 2016 / Eternal?

 

5 minutes ago, banjiepixel said:

Modern Doom is really great but it would be really awesome to have also a retro throwback Doom game, something similar to Sonic Mania but for the Doom series.

 

How would this differ to pwads? If ID wanted to release a new Doom game on idtech1 the best thing they could would be grab people from DW to make it and those people are already releasing content here.

[warman2012]

4 hours ago, deepthaw said:

I like glory kills. They encourage keeping you close to enemies, and reward you for it. The entire game is designed around keeping you in the demons' faces at all times.

 

I think even @warman2012 would concede it's better than regenerating health/shields like other modern shooters.

Actually, you couldn't be farther from the truth. The original pick up health packs is the only way for me and from what I gather some of the old guard. Glory kills just slow you down and it's not optional, despite what others say. The player gets increased damage from enemy attacks to balance out the mechanic in the first place, so the player is forced to glory kill every single thing or die. Too slow for me.

[Vermil]

Brought it as a Doom fan but never played it due to it ultimately not looking interesting enough in videos.

[warman2012]

Thanks for the input guys. I think I got the info I needed. You are welcome to post though if any admins are reading, could you lock this thread?

[banjiepixel]

15 minutes ago, xvertigox said:

How would this differ to pwads? If ID wanted to release a new Doom game on idtech1 the best thing they could would be grab people from DW to make it and those people are already releasing content here.

 

Does Sonic Mania differ from romhacks? Yes it does and so would this new retro styled Doom game be able to differ from pwads. Why rely on idtech1 when they could design a completely new retro engine for modern hardware in mind? This could also mean having many advanced modding features being part of that new engine's default "vanilla" features. Something easy to mod, easy to create map for and something easy to maybe even make open source someday.