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

I Think I Finally FIgured Out Why I Hate Plutonia

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Azure_Horror said:

Oh, that stupid room brings back a lot of bad memories... Like, why? Why revenat snipers? Why no cover? Why inescapeble piе? Why so much nonsense at once? 

One of the better traps in Plutonia and it actually brings in actual difficulty. Allowing the players to snipe the Chaingunners like that is sorta of design flaw. If the room make you deal with everything at once, then it will be better. :p

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GarrettChan said:

One of the better traps in Plutonia and it actually brings in actual difficulty. Allowing the players to snipe the Chaingunners like that is sorta of design flaw. If the room make you deal with everything at once, then it will be better. :p

 

Eh, non-cheesable chaingunners only would make a fight more hectic, while adding almost no difficulty increase. You can rocket them ''fairly'' almost as soon as you step on the ring walkway. And they are squishy, unlike mancubi, and present rather easy target, unlike corner revenants. Basically, the non-cheesable chaingunners would only serve to leave additional bad impression on first few failed attempts.

 

As for the fight being ''one of the best traps in Plutonia''... I disagree, but I think, I can see, where are you coming from.

My thoughts about the final Abattoire encounter:

1) In my opinion, this fight is not even a trap. Firstly, there are no immediate danger. Secondly, the monsters are hidden from sight mostly for the sake of making the main part of the fight non-cheesable.

2) The main danger is falling off the walkway. That's it. Even the enemies are dangerous mostly because they complicate the ''not falling into the death pit'' task. Oh, and they can push you off the ledge sometimes.

3) Revenant snipers are very inconsistent. You are scared less of the revenants themselves and more of their potential, so to speak. Basically, there is a small chance that the revs will decide to be evil and launch some nasty pile of heat-seekers at the worst possible moment. But on the average attempt that would not happen. But you still need to pay attention. Thus a risk of getting distracted and falling into the pit.

4) Oh, and revs occasionally hide into the corners from your shots. More circles around the walkway, more chance to fall off.

5) To summarize points 2)-4): this a mobility focused fight, that may be clunky at times, but it tests an unique skill: moving on walkways under pressure.

 

The problems:

I) Problem number one: the preceding part of map09 is focused on Evilution-type gameplay. Basically, the patience is rewarded, while decisive action brings much risk, while offering almost no combat advantage (It offers advantage in speed, but speed is non-crucial for the completion of previous encounters). Thus throwing a very dynamic encounter at the very end throws the player off balance in a non-fun way.

II) Problem number two: the encounter is easy to solve ''theoretically'', but hard to execute. Only unpredictable thing is rev RNG. (which is often annoying, as discussed at points 3) and 4) above). Basically, most of excitement comes from the test of skill. And what skill is being tested? Mainly, the player's ability to peform precise movement under pressure. But that skill is not practiced anythere before. (neither in other IWADs, nor in preceding part of Plutonia, nor in the other parts of map09). This can also throw the player off balance in a bad way.

III) Problem number three: Just the fact that a uniquely tough encounter is placed at the very end of the map can be very annoying. Often, such map design can lull a player into a false sense of security, leading to very inconvenient save placement and additional frustration on failed attempts. The problem is doubled, if the player is determined to play the map mostly or completely saveless. Basically, that fight would be much less annoying, if it happened in the first half of the level.

 

In short, the final fight of Abattoire has both pros and cons. On one hand, it is unique and tightly designed. Some can argue that this fight is one of the earliest examples of a ''modern'' combat setpiece. On the other hand, the encounter is clunky and has a rather unfortunate placement in the context of both the map and the megawad.

 

In conclusion: Final fight of Abattoire has a very cool idea. But I still hate the result. :p

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Azure_Horror said:

Eh, non-cheesable chaingunners only would make a fight more hectic, while adding almost no difficulty increase. You can rocket them ''fairly'' almost as soon as you step on the ring walkway. And they are squishy, unlike mancubi, and present rather easy target, unlike corner revenants. Basically, the non-cheesable chaingunners would only serve to leave additional bad impression on first few failed attempts.

TBH, I don't really care how other players think of if I were making a map. Plutonia is way too easy for today's standards. Though on the other hand, you can't ask too much from a WAD in 1996 due to many limitations.

 

Also, I actually would like to make map that a lot people complain due to being uncomfortable because people don't like to polish their skills. Therefore, the more people said this gives a bad impression of first play, the happier I'm.

Edited by GarrettChan : nice typo about making "can't" into "can" again :P

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GarrettChan said:

TBH, I don't really care how other players think of if I were making a map. Plutonia is way too easy for today's standards. Though on the other hand, you can ask too much from a WAD in 1996 due to many limitations.

 

Also, I actually would like to make map that a lot people complain due to being uncomfortable because people don't like to polish their skills. Therefore, the more people said this gives a bad impression of first play, the happier I'm.

So basically "ur bad"?

That'll be $1.00, cash or credit?

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, GarrettChan said:

TBH, I don't really care how other players think of if I were making a map. Plutonia is way too easy for today's standards. Though on the other hand, you can ask too much from a WAD in 1996 due to many limitations.

 

Also, I actually would like to make map that a lot people complain due to being uncomfortable because people don't like to polish their skills. Therefore, the more people said this gives a bad impression of first play, the happier I'm. 

Do not confuse annoyance with difficulty.

 

Otherwise we should conclude that many doomers lack the skills to properly tackle Habitat from TNT:Evilution.

Because a lot of people complain about that one.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, act said:

So basically "ur bad"?

That'll be $1.00, cash or credit?

Nope, but the thing you're talking about money is way beyond stupid.

 

1 hour ago, Azure_Horror said:

Do not confuse annoyance with difficulty.

I don't feel any annoyance in the last room of Plutonia Map09.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Azure_Horror said:

2) The main danger is falling off the walkway. That's it. Even the enemies are dangerous mostly because they complicate the ''not falling into the death pit'' task. Oh, and they can push you off the ledge sometimes.

 

I'm not too interested in this thread overall, but I do want to point out that this is a valid danger. Whether or not this is the main danger or not is irrelevant; limited space to move is a completely valid way to increase difficulty IMO, as it tests a player's spatial awareness and ability to move accurately across platforms, ledges, narrow areas, etc.

Share this post


Link to post

Some incredibly relevant reading if no one's ran into it yet:

 

https://5years.doomworld.com/interviews/dariocasali/

 

It's over 20 years old now but in it, Doomworld interviews Dario Casali! Particularly relevant is this quote here from the second page:

 

Quote

Plutonia was always meant for people who had finished Doom2 on hard and were looking for a new challenge. I always played through the level I had made on hard, and if I could beat it too easily, I made it harder, so it was a challenge for me. I don't have a lot of sympathy for someone who plays Plutonia on hard skill and complains it's too hard. I had a lot of mail from people who had never even tried the easy skill setting because they "only play on hard". However, if someone does play Plutonia on easy and still finds it too hard, play Evilution through, and you should be ready to play Plutonia...

 

That could be a fairly big reason why the levels are so consistently designed, and why there's such a loose regard of "difficulty progression" starting as early as the first level (revs, archies, chainboys - all there on UV!).

 

I also find it to be tons of fun and a solid way to design a set of levels, but only on a replay; I wouldn't recommend Plutonia UV the first time through anymore than I'd recommend people start Eternal through it's master levels.

 

On 10/31/2021 at 7:52 AM, Senor Cacodemon said:

I like a majority of Plutonia but that ONE part in Map 22 (Impossible Mission) where you get dropped down to 6 CHAINGUNNERS right next to you is a bit infuriating 

 

For me, it's that shotgunner elevator. Same level, too. The chaingunners in the rest of the game did not get me as hard as those three did.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Azure_Horror said:

Do not confuse annoyance with difficulty.

 

Otherwise we should conclude that many doomers lack the skills to properly tackle Habitat from TNT:Evilution.

Because a lot of people complain about that one.

Ah, I thought that people complained about the map overall, not that specific area...or am I missing something here? Also, I laugh in freelook gameplay.

 

Anyway, I don't think that Plutonia deserve the hate. Yeah, it's a valid opinion about its personal endeavour from the megawad, which it's fine. 

Plutonia has indeed some bitching moments...someone mentioned the last area of Abattoire, which I agree to some extent that it's quite a problematic fight for first-timers. Funnily, chaingunners can be kinda cheesed if the player can shoot rockets from afar (yes, the blast can kill them and takes a few rockets). Onslaught has also a few annoying fights, not to mention that Plutonia introduced the archie-reviving tower gimmick that many are not a fan, which are present in maps 15 and 27 (Onslaught has them too but those are hidden behind those chaingunning sectors).

 

But, it also has memorable moments that cemented the wad to be recognized as one of the best, like the classic Hunted map. Also, it was the precursor of the creation of hard maps, like in both of the secret maps, especially Go 2 It.

I honestly don't care much about the story itself with the prototype accelerator and that shit revolving around it. One thing that I must be agreed at some point is that the curve difficulty looks like a ECG wave pattern....goes up, then down, then suddenly goes really up and so on. It doesn't have a steady progression, similar to the likes of Thy Flesh Consumed. But I don't mind that at all, because practicing the set definitely minimizes those weaknesses and have a more concise opinion about the maps. Yes, I know that it has the good old archie-revvie-chaingunguy combo all over but, it's done because of usage reasons and, yes, it's a good combo to screw you up.

 

Basically, Plutonia is a good example to the players to get better on their skills, despite of what shit has in store for you. It tells you to be prepared for the worst and have a satisfactory feeling when you destroy the IoS for good. And, Plutonia is a much better refined product than TNT and Doom 2, which it's why I consider one of the best IWADs, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/31/2021 at 10:24 AM, rzh said:

People who don't appreciate traps probably don't like Hexen either

I don't like Plutonia because of the traps but I love HeXen, even if I get lost or get mad because of a switch behind a statue that I didn't see

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, BGrieber said:
Quote

I had a lot of mail from people who had never even tried the easy skill setting because they "only play on hard".

I apologize for the double post, but I feel this is very important to point out. There should be no shame on playing on lower skill levels, even if the ""default"" is UV and the mayority of players play on hard. So yeah, imo it's a bit stupid when you see people complaining that a wad is too hard when they play on UV or even NM, when, effectively, it's the HARD difficulty setting, it's MEANT TO BE HARD.

I've seen this happen in some games too, for example, Friday Night Funkin, most of the time you'll see people playing only in Hard

Spoiler

Like, seriously, that's why the game offers a selection of skill levels. If it's too hard, you can always lower the difficulty a bit.

Now, I understand that sometimes games can become easy the longer you play them and develop some skill, and that beating games in hard is a prove of skills, but if it's the first time you play something and HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA of what you have to do, you should play in a lower skill level to know the game, develop some skill and then tackle hard. But in the end, you have the final word, it's you're choice after all.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/31/2021 at 9:19 AM, Mr. Freeze said:

sorry but hating Plutonia keeps you out of the Cool Doomers Club I don't make the rules 

 

Thats because you don't know about the much cooler underground Club that likes Evilution.

Because liking Plutonia is Mainstream, liking Evilution makes you a underground Badass.

 

On 10/31/2021 at 5:10 AM, act said:

The key to the issue at hand is progression. Plutonia doesn't feel like it's going anywhere. There's a minor difficulty spike between Map01 and Map05, but for the entire game it's just a slog. And to some that may be appealing; to me that's a dealbreaker. When I play a game, and it's difficult, I'd like to see it get harder. Plutonia can be easily described as "Thirty (Two) levels of Chaingunner-Revenent-Archvile Theater" and that's where I find my problem lies. What's the actual difference between Map09 and Map25? None. The game doesn't progress or go anywhere, it gives me no reason to carry on, and loses it's fun factor quickly because I realize it can't get any harder without leaning into the territory of "Complete Bullshit."

 

Hm i've seen also the Deathtraps and its Trial and Error Nature as biggest Annoiance, but what you discribe truly adds to what makes Plutonia a bad Addon.

Thats also why i would not call it hard.

You really have to like that Trial and Error Design, i personally want to feel some kind of Progression, to explore a Enviroment and have fun Fights.

 

 

22 hours ago, Yumheart said:


I mean, Doom has a save feature and most "hard" wads have fights that rely on the player dying a few times and having to figure out a strategy.
Think of Sunlust, Combat Shock 2 or even just the later third of Scythe 2 or even Ancient Aliens.

 

Doom 64 has also such Traps, but spread over the whole Campaign, so that it is annoying for that Moment, but not defining the whole Feeling of the Game.

They managed much better what good Game Design is.

 

So said, have to add this Picture on such Topics:

 

PlutoniaNutShell.png.a3f829df546bee3ddb31ee153664c2d1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Doom 64 has also such Traps, but spread over the whole Campaign, so that it is annoying for that Moment, but not defining the whole Feeling of the Game.

They managed much better what good Game Design is.


I would argue that combat-related puzzly trial and error isn't really something bad in the context of a game like doom, a game that lets you save before every fight if you wish to do so. But that's just up to preference of course, if you're letting your pride get bruised by dying a few times figuring things out, then it might be better if you play easier mapsets. That said, many wads nowadays rely on the sort of fight where you have to come up with some kind of attack plan, so I feel like it's better to have a more open-minded approach on fights in doom, otherwise you might lock yourself out of many awesome experiences.
None of this is mean-spirited btw, just my 100% non-authoritative thoughts on the topic :3

Edited by Yumheart

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Yumheart said:

I would argue that trial and error isn't really something bad in the context of a game like doom

I'm not really following this conversation, but I think it depends on what is meant by "trial and error". Some experimentation, AKA multiple trials and errors, will help solve pretty much any puzzle, so it goes without saying that it isn't bad to have gameplay where trial and error is rewarded to some extent. What would be bad, though, is if the player is forced to choose from 20 identical doors, going through 19 of them just instantly kills the player, and one wins the map. There's no hint or logic that can improve the odds of a correct answer from someone who lacks foreknowledge, so there's simply no choice but to try random doors until one of them works. Most complaints of "trial and error gameplay" in Doom are referring to situations that don't resemble this at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Pseudonaut said:

I'm not really following this conversation, but I think it depends on what is meant by "trial and error". Some experimentation, AKA multiple trials and errors, will help solve pretty much any puzzle, so it goes without saying that it isn't bad to have gameplay where trial and error is rewarded to some extent. What would be bad, though, is if the player is forced to choose from 20 identical doors, going through 19 of them just instantly kills the player, and one wins the map. There's no hint or logic that can improve the odds of a correct answer from someone who lacks foreknowledge, so there's simply no choice but to try random doors until one of them works. Most complaints of "trial and error gameplay" in Doom are referring to situations that don't resemble this at all.


You're correct of course, I'll try to phrase myself better.

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, Yumheart said:

I would argue that combat-related puzzly trial and error isn't really something bad in the context of a game like doom, a game that lets you save before every fight if you wish to do so.

 

7 minutes ago, Pseudonaut said:

Some experimentation, AKA multiple trials and errors, will help solve pretty much any puzzle, so it goes without saying that it isn't bad to have gameplay where trial and error is rewarded to some extent.

 

I'm with this. Unless you're trying to single segment runs, you can basically save however you want. I don't mind people save-scumming in order to learn the map, or reduced the wasted time on a hard fight, but a bit of trying your tactics on a hard fight is basically how most of the maps are done, especially good slaughter maps. Sometimes I don't really get why new games forced the player to use checkpoint instead of save whenever you like. Probably it's just extending the play time of the game or something.

 

Again, trying to extend my topic about "uncomfortable" a bit further. People are way too used to cover shooting in Doom, and whenever the design is not like this, it gives quite a lot of uncomfortable feeling, namely the last room of Plutonia Map09 and the whole Plutonia Map15, where you need to constantly running around without too much (or no) cover, and these somewhat challenge your movement skill. Therefore, I get a lot of people will complain about this, but if you just consider this being bad or annoying solely due to being uncomfortable, then I probably can't say too much more about it.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Azure_Horror said:

Do not confuse annoyance with difficulty.
 

Otherwise we should conclude that many doomers lack the skills to properly tackle Habitat from TNT:Evilution.

Because a lot of people complain about that one.

Nice try there with the false equivalence, but nobody who has played either map is going to buy into that one...

 

You'd be surprised about the kinds of things people get "annoyed" by, just because they can't figure something out in whichever time-frame their patience - or lack thereof - dictates that something would need to be possible to figure out, because else said thing qualifies as "bullshit"...

 

 

Not related to the quote above, but rather this thread as a whole:

 

So here's one for all you folks who like to invoke some sense of authority by way of throwing the ever-so-hollow "this is good/bad game design" around: If the goal of a fight, just any given fight, is to stay difficult in some capacity, in particular if we're going under the assumption that the player knows what's ahead, then it always comes at the expense of accessibility to some degree - with the hardest of setpieces out there being tuned up such that players are practically forced to dissect said setpieces over the course of several attempts prior to being able to formulate a reliable strategy. This, however, has nothing to do with trial and error in the same sense that navigating a maze blindfolded would be trial and error, unless you lack the tactical and analytical faculties to assess how to best deal with the problem you are presented with...

 

I know it's nice to dream of the ever-so-elusive, super-accessible, yet incredibly difficult fight that nobody's ever managed to create to everybody's satisfaction, but there's a good reason why it doesn't exist "objectively speaking", and if you think it exists, then it exists only according to your very own, entirely subjective metrics - none of which have any bearing on how well-designed something is or isn't...

 

If you want to talk about how some WAD out there goes beyond the boundaries of what you consider challenging, into the realms of frustration, that's fair game... And nobody's going to knock for you saying straight up that something just isn't your cup of tea... But the moment you inflate your own preferences to a metric by which to measure how well-designed any given product out there is, you're choosing an extremely indefensible hill to die on - and die on it you will, because nothing in plutonia (or the vast majority of PWADs out there) rates so high on the "you have to win the RNG-lottery to survive this one scale" that any case you might be able to make could ever hope to hold up to any manner of well-informed scrutiny...

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

and how many of scythe's maps did our self-proclaimed "scythe enjoyer" beat on their first attempt, hm..?

Again, a good enough player should be able to beat a level first try with enough effort in a perfect world. I never said Scythe was perfect or that I'm a good enough player.

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Spineapple tea said:

Again, a good enough player should be able to beat a level first try with enough effort in a perfect world. I never said Scythe was perfect or that I'm a good enough player.

It's safe to say that top players certainly could survive the ending of Plutonia map 9 first try, provided they arrive there with sufficient health. I see no reason why someone couldn't infer that the chaigunners are top priority, fire some rockets at them to take them out, survive for a bit on the ledge while clearing out the sides and go for the mega and rockets that open up and are clearly visible. I have no idea why you would go for that switch anyway; there's nothing obvious about it that implies it needs to be hit right away, just dealing with the monsters first then pressing it seems like it would be a natural play even first try.

 

That said, Doom's RNG is such that there's never a clear 100% success rate at anything; with sufficiently aggressive strats or bad RNG or bad starting health, you could die in Doom's E1M1 on UV, and on the flipside survive some of the toughest encounters, so by this standard, no level will ever exhibit good game design.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, 4shockblast said:

*stuff about RNG

Exactly. Decino's video reveals some very interesting details. Plus, sometimes even on the easiest levels the bullets hit more often.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Spineapple tea said:

Again, a good enough player should be able to beat a level first try with enough effort in a perfect world.

No... and the reason I say no right here is the very same reason why people who try to bludgeon discussions to death with "good game design" get a no from me as well... That's an arbitrary standard, and it's an utterly stupid one at that for reasons including but not limited to what 4shock already pointed out...

 

You name any "good game" you want, and you're going to be hard-pressed to find someone who beat it on their first try, without using continues, and is able to deliver some tangible evidence, for that matter... (and no, SimCity, the Sims, or other games without explicit fail states don't count)

 

Example: Hades is a "good game", and yet the vast, vast majority of people didn't beat it on their first try... In fact, if you own that game, start a fresh save file, and see if you're able to beat the game on the very first attempt with the added advantage of knowing what to expect...

 

Next example: SunLust is a "good WAD", even an award winning one at that, and yet not even the best players this community can pride itself with did manage to beat each and every map first try, certainly not as far as I'm aware...

 

Yet another example: Eviternity is a "good WAD" according to how many people mention it as one of the must-plays, it also won an award, and yet I don't know of any person who was able to beat each and every map first try, and we can safely assume that the vast majority of people did not accomplish this feat - good enough players most likely included (in fact, it took a good enough player lots of hours worth of attempts to beat the whole megaWAD deathless in a single sitting, with the advantage of playing continuous and knowing each and every map like the proverbial back of their hand)...

 

As an aside, if you yourself realize that you're not a good enough player, then who are you to estimate what a good enough player should or shouldn't be capable of..?

 

Basically, screw your standards and what you think should or shouldn't be possible in classic doom for people other than yourself...

Edited by Nine Inch Heels

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Spineapple tea said:

Again, a good enough player should be able to beat a level first try with enough effort in a perfect world. I never said Scythe was perfect or that I'm a good enough player.

 

I have no doubt that a "good enough" player, one with absolute peak of reaction time, awareness, aim, intelligence and movement skill would be able to beat any map in Plutonia on their first try, "unfair" traps or no. Unfortunately, even the greatest players aren't at the height of human ability to play Doom (or just about any other game), so that's not exactly something we can verify :p

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, BGrieber said:

It's over 20 years old now but in it, Doomworld interviews Dario Casali! Particularly relevant is this quote here from the second page:

 

Yeah, this is a really good point. If you're complaining about something being too hard on UV (for reasons that are actually affected by difficulty level, that is, which I think applies to Plutonia's difficulty), try HMP or HNTR. The difficulty settings exist for a reason, and Plutonia implements them pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post

I love how everyone has to make this conversation into "Plutonia too hard!?!?"

Like every post on Page 2 is just "Guyz plutonia hard!!!" "NOOOOO plutonia FAIR" "PLUTONIA GOOD!" "NO PLUTONIA BAD BECAUSE HARD!"

I don't care about it's difficulty. I'm fine with hard games, with challenges, things that task me with achieving. The problem is that, let me reiterate to everyone here:

PLUTONIA LACKS ANY PROGRESSION. THAT'S ITS FUNDAMENTAL, FATAL FLAW. NOT THE "DIFFICULTY."

If I randomly warp to any level in Plutonia, and beat it, I've then basically beaten every single Plutonia map. If the Casali bros took advantage of the 4 splash screens in Doom 2 and used that as a way to make the levels ease into the hardest of Plutonia, then I'd love it. It'd slowly warm up as it goes from "Doom 2's Hardest" to "Thy Flesh Consumed" to "Damn, this is Hard" to "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA". That'd be awesome. But no, Plutonia shows it's hand and - pardon my vulgarity - blows its load way too early to be enjoyed. I can't have fun with it, because it just goes "Yup, that's everything" after the first 10 maps or so.

And that's why I believe most people like Plutonia to fit in. It's a one-trick pony, prancing around yelling "I'M DIFFICULT XD". I'm personally sick of it. Again, in an alternate universe where the Casali bros decided that difficulty curves could be taken easy advantage of, especially considering the fact that they designed to be hard to themselves. That just simplifies balancing, because now they just have to worry about making it easy for them to beat, to making it hard for them to beat. They don't need to worry about the psychology and individual skill of players; they just could base it from themselves. But they didn't, and they made a 32 map slog of Chaingunner-Revenant-Archvile theatre.

Share this post


Link to post

The progression on Ep4 is the best out of all the IWADs obviously.

 

/s

 

Yet, many fair points are thrown here, but someone is just keeping eyes on "oh, you said I'm bad? You owe me $1" kind of deal.

Share this post


Link to post

Those beautiful chaingunners, that smile they give to you when they shoot. You can always download this but read the reviews first, hah.

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, GarrettChan said:

The progression on Ep4 is the best out of all the IWADs obviously.

 

/s

 

Yet, many fair points are thrown here, but someone is just keeping eyes on "oh, you said I'm bad? You owe me $1" kind of deal.

Can you please give me a good list of the "fair points"

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, act said:

PLUTONIA LACKS ANY PROGRESSION. THAT'S ITS FUNDAMENTAL, FATAL FLAW. NOT THE "DIFFICULTY." 

 

It is when it's concerning which level of difficulty. The interview is an admittance that the 'hard' difficulty (I'm assuming he means "Ultra Violence" here) was curved more to his want and skill level and less of a general one. Not Too Rough and Hurt Me Plenty have been much better about maintaining progression.

 

Since Dario's been a bit active here as of late, I wonder if there's a chance he can comment on or clarify any of this?

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, act said:

And that's why I believe most people like Plutonia to fit in.

What? That barely makes sense. I am very doubtful that there are many people around forcing themselves to like an ancient megawad for... status? You see people saying they don't like Plutonia like, all the damn time here. Look at this thread! And if anyone is professing their love of Plutonia through grit teeth, they should probably stop because rather than getting an in with the aging fans of a 30 year old game, there are much more productive and lucrative things to be faking it for. It's how I'm gainfully employed!

 

You only get to speak for yourself, don't pretend you understand anyone else's motivations. You say you can't have fun with it because of the progression? Sure, that's completely valid. But you're saying that most people agree with you whether they know it or not based entirely on the fact that you personally don't like it. Really insulting to a lot of people's intelligence!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, act said:

I love how everyone has to make this conversation into "Plutonia too hard!?!?"

Like every post on Page 2 is just "Guyz plutonia hard!!!" "NOOOOO plutonia FAIR" "PLUTONIA GOOD!" "NO PLUTONIA BAD BECAUSE HARD!"

I don't care about it's difficulty. I'm fine with hard games, with challenges, things that task me with achieving. The problem is that, let me reiterate to everyone here:

PLUTONIA LACKS ANY PROGRESSION. THAT'S ITS FUNDAMENTAL, FATAL FLAW. NOT THE "DIFFICULTY."

 

seems like you're misunderstanding your own thread.

 

one commenter disagreed with your comment that you can't get harder than Plutonia without getting into "bullshit difficulty" -- a fair thing to disagree about. 

 

another (NIH) remarked that you had to contextualize Plutonia relative to its era and gave reasons it might make sense for the wad to have no difficulty curve. whether you agree with those points or not, the implication is basically the opposite of "ur bad" -- it's that you're a modern player who feels the limitations of the flat difficulty curve because you're better than they were back in 1996.

 

then there's also a whole bunch of people talking about Plutonia's difficulty because they are talking about why they might not like Plutonia, and so a discussion broke out about that. GarrettChan's response was to someone else. if you want a thread to stick to one narrow subject, you do have to be more specific with your title and with defining the parameters of the discussion. this OP feels like an invitation to slightly more general discussion.

 

your OP even got a lot of 'likes' -- not that those mean a lot, but it's an amount that usually isn't reached when everyone feels you're making a bad point. 

 

I get the sense you were so primed for the "ur bad" responses that you're reading them where they didn't exist. would take a short breather imo. it would be a shame to derail your own thread lol. 

Share this post


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