Do people actually hate the DLCs?

[The Doommer]

I haven't played them at all after I finished the main game

However I keep hearing in the forums that TAG2 at least is something that people hate?

 

Why would that be the case?

[Metal_Slayer]

6 hours ago, The Doommer said:

However I keep hearing in the forums that TAG2 at least is something that people hate?

It's boring, the new enemies, the levels, the music, the new weapon and specially the final boss are all boring.

They made the mistake of promising all of the DLC would come out before the 1 year anniversary, as a result, all of the new enemies turned out to be reskins of existing enemies but with some kind of gimmick attached to them, the last level is literally Urdak with a red coat of paint, the new weapon is also a reskin, but the real problem is how it seems like they didn't balanced the combat with it in mind. Other than the asset recycling, the design of the levels is the most linear the game has ever been and the pacing is similar to the middle levels of the base campaign.
What made people mad were the expectations that the first DLC set for everyone, part 2 seems like they just got all of the things people didn't liked about part 1 and extended it through all the levels.

[chemo]

9 minutes ago, Metal_Slayer said:

the new weapon is also a reskin

How on earth does the hammer/hellbreaker qualify as a reskin?

[gwain]

10 hours ago, Metal_Slayer said:

It's boring, the new enemies, the levels, the music, the new weapon and specially the final boss are all boring.

doom2 in a nutshell

[Azuris]

14 hours ago, The Doommer said:

I haven't played them at all after I finished the main game

However I keep hearing in the forums that TAG2 at least is something that people hate?

 

Why would that be the case?

 

I loved the Maingame and was brutally obsessed by it, the DLCs killed that Obsession.

 

What i liked about TAG1: The Spirits.

 

My Complaints in TAG1:

Level Design has some Flaws, invisible Walls hinder you to jump to Places you should go on the intented Way.

Some Areas are to crumped and make Battles hard because you can't move, some give you way to much Space and make Battles very easy.

They included very much Stuff to annoy you, be it that you can literally see anything, while at the same Time include explosive respawning Stuff and throwing Enemies at you.

The Battles are very exhausting, not because they are so much harder, more because they feel like you are working in a Shop and after a long Day, a Group of Customers are entering five Minutes before Closer.

They killed some Tactics to kill the Maurodeur, at the same Time he seems weaker and has that annoying Bird Sound.

The Blood Mayker is annoying.

Overall they throw just Stuff in only to be killed in one exactly Way or to annoy you somehow by slowing you down as an Example.

 

Including Tag 2 now:

More annoying Enemies, i stopped playing after i met that one that you can only kill with a Blood Punch and hinders you to make anything until you killed it.

They nerved down the exhausting Battles, but now they feel to easy.

 

They just don't have the same Feel for what was Fun in the Maingame.

There truly is only a small C Team behind it.

 

Overall:

Doom 2016 and Eternal are Doom 1 and 2.

Tag 1 and 2 are Plutonia.

 

Sadly no TNT Equivalent.

[whatup876]

I think it's important to acknowledge that these expansions were made under a year one pass thingy and stuff like COVID and that one Texas storm.

Most of the complaints i usually see are:

• Some enemy models being reskinned except for exceptions like the Armored Baron and maybe the Riot Soldier.
• Cursed Prowler, even though i always thought Doom could use a poison enemy but that's me.
• Immora troopers being a non-threat. (and i guess how they're not using a more demonic armor from 2016 MP)
• Maybe the Stone Imp reminded people of the "gun exclusivity" aspect and they didn't like that.
• And the overall direction of the story/lore/art direction; Immora being a red tech city instead of looking Hellish.
• Dark Lord being the real God all along.
• The mere fact he looked like evil Doomguy instead of some monstrous entity bigger than the IOS and like those guys we saw in the concept art.
• Evil Doomguy making people expect a real "rival fight" but instead it was "Marauder in a mech". this one specifically feel like they took an idea prevelant in some games but didn't go with it.
• Maybe some lore nitpick stuff like "Doomguy had to find the portal of Divum to get to Immora but then his Sentinel buddies somehow got there, even though they're a near extinct civilization" or something.
• And difficulty stuff, specially with how they updated TAG1 afterwards.

There's probably more, even if they're not really "good reasons" but everyone has theirs.

Credit where is due, they finally added something for the levels to Meathook with.

And the Hammer is honestly more interesting than the Crucible, if anything.

There's still a sense of effort and work put into an expansion that probably could have been something else but a "series finale".

 

It's still not the worst expansion in the world and not even close.

Realistically, it's more in a "mmm, i don't know" area.

[BGreener]

I can’t recall if I got burnt out from the game by that point or if I just didn’t enjoy the second DLC, seeing as I only made it halfway through it. I do know I wasn’t a fan of the environments and most of the new enemy types felt uninspired. Like the chainsaw and crucible, I’m also fairly indifferent to the hammer.

 

We’ll see how I feel about it in another year or two.

[igg]

I don't hate the DLCs and enjoyed both of them, but the broke the main game for me :-(

 

My main complaint is the story:

• Doom 1, Doom 2, Doom 3, Doom 2016, Doom Eternal are all about an epic fight of a space marine against the root of all evil.
• TAG 1 & 2 downsized the story to a family conflict of some ancient beings. In some interview Hugo Martin said something like the Dark Lord is a primeval but there are other primeval who made him. Overall the story reminds me of Greek religion.
• TAG 1 forced you to kill Vega. This was a major disappointment. 

[The Doommer]

15 hours ago, gwain said:

doom2 in a nutshell

Hard disagree

Final boss was surely boring imo but nah not the rest

 

3 hours ago, igg said:

TAG 1 forced you to kill Vega.

So did 2016, but 2016 had you back him up

So yeah ig that sucks

 

7 hours ago, whatup876 said:

Dark Lord being the real God all along.

Haven't played it but it sounds like a cool concept on paper

 

8 hours ago, Azuris said:

Tag 1 and 2 are Plutonia.

That would be a compliment if anything

 

[whatup876]

1 hour ago, The Doommer said:

Haven't played it but it sounds like a cool concept on paper

You know how Eternal reveals that VEGA is the Father? TAG1 expands on him with some codex pages, then TAG2 has pages that are like "hey everything you read before is a lie, here's how it really happened".

Then there's a cutscene in the middle of the DL boss fight where he gets VEGA to admit the truth.

So in a way, Doomguy kills God.

 

Some disliked this because it goes against the "Doom is the most Christian game", though the minute that Urdak and Maykrs were introduced, Doom stop being about traditional religious references.

But it's the kind of idea that most people would probably dislike, regardless of execution.

[The Doommer]

6 minutes ago, whatup876 said:

then TAG2 has pages that are like "hey everything you read before is a lie, here's how it really happened".

That seems like a bad retcon if anything

 

Then again, gotta see for myself

[Metal_Slayer]

18 hours ago, chemo said:

How on earth does the hammer/hellbreaker qualify as a reskin?

The model is on the base campaign with a NPC

[Azuris]

2 hours ago, The Doommer said:

That would be a compliment if anything

 

 

I choosed it by purpose, as Plutonias Style of Play and Progress is very dividing, so is the DLC for Eternal.

 

39 minutes ago, whatup876 said:

.Some disliked this because it goes against the "Doom is the most Christian game", though the minute that Urdak and Maykrs were introduced, Doom stop being about traditional religious references.

But it's the kind of idea that most people would probably dislike, regardless of execution.

 

I think it would have been better to leave Stuff just in the Dark, to let Hell be an abstract undiscribeable Place, let the Codex Stuff add to the Mistery, but don't take it away by explaining every Piece of Lore.

Something many Artists have to learn.

 

I ever loved the Scenario in Doom, the Future, everything is High Tech, but than a Portal to Hell, something so Medival breaks lose and all the Technology doesn't help against this abstract Force.

[The Doommer]

25 minutes ago, Azuris said:

don't take it away by explaining every Piece of Lore.

There's like an spectrum on the lore explanation in games

 

Games like FNaF has a mess of a lore that it's really hard to piece everything together

 

Then some games explain everything and ruin the mystery

 

I feel like it should be in the middle

[chemo]

16 minutes ago, Metal_Slayer said:

The model is on the base campaign with a NPC

Taking a world model and turning it into a usable weapon with completely unique animations and functionality isn't a simple process, nor does it count as a "reskin" because it's not a mere variant of a pre-existing item.

 

Does the model count as a re-used asset? By definition, yes, but if you're making an expansion and want to add a previously unusable weapon to the player's arsenal, why the hell should you bother re-doing the assets completely from scratch if they look fine already?

[The Doommer]

45 minutes ago, chemo said:

re-used asset?

I don't get why people think reusing assets is bad

 

It's a DLC not a new game

 

Half Life 2 EP 1, 2 used the exact same gun models bruh

[chemo]

33 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

I don't get why people think reusing assets is bad

 

It's a DLC not a new game

 

Half Life 2 EP 1, 2 used the exact same gun models bruh

By extension, the base DOOM Eternal itself has a number of assets reused from DOOM 2016 and even Quake Champions.

 

And you know what, who cares? The things they did reuse still look perfectly fine and time and resources were better spent on other aspects of the game.

[Chezza]

As I played the DLCs more, I've grown to prefer them over the primary campaign levels.

 

My theory on why people don't like the DLCs also relates to my criticism of Doom Eternal. Poor pacing in difficulty curve and enforced way of playing. The game was built around the peak of player performance and yet there are a lot of mechanics to learn that aren't common in other FPS, so little familiarity. Even Doom 2016 veterans would have to retrain their muscle memory. And how does the game teach the player? With a bunch of annoying tutorials interrupting the flow and then we're chucked in the deep end.

 

The DLCs pushes the mechanics even further. If you didn't learn to move fast, weapon swap frequently, track your resources, master all your weapons / tools and in particular know what specific weapons / mods to use against specific enemies, you're going to get obliterated. So those who didn't catch on or agree with Eternal's style to begin with would have the "negative" aspects amplified.

 

Personally I love how Eternal plays as I've hit that "fun zone" and appreciate the end result, but I don't think it's an accessible, well paced game.

Edited July 23, 2022 by Chezza

[Metal_Slayer]

When developers don't have enough time to make new assets for a DLC they should at least try to compensate that by improving the level design to a degree that isn't seen on the base game, TAG 2 just has the same boring design of the more linear levels of the game plus new problems.

[whatup876]

13 hours ago, Azuris said:

I think it would have been better to leave Stuff just in the Dark, to let Hell be an abstract undiscribeable Place, let the Codex Stuff add to the Mistery, but don't take it away by explaining every Piece of Lore. 

Something many Artists have to learn. 

To me, it's also because of the audience Doom has, where Doomguy HAS to be the strongest character and the series must be the most heavy metal series and so on...

It kinda makes me question whether or not they are aware of other media and how it portrays Hell.

Like, if people really wanted Doomguy to be so powerful, they would have been more critical or certain decisions in terms of lore, art or even gameplay.

Some being to make Hell stronger, to make Doomguy stronger.

 

Specially when you look at wads or fanart that were unofficially "expanding" or "exploring" the series, with crazy designs and ideas.

To be, the starting point was the UAC being responsible for cybernetic demons, when Hell having tech and the SKINTEK wall texture are unique aspects of Doom's Hell.

Doom's Hell probably has a lot of potential to be stranger.

 

The minute people started to compare TAG2 to MCU Avengers also made me question something about people imagining Doomguy beating Thanos: do they imagine the same with other characters?

And i mean Thanos as if some modern nerd where to rank how strong characters are and use Thanos as a reference for a certain line: "if X can cross this line, they are really strong"

It could also say something about the new generation of fans or the era Doom is made in.

[The Doommer]

12 hours ago, Chezza said:

With a bunch of annoying tutorials interrupting the the flow and then we're chucked in the deep end.

 

You can disable those...

 

12 hours ago, Chezza said:

So those who didn't catch on or agree with Eternal's style to begin with would have the "negative" aspects amplified.

I don't think devs make DLCs for people who don't like Eternal's style

 

And in general, usually DLCs aren't made for people who aren't a fan of a game

 

That's just bad reasoning

[Chezza]

30 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

You can disable those...

The option to switch tutorials off is irrelevant. I'm referring to how the game teaches the player the core mechanics in order to play effectively and by correlation, enjoyably. When done perfectly, the player doesn't even realise they've been taught the basics.

 

 

30 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

I don't think devs make DLCs for people who don't like Eternal's style

 

And in general, usually DLCs aren't made for people who aren't a fan of a game

 

That's just bad reasoning

True, and I'm convinced in this case id software developed the DLCs in favour of the experienced Eternal fans, but again you may be missing my point.

 

I'm implying that the below average introduction to Eternal's core mechanics, coupled by a higher difficulty curve has hindered many player's adoption, which in turn renders the game more difficult and causing frustration. I think there are many who really wanted to like Eternal but struggled to complete the game and got burned out or straight out given up by DLC 1, which at that point ramps up the challenges and need for core mechanic mastery.

[The Doommer]

4 minutes ago, Chezza said:

I think there are many who really wanted to like Eternal but struggled to complete the game and got burned out or straight out given up by DLC 1, which at that point ramps up the challenges and need for core mechanic mastery.

Is the game that hard on lower difficulties?

4 minutes ago, Chezza said:

the below average introduction to Eternal's core mechanics

The thing with Eternal is imo, that it fully accepts the fact that's it's a game

And so it doesn't want to integrate a story mission to teach you the basics

I'm not saying tutorial missions are inherently bad, just feels like Eternal wanted a different approach

[Chezza]

18 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

Is the game that hard on lower difficulties?

 

It's subjective, but I would say in comparison to many other FPS it's notably more difficult even in easy. Watch easy playthroughs from casual gamers, game journalists and even the John Romero and you'll see how they fail to follow the core mechanics. Lack of chainsaw for ammo, not using equipment, missing all secrets, struggle to shoot enemy weak spots, poor weapon choice for specific enemy types etc. Often they didn't digest the teaching the many tutorials were trying to tell them, hence they lagged behind and just played... so terribly.

 

18 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

The thing with Eternal is imo, that it fully accepts the fact that's it's a game

And so it doesn't want to integrate a story mission to teach you the basics

I'm not saying tutorial missions are inherently bad, just feels like Eternal wanted a different approach

I agree and I respect how knows it's a game and priorities gameplay over long stories. But it doesn't have to be a story or dedicated mission, rather subtle encounters that sets the player up to use a specific core mechanic to warm up to it.

 

If you have 7 minutes spare I encourage you to watch this youtube video about how games can implement an effective tutorial. Doom Eternal hasn't followed many of their recommendations.

 

 

[The Doommer]

4 minutes ago, Chezza said:

game journalists

Game journalists can't follow a cuphead tutorial, they don't count

 

5 minutes ago, Chezza said:

the John Romero

I watched his stream, and while he did seem to struggle initially, he did pretty well

 

I do understand your point, I guess the game is done harder than other mainstream games but that's not really a bad thing

Otherwise Dark Souls would be regarded as a bad game rather than a loved one

 

7 minutes ago, Chezza said:

Doom Eternal hasn't followed many of their recommendations.

Are they recorded by experienced game devs?

Cause unless it's a gaming principle it doesn't have to

 

 

[Hitboi]

44 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

Are they recorded by experienced game devs?

They have a lot of game design-related videos, I'm not sure if they are experienced game devs but they make good points that I, a non-game dev can understand.
 

45 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

Cause unless it's a gaming principle it doesn't have to

That video was about designing a good tutorial, by "gaming principle" game tutorials usually don't have much of a "fun" value where game design into them really matters, they are about learning the player how to do stuff, that's it. At least from how I view it.
 

50 minutes ago, The Doommer said:

Game journalists can't follow a cuphead tutorial, they don't count

lol, I remember that Cuphead clip where the journalist was figuring out how to jump and dash at the same time
 

15 hours ago, The Doommer said:

I don't get why people think reusing assets is bad

What? Who told you that? Doom II reuses a lot of assets (this is probably unarguable) from Doom 1 and there are a lot of people who love Doom II.

[The Doommer]

1 hour ago, Hitboi said:

What? Who told you that?

If you scroll up to the first few post it seems some of the complaints were assets being reused

 

1 hour ago, Hitboi said:

the journalist

The same guy who was acting like an idiot when playing Doom Eternal

The same exact person

 

That's why I never care about what they think

 

1 hour ago, Hitboi said:

by "gaming principle" game tutorials usually don't have much of a "fun" value where game design into them really matters

Ig you're right, not a game dev myself

[Mr Masker]

I found the new enemies tedious to fight. The dumb weakpoint timing on those angel guys, and whoever invented the spirit enemy should be put on trial for warcrimes against my Doom Eternal. I only played the first DLC but I think that, and the mixed review score was enough to disuade me. Also the evil doom guy looks like a Wattpad OC.

[Rudolph]

2 hours ago, The Doommer said:

Game journalists can't follow a cuphead tutorial, they don't count

That was just one individual. Get over it already.

[The Doommer]

1 minute ago, Rudolph said:

That was just one individual. Get over it already.

What about the guy who was whining about the Tyrant in the room on one of the DLCs

When there was a really easy way to kill his ass

 

Also cuphead tutorial guy is the same person who struggled to play Doom Eternal, so it is pretty relevant.

 

There may be good journalists here and there but most suck