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

Do people actually hate the DLCs?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, hybridial said:

I get other people don't care for it but what else can id do but look at the reactions and make their choice.

 

That's why I'm interested to see how they handle their next shooter, be it a new Doom or Quake or otherwise. Maybe they've learned a thing or two after Eternal's development and will have a better idea how to make their mechanics more approachable and fun without hurting the ceiling.

 

Funnily enough, I didn't make it far into 2016 the first time through. After loving Eternal I went back to revisit 2016...and honestly? I think that first quarter of it is the closest to the modern "Doom" I've been wanting. Love that early chunk of level exploration, there was even a moment I had a roaming hell knight running through the foundry.

Share this post


Link to post

2016 and DE play nothing like Classic Doom but at 2016 at least tried to ape it. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Quasar said:

Earlier you said it was designed for Doom fans. If somebody can't levy criticism against it because of its higher skill cap while being a Doom fan, who bought it because it said "Doom" on it, that seems like a contradiction to me. If you're trying to say you can't be a Doom fan without liking Eternal, that's just gatekeeping. I know so many Doom fans who like it a lot less than I do and won't ever play it again, while I have over 200 hours in it but feel that qualifies me to talk about its weaknesses, not just heap praise on it unconditionally.

 

I play on ITYTD normally just because it's the most enjoyable to me. I have finished HMP without much problems, but UV was not even doable for me without farming extra lives through replays and that point it seemed like "what's the point?". I tried Nightmare for the hell of it because I do like to challenge myself, up to a point. I got to Cultist Base without dying once, and then burned 20 lives in a row on a single encounter where I just kept getting sniped out of the air by imps from all the way across the map. No amount of "learning experiences" are going to make me better at this game at this point, so that's my POV on it. It requires teenager reflexes to become that proficient and I'm 42, not 14. However at least id Software sees fit to provide these skill levels, which is what sets them apart from the competition. Otherwise I wouldn't have the overall positive opinion I do have of the game.

 

I'm not sure why it bothers you that much if somebody has a negative opinion of it, though. It surely can't detract from your own enjoyment; it seems like there's this false idea that everybody has to agree something is good or else it's ruined for everybody.

ok, sincere apologies from me. now it makes sense: i have to remember that i'm not discussing this with people around my age. i'm way younger than you, i understand now. i absolutely adore this game, and want as many people to enjoy for what it is as possible. it's a masterfully crafted, perfectly polished experience, and i'd hate for someone to dislike it.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, hybridial said:

I couldn't disagree with a statement more, in fact I'll go one further. Doom Eternal is the game Doom 2016 is a half finished prototype for. Doom 2016 is the one on reflection I don't really like. I found it shockingly dull, it took me a calendar year to even finish the thing. And I really was left wondering why I felt this way because up front it seems like an amazing modern interpretation of Doom. But it's not. I think Doom 2016 is a massive departure from classic Doom, but one with only half realised ideas for new mechanics, and I think more egregiously, an extremely wishy washy approach to level design, where sometimes things were more open but it felt a bit pointless, most of the time it was linear.

 

I have to agree with this. I don't think 2016 is a bad game at all, but it's nothing like the classic games. The game doesn't have the chops to justify its' length - Weapons are largely too similar in application which makes switching between them feel not so much a meaningful decision so much as wanting to see a different particle effect appear as the monster turns into pink mist. Enemies are not dangerous enough, so target prioritization and diverse movement patterns are largely irrelevant. Levels are not holistic as in the old games and instead are partitioned into set piece battles where you're always supplied with whatever you need.

 

If I had to describe 2016, it would be not as a return to form but a simulacrum of oldschool FPS games, filtered through two decades of pop culture and internet memes. All noise and violence but not much in the way of real substance. Strip away the "RIP AND TEAR BROOTAL" window dressing and as I have said on other occasions I think the game would have a lot more in common with linear mid 2000s shooters like Half Life 2 or RTCW than the games it wishes to take after. Eternal is a much more fleshed out game with incredibly fun gameplay mechanics and I'd hate to see it return to the mundanity of its' predecessor which from a gameplay standpoint is far simpler and more shallow than classic Doom ever was.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, xdarkmasterx said:

 

I have to agree with this. I don't think 2016 is a bad game at all, but it's nothing like the classic games. The game doesn't have the chops to justify its' length - Weapons are largely too similar in application which makes switching between them feel not so much a meaningful decision so much as wanting to see a different particle effect appear as the monster turns into pink mist. Enemies are not dangerous enough, so target prioritization and diverse movement patterns are largely irrelevant. Levels are not holistic as in the old games and instead are partitioned into set piece battles where you're always supplied with whatever you need.

 

If I had to describe 2016, it would be not as a return to form but a simulacrum of oldschool FPS games, filtered through two decades of pop culture and internet memes. All noise and violence but not much in the way of real substance. Strip away the "RIP AND TEAR BROOTAL" window dressing and as I have said on other occasions I think the game would have a lot more in common with linear mid 2000s shooters like Half Life 2 or RTCW than the games it wishes to take after. Eternal is a much more fleshed out game with incredibly fun gameplay mechanics and I'd hate to see it return to the mundanity of its' predecessor which from a gameplay standpoint is far simpler and more shallow than classic Doom ever was.

RTCW is linear? Really? I remember it being somewhat labyrinthine at times. I agree definitely with your assessment though. For a while, I kinda hated 2016 because it wasn't really a true recreation of the original games in spirit (I got biased by some pretty out there youtube video at the time, plus playing on nightmare is just irritating, but then it always was). Nowadays I enjoy it going back playing on UV. It has a much lower skill ceiling, but still a lot of fun to play through. I just view it as a prototype for Eternal nowadays.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/2/2022 at 8:22 AM, map11has2names said:

Doom Eternal was designed for people who wanted an evolution of 2016. oh, and the "actual Dooms fans" remark is horse shit. i swear, people on Doomworld have this burning hatred of this game, for whatever reason. don't care for it? 

I think the majority here (including me) loves Doom Eternal and like the DLCs (except me).

Share this post


Link to post

I liked TAG1 a lot, hated TAG2 though and never bothered to replay it, it's been a while since I played either so I my opinions could've changed but I doubt it will when I replay them

Share this post


Link to post

Seems like the situation is people want to hate the DLCs, more than it being that there's anything really wrong with them. People also like to say that Doom 1 and 2 are simply bad games. If 2016 and Eternal were not massive successes, it'd feel tough being a Doom fan sometimes.

 

On 8/2/2022 at 8:12 PM, xdarkmasterx said:

If I had to describe 2016, it would be not as a return to form but a simulacrum of oldschool FPS games, filtered through two decades of pop culture and internet memes. All noise and violence but not much in the way of real substance. Strip away the "RIP AND TEAR BROOTAL" window dressing and as I have said on other occasions I think the game would have a lot more in common with linear mid 2000s shooters like Half Life 2 or RTCW than the games it wishes to take after. Eternal is a much more fleshed out game with incredibly fun gameplay mechanics and I'd hate to see it return to the mundanity of its' predecessor which from a gameplay standpoint is far simpler and more shallow than classic Doom ever was.

2016 and Eternal are far more alike than they are different. They don't play like Doom 1 and 2, nor should they. Their relationship to old Doom was always about the setting, not the gameplay. It's the same idea as Doom 3, just from a different angle. The only games 2016 and Eternal really play like are things like Unreal 1 and Metroid Prime, they have nothing to do with Half-Life 2 or RtCW or whatever. Even HL2 and RtCW have nothing to do with each other, and it's concerning you lump them together like that.

 

You really should go back and play old Doom. It's not very far removed from Wolfenstein 3D, its immediate predecessor. Old Doom doesn't even have real bosses, and the inability to shoot in any direction or even jump greatly limits what you are ever allowed to do with game design. I'm not really knocking old Doom here, I understand why it is the way it is, I grew up with it, and I'm even playing it right now. However, to say that 2016 is "far simpler and more shallow" is just objectively wrong from every angle.

 

That aside, some of all this is buried in how people like to draw a solid line between Doom and Quake, and that practice should stop. Quake is effectively the followup to Doom, much like how Doom is effectively the followup to Wolfenstein 3D. People understood that Quake II was a gameplay sequel to Quake even if the setting was completely different, but you don't need a specific name to make this clear. Likewise, 2016 and Eternal are the followups to what id Software had done up to that point, and also reflect a kind of reboot for the entire company. Most developers work this way, especially developers that are known for making a particular kind of game.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, kexen said:

You really should go back and play old Doom. It's not very far removed from Wolfenstein 3D, its immediate predecessor. Old Doom doesn't even have real bosses, and the inability to shoot in any direction or even jump greatly limits what you are ever allowed to do with game design. I'm not really knocking old Doom here, I understand why it is the way it is, I grew up with it, and I'm even playing it right now. However, to say that 2016 is "far simpler and more shallow" is just objectively wrong from every angle.

 

When I said shallow, I didn't mean the number of mechanics but the process of gameplay itself. I found 2016's combat to ask very little of the player - ammo management is simple, weapon choices don't mean much, dodging is easy etc. Not to mention the level design is quite simple in comparison. It's a fun game for what it is but the game is seriously repetitive and basic.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, xdarkmasterx said:

 

When I said shallow, I didn't mean the number of mechanics but the process of gameplay itself. I found 2016's combat to ask very little of the player - ammo management is simple, weapon choices don't mean much, dodging is easy etc. Not to mention the level design is quite simple in comparison. It's a fun game for what it is but the game is seriously repetitive and basic.

 

That's fine, it's when they were first onto something with the combat. It was fun for its time - still can be for some - and Eternal owes everything to the foundations it set, besides the obvious stuff like assets. I found level design comparable between the two, but I wouldn't mind more attempts like the Foundry.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, kexen said:

The only games 2016 and Eternal really play like are things like Unreal 1 and Metroid Prime

I can sort of see the similarity with Unreal in terms of aggressive AI, but Metroid Prime? :o

 

Is it because of the immersive HUD and body awareness?

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, kexen said:

That aside, some of all this is buried in how people like to draw a solid line between Doom and Quake, and that practice should stop. Quake is effectively the followup to Doom, much like how Doom is effectively the followup to Wolfenstein 3D. People understood that Quake II was a gameplay sequel to Quake even if the setting was completely different, but you don't need a specific name to make this clear. Likewise, 2016 and Eternal are the followups to what id Software had done up to that point, and also reflect a kind of reboot for the entire company. Most developers work this way, especially developers that are known for making a particular kind of game.

 

And you can really see, as the Jumpads and all the talk about the vertical Combat is something that was set up in Quake 1-3.

 

5 hours ago, Rudolph said:

I can sort of see the similarity with Unreal in terms of aggressive AI, but Metroid Prime? :o

 

Is it because of the immersive HUD and body awareness?

 

I guess because you are powering up the Protagonist.

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, Azuris said:

 

And you can really see, as the Jumpads and all the talk about the vertical Combat is something that was set up in Quake 1-3.

Which have already been setup in Doom. If you compare Classic Doom with other FPS of that period you get two major differences: Vertical combat (open elevators, different height levels within each level,  fighting monsters below/above you) and lighting.

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

×