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

What other games are you waiting for?

Recommended Posts

Python_Junkie said:

What odd "thing"?


It's not something literal as an unwritten status that can't really be described. Doom is good simply because it is Doom. The music, monsters, level and gameplay just -work-. If you took away or tweaked the aspects, it wouldn't work as well anymore. Thus, I fear Doom 3 will lack such qualities for the sake of being a graphical showcase. Blegh.

Share this post


Link to post
Cecillia said:

It's not something literal as an unwritten status that can't really be described. Doom is good simply because it is Doom. The music, monsters, level and gameplay just -work-. If you took away or tweaked the aspects, it wouldn't work as well anymore. Thus, I fear Doom 3 will lack such qualities for the sake of being a graphical showcase. Blegh.

i agree completely. graphics seem to me to be the only thing doom III has going for it, and even those can be really cheesy (those new lost souls for example =P). if doom3 were really about design they could have easily managed it perfectly well in the quake III engine without the need to make something prettier. the thing that was so cool about doom was it's originality. ten years later you'd think id would have found a new theme to tackle, but apparently not.

Share this post


Link to post

Especially with the major "remodeling" it's alienating me at least o_O; I -liked- the classic monsters, like cacos, lost souls, the bulldog demons, and the pain elementals. There's nothing quite like a first run-in with an elemental... and being confused over why it wasn't attacking o_O; turned out too many lost souls were on the map, so he just floated around and being asthmatic.

Games don't need to be pretty to be good. Many people don't seem to be able to recognize that.

Share this post


Link to post

Complaining that ID Software only ever make fantasy/sci-fi games is like complaining that Steven King only ever writes horror novels, or that the Beatles only ever played Rock'n'Roll! =P

Share this post


Link to post
NiGHTMARE said:

Complaining that ID Software only ever make fantasy/sci-fi games is like complaining that Steven King only ever writes horror novels, or that the Beatles only ever played Rock'n'Roll! =P

uh, monster-fighting FPSes might be their trademark now but they did used to have other ideas. dangerous dave, commander keen, hovertank 3d, rescue rover, wolfenstein 3d, catacombs 3d... id's signature up through 1993 had been original creative design. but since hall left, they've just been remaking doom over and over. the id i loved was the creative id of the early 90s.

Cecillia said:

Games don't need to be pretty to be good. Many people don't seem to be able to recognize that.

exactly. in fact, i'm more comfortable with an ugly game, because then i can rest assured the effort was spent towards design instead.

Share this post


Link to post

Almost all those games you mention are still fantasy/sci-fi though... And isn't saying Quake 3 is anything even remotely like Doom considered blasphemy around here? ;)

sargebaldy said:

in fact, i'm more comfortable with an ugly game, because then i can rest assured the effort was spent towards design instead.

Not neccessarily. For example, the Sims looks like s**t, and it plays like s**t too ;)

Share this post


Link to post

heh. It's funny how people STILL seem to think Doom3 will be a technology showcase and not a game. To all of you: READ UP! All those people who played the DM test thought it was absolutely awesome. Most of the reports I've read suggested that it was surprisingly fun and refreshing. We haven't seen any SP reports yet, but I bet it will surpass anything id ever done. They are really trying to make a game here. Throw away all those prejudices and be open-minded.

Anyways, bottom line: Think what you want, like what you want. This is merely a suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post

A game can be good without good graphics. So a game with groundbreaking graphics can't be better?

Wow, that's some perty logic... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Zoorado said:

A game can be good without good graphics. So a game with groundbreaking graphics can't be better?

Wow, that's some perty logic... :rolleyes:


Yeah. I'm so tired of the fact that many people look at a game with a negative biased opinion JUST because the game has good graphics.

Julian said:

I'm waiting for RTC-3057.


Yeah well...SEND ME DEI!!! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Shaviro said:

Yeah. I'm so tired of the fact that many people look at a game with a negative biased opinion JUST because the game has good graphics.

Jedi Knight 2 had wonderful graphics...but shitty level design.

The best games = stunning graphics + equally stunning gameplay

Share this post


Link to post
NiGHTMARE said:

Almost all those games you mention are still fantasy/sci-fi though

you do realize there is more to a design than just a theme i hope. and doom*/quake* have more of a similarity than just 'fantasy/sci-fi'. doom, doom2 and quake involve fighting demons and the undead, quake2 and 3 involve aliens (if you count quake3 as having a plot) and doom3 goes right back to fighting more demons. all are first person shooters with survivalist plotlines. everything i had on my earlier list came out within a 3 year period, and were far differently designed. don't even try claiming that hover tank and keen are similar games, or that wolf3d was a similar shooter to catacombs3d. id's been going around in circles for a decade, and i for one am tired of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Cecillia said:

Games don't need to be pretty to be good. Many people don't seem to be able to recognize that.


it depends on what you mean by 'pretty'. if you mean cutting edge realtime shadow lense flare 64bit bumpmapping dynamic shaders etc etc then I agree. Personally I think that sort of stuff is really nice to have, and I think it makes the game look better, but it can hardly make up for boring/bad levels etc

if you mean how the maps look, I disagree. I mean, take whatever map you happen to think plays the best from any game (solo play of course) and strip all the textures from it so it's just a bunch of polygons, then uh, I don't care how well it plays, that's just ugly as crap

Share this post


Link to post

if she means what i mean, she means the graphical abilities of the engine, and not the textures. obviously having nice looking textures is vital to making a game look like anything. fancy schmancy lighting and bumpmapping and such isn't. it makes things a bit more realistic but it doesn't change the overall theme. e.g. you can still tell you're in a nazi base in wolf3d despite the fact the lights aren't amazing.

Share this post


Link to post

Visual technology is only an added perk. You play a game to have fun, not as a visual aid for a business proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
sargebaldy said:

or that wolf3d was a similar shooter to catacombs3d.

I found they were quite similar actually; more so than even Heretic and Doom :)

Share this post


Link to post
NiGHTMARE said:

I found they were quite similar actually; more so than even Heretic and Doom :)

similar in the sense they both have a shoddy engine maybe =P anyway, heretic isn't an id game (even if romero produced it and it uses doom's engine). try using two id games for comparison instead.

Share this post


Link to post

heh. Realtime shadows + bumpmapping is a BIG step in the right direction. I'd even say it's more important than ├╝ber-fantastic gameplay because they bring so much atmosphere it's to die for. (it does in Doom3 anyway). I don't think you can divide a game into parts like that, tho. OMG THIS IS FUN AND THIS IS GOODLOOKING. I think they go hand in hand a big part of the way.

Good technical graphics, like in the Doom3 engine, is very important for the believability of the game and the immersion of the game. You'll be more involved in the game --> you'll be having more fun.

Good design, like in _most_ id games, is crucial for the game's feel and atmosphere. Good design in all aspects --> more fun.

Good balance and basic shoot-kill gameplay. This is also a crucial point. You can't have a game with unbalanced gameplay :P

PLEASE stop hating games with good graphics :P
Doom was 10 years ago, get over it already.
And didn't it have outstanding visuals/tech for its time?


And to sum up:

You'll need the technical aspect in order to immerse/believability.
You'll need the design aspect in order to impress/immerse.
You'll need the balance and basic gameplay aspect in order to keep the player interested.

On another note:
I'm not tired of id doing the same style fps games...they make _FUN_ games as opposed to most other companies who just do mainstream copies of id, valve etc etc games.

Share this post


Link to post

You know, I have nothing against high graphic quality, but there have seriously been very few great games with stupendous graphics. The only ones I can think of (and I mean just for their time) are:

Descent
Descent 2
Quake 2
Half-Life (though it was medium-high in both departments)
GTA3

But really, I love games that sacrifice high-quality graphics for gamplay, such as:

Civilization 1-3
Stars!
Icewind Dale 2
Diablo 2 (could have easily been made 3d, but they didnt)
Fallout 2

I think high-quality graphics would actualy ruin a lot of those games. For instance, 3d models in Civ would be pointless. And in such games, imagination is half the fun. I mean, its great to imagine your armies in Civ slaughtering the enemy, or the specific design of your newly-created ship in Stars!, but to actualy see such a thing in any way modern processors could render would be a bit dissapointing or at the very least repititious.

Yeah anyway, I forgot what my point was, but I do know one thing. Wolfenstein 3d and Catacomb 3d were too entirely different games. In fact I like Catacomb a lot more then Wolfenstein. Wolf had like 5 eneies (besides bosses) while Cat had something like 100 different eneimes. Sure, a lot were sprite recolorings, but still that makes about 30 unique eneimes and sprite recoloring didnt hurt the Diablo games any. :P Also, the game has exploding walls, time stopping, individualy named corridors, and some other cool stuff like that. Honestly, what other games had any of those features? Those that do were made years after it.

Yeah, I'm done here.

Share this post


Link to post
Shaviro said:

Doom was 10 years ago, get over it already.

exactly my point. doom was 10 years ago. and yet id still hasn't stopped making doom clones. they're about 8 years due to start trying something new.

Share this post


Link to post
sargebaldy said:

exactly my point. doom was 10 years ago. and yet id still hasn't stopped making doom clones. they're about 8 years due to start trying something new.


uh.

Quake 1 was completely different in both gameplay and style.
Quake 2 was even further away in style, but maybe a bit closer in gameplay.
Quake 3 Arena is nothing like Doom at all.
Doom 3 will be like Doom because...well...it's a retelling of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Shaviro said:

uh.

Quake 1 was completely different in both gameplay and style.
Quake 2 was even further away in style, but maybe a bit closer in gameplay.
Quake 3 Arena is nothing like Doom at all.
Doom 3 will be like Doom because...well...it's a retelling of it.


I think he means the basic premise of them which is pretty much the same as doom. "you're in this place, there's no story, now kill a bunch of shit and find some keys and exit the map"

q3 of course didn't have a sp part to it, but the dm part is largly exactly the same as doom's, ie you're fast and the weapons are simple

Share this post


Link to post
sargebaldy said:

exactly my point. doom was 10 years ago. and yet id still hasn't stopped making doom clones. they're about 8 years due to start trying something new.

Doom itself was a Wolf3D clone.

Share this post


Link to post
IMJack said:

Doom itself was a Wolf3D clone.

and wolf3d was a catacombs 3d clone, if you look at it like that. but thematically at least, doom and wolf3d are far more dissimilar than doom and quake for example.

Share this post


Link to post
sargebaldy said:

and wolf3d was a catacombs 3d clone, if you look at it like that. but thematically at least, doom and wolf3d are far more dissimilar than doom and quake for example.

"Thematically", like Cyb was saying, it's all the same.

Cyb said:

"you're in this place, there's no story, now kill a bunch of shit and find some keys and exit the map"

Share this post


Link to post
IMJack said:

Doom itself was a Wolf3D clone.

Technically yes, but that was before they completely rewrote the code.

ROTT on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
IMJack said:

"Thematically", like Cyb was saying, it's all the same.

oh, i missed that. yes, i meant what cyb said. although wolf3d at least had the subtle difference of not taking place in a futuristic world. after doom they kept using the same boring routine in the same environment, making it even more boring.

Share this post


Link to post

Doom was a pretty huge leap from Wolfenstein 3D in terms of level design though, while Quake in turn wasn't such an advancement over Doom in that department.

Share this post


Link to post
sargebaldy said:

oh, i missed that. yes, i meant what cyb said. although wolf3d at least had the subtle difference of not taking place in a futuristic world. after doom they kept using the same boring routine in the same environment, making it even more boring.

I still have to disagree. Sorry.

Doom: High-tech space stations, to classical Hell.
Q1: Heavy gothic, occasional neo-gothic.
Q2: Industrial zones and cityscapes.
Q3: No consistant theme.

At least id has kept the games from looking/feeling the same, IMHO.

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
×