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

/Newstuff Crap Wads.

Recommended Posts

With all of the crap wads coming into /newstuff is there a way to filter out the crapness and only review the good stuff? I am getting sick of seeing long lists of reviews for sh&t levels.

Is there a way people who can make good maps can E-Mail a link to a file on their sites and they review something instead, that has a greater chance of being worth the bandwidth that DW wasted putting up shots of maps like HELLRAIS.WAD and other shite like that?

Maybe you should have a DW members review section, where the talented Doomers here can have their own work displayed.

Yes, I know everyone deserves to have their work displayed, but not when it is a bunch of unaligned shite!

Share this post


Link to post

I've noticed that some of the reviews (barring the flippers and snorkels) don't have an obvious enough rating system.
perhaps the better wads should be in bold text, or /newstuff should be sectioned or something?
I do appreciate that they seperate the recent uploads of 8 year old wads.

Share this post


Link to post
bejiitas_wrath said:

Yes, I know everyone deserves to have their work displayed, but not when it is a bunch of unaligned shite!

Why is insulting the 1994 wads the cool thing to do now? Those were the roots of the independent wads we play today. In fact, I just downloaded the ones that were reviewed in TNC #239 and I could notice the emerging themes in some of those wads that we enjoy today. Yes, they're low on detail and sometimes alignment, but they've also got the gameplay down pat for the most part. Remember, these people didn't have the privileges of DoomBuilder, XWE and the other wad utilities that we enjoy today, so producing something good was a bit of a feat back then (not that it isn't today, since standards are obviously much higher).

Nevertheless, I see a parallel between this and today's gaming industry. Doomers today want their cake and to be able to eat it too, which isn't always possible. What's being uploaded are blasts from the past, so to speak...the Nintendo games of wads, the originators, but we're all hooked on glitzy effects, detail and other bells & whistles. Judging from the vocal nature of the anti-'94 wad members, gameplay, which is far more eminent in these wads than a lot of contemporary ones today, is something Doomers are willing to sacrifice for distracting oohs and ahhs or the next cool innovation.

Share this post


Link to post

IAWTP.

I found the abuse hurled at David Bruni particularly distasteful, given that he was not only a mapping pioneer, but someone who went to great trouble to write helpful texts passing on his knowledge to other potential mappers.

I've enjoyed most of the current batch (haven't played all of them yet though). Even hellrais, which seems to have attracted particular "attention", was kind of fun to run through.

Share this post


Link to post

I think part of the point is that there is not enough distinction between the types of wads in /newstuff.

playable is different than glitzy(usually)
'unique' has it's place
some people (like me) have no use at all for weapons/sprite replacements, etc...
classic versus new-school.
scripted, mouselook versus doom2.exe-compatible
legacy versus zdoom :P
etc...

the point of /newstuff is to focus DOOMers on what is worth playing.... all types of DOOMers.
the "this was shit, look at my Edge coredump screen capture"-type of review is rare completely applicable.
I like the way /newstuff has been handled... it does it's basic job of directing the bulk of the DOOMers to the better wads... but it could be improved so all types of DOOMers are satisfied.

in the end, if you just download the whole /newstuff directory, yeah, you're in the dark as to which are 1994 wads and which are 2005 gems. I think the /newstuff reviews does a good enough job in preventing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Job said:

Why is insulting the 1994 wads the cool thing to do now? Those were the roots of the independent wads we play today.

As people have said time and time again, no one has a problem with 1994 wads. The issues is with *bad* 1994 wads.

The fact people are confusing the two things is yet another reason why the poor quality wads should stop being uploaded.

Share this post


Link to post

NiGHTMARE said:
As people have said time and time again, no one has a problem with 1994 wads. The issues is with *bad* 1994 wads.
The fact people are confusing the two things is yet another reason why the poor quality wads should stop being uploaded. [/B]

They are not confusing things; people have widely differing opinions. One guy will see and old wad and say "what is this ugly misaligned blocky mass of squarish sectors doing in the archive?" while another says "hey this crude and simple wad plays really well, I'll record a couple demos for it!"

Bad and good depends on the eye of the beholder.

Share this post


Link to post
Jimi said:

I just made a great wad for the next /newstuff inspired from this thread and I uploaded it!


Boy I'll never guess which map that one might be.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

They are not confusing things;

The very posted I quoted shows that they are. Job thought everyone was insulting all 1994 wads, when it's only the poor quality wads from that year which are being layed into.

Bad and good depends on the eye of the beholder.

Sometimes yes, but often no. Fighting a Cyber Demon with a pistol in a 256x256 square room, or an endless corridor with HOMS on either side is not a good level, no matter who you are.

Share this post


Link to post

NiGHTMARE said:
The very posted I quoted shows that they are. Job thought everyone was insulting all 1994 wads, when it's only the poor quality wads from that year which are being layed into.

There's hardly a standard on how "bad" a wad is so it can be considered unanimously worthless, and there should not be one. Particular wads that were slammed were defended by others, so Job's generalization makes sense. It's like the death sentence; an innocent and worthy wad can and will get its head cut off. The filtering is not worth that, and this should not be done for the sake of reviewing. Other better alternatives have been suggested, like providing nothing but links, or, even better for the present situation, getting funduke's cooperation to provide a quick view of the wad that a reviewer uninterested in playing through (or even loading) an old wad may use.

Share this post


Link to post

How about funduke lets the /newstuff guys know what he's uploaded. They could then avoid sifting through them which would save time.

Then funduke could make a post in this forum listing the uploads? It would keep the whining out of /newstuff.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, he does sign all the text files... plus if you see the latest /newstuff chronicles, he talked w/ Ty and will be including a written preview of the wads. Some people care about some of those wads, so if they're not entirely left out, it's better.

Share this post


Link to post

The people doing /newstuff reviews can choose to review the 1994 wads if they want. There's plenty of crappy maps that come out this year as well, so should those be ignored as well? I don't think the purpose of /newstuff is to cator to just the good wads.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

There's hardly a standard on how "bad" a wad is so it can be considered unanimously worthless, and there should not be one. Particular wads that were slammed were defended by others, so Job's generalization makes sense.

Sorry, but no. It only makes sense if everyone thinks all 1994 are bad, which obviously is not true.

Share this post


Link to post
Job said:

the Nintendo games of wads

i agree with your point. those wads are our anthology, but dude, that dosn't make them good. there were a lot of crappy nintendo games...

Share this post


Link to post

From what I've seen, there really isnt a whole lot of new wads coming in anyway, so the more, the merrier, or something like that

Share this post


Link to post

Don't generalize them. You MIGHT see a good wad soon... Just look patiently.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind the older wads being uploaded. What annoys me is that they are taking the attention away from other wads who people [ie. ME!!] put alot of time into.

I agree with Tormentor, good '94 wads can still be reasnobly high on the list, so aren't ignored, and the pointless or lower standard ones are at the bottom, so no-one really bothers to have much of a look there.

Share this post


Link to post

When I did the /newstuff reviews, I put the rereleases/reuploads in a separate section at the bottom. Not on the basis that they were bad or anything, but just because I viewed them as a separate category, and possibly of interest to a different group of people.

I also put SP wads before DM ones, and then non-level files. Inside each section I put the better ones (in my opinion, obviously) first, and the less good ones last.

Share this post


Link to post
evilhomerdoomer said:

I don't mind the older wads being uploaded. What annoys me is that they are taking the attention away from other wads who people [ie. ME!!] put alot of time into.

Make better wads? If you can't divert attention from '94 wads, then you need to head back to the drawing board. : P

Share this post


Link to post
Grazza said:

When I did the /newstuff reviews, I put the rereleases/reuploads in a separate section at the bottom. Not on the basis that they were bad or anything, but just because I viewed them as a separate category, and possibly of interest to a different group of people.

I also put SP wads before DM ones, and then non-level files. Inside each section I put the better ones (in my opinion, obviously) first, and the less good ones last.

Sounds like you should put together a /newstuff style guide for the other reviewers :).

Share this post


Link to post

I sometimes find the level of sarcasm in /newstuff to be,, distracting.

There should be a more understandable rating system inplace as a standard (even if it's flippers and snorkels).

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
×