Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Intel17

How do you play DOOM?

Recommended Posts

I used to use Doom95 a lot, but after discovering ZDoom I use that for basically everything. Although I love the feel of classic Doom, I don't think Doom95 emulates it well enough to make it worth the limitations. And other than that, ZDoom is probably the most well-rounded source port.

I also have Legacy, but I hardly ever use it.

And one more thing...I have vanilla Doom on this olde-tyme Windows 95 laptop, but for some reason it runs at a terrible frame rate. :(

Share this post


Link to post
StupidBunny said:

And one more thing...I have vanilla Doom on this olde-tyme Windows 95 laptop, but for some reason it runs at a terrible frame rate. :(

So does mine under Windows XP. It runs fine under dosbox.com]Dosbox, though.

Share this post


Link to post

For me it was nothing but Doom95. Then I discovered ZDoom and ZDaemon and used those for single player and multiplayer, respectively. Then I learned to hate ZDoom and love ZDaemon. So it's been pretty much just ZDaemon for some time now.

Share this post


Link to post
StupidBunny said:

I used to use Doom95 a lot, but after discovering ZDoom I use that for basically everything. Although I love the feel of classic Doom, I don't think Doom95 emulates it well enough to make it worth the limitations.

You really ought to try Chocolate Doom. Pretty much perfect classic game play; and it's compatible with default.cfg, demos, and savegames :)

Share this post


Link to post

ZDoom, because I find it (and derivatives) to have the best controls of them all. Mouselook, no autoaim.

The first time ever I played any game on multiplayer was Ultimate Doom with Doom95. Modems ftw.

Share this post


Link to post

StupidBunny said:
And one more thing...I have vanilla Doom on this olde-tyme Windows 95 laptop, but for some reason it runs at a terrible frame rate.

You could try booting it in DOS mode (you might have to load the mouse and define the sound card IRQ/DMA values), as otherwise it needs to manage both the OS and the game, using more memory and resources.

Share this post


Link to post

I use PrBoom+ because it's stable and work well with all my favorites pwads (I set complevel for each wad except Scythe 2 for wich I've only activated the death glide for map25 and keeped the complevel -1 =)
I think to use chocodoom for to record something now, Dosbox doesn't work well in my comp, maybe my fault.

Share this post


Link to post

Doom95:  I became accustomed to this when it was the only sane choice (higher visplane limit than vanilla, much better variety of sound/hardware drivers), so I still use it a lot.  I totally agree with Hellish Godzilla about the bass.  Also, one can learn a lot about editing by diagnosing crashes in Maximum Doom.   :>

PrBoom+:  a more recent discovery.  The change in aspect ratio is sufficiently disorienting that I may have to choose one or the other, and this one seems to include the most features while retaining the "classic" engine physics.

DOS:  the pixellation hurts my head now, so I only use this for wiki research.

ZDoom:  all the scripting and stuff still seems unnatural, so I only use this for wiki research.

Share this post


Link to post
Xeriphas1994 said:

PrBoom+:  a more recent discovery.  The change in aspect ratio ...

Not completely sure what you're referring to here, but I'd guess that you have a widescreen monitor, which is spreading out the display horizontally. You can change the aspect ratio using the -aspect command-line option to anything you like (OpenGL-only). For instance:

-aspect 9x5

Share this post


Link to post

1.GZDoom
Although I'm a hardcore player, and been playing doom since december 1993 (or the beginning of 1994, can't tell), my eyes hurt when exposed to lowres software.
GZDoom still has the feel, looks clean, is fast, and can support almost any other por-specific map.

2.Chocolate and Vanilla
Very rarely, when I need to check if a map is 100% vanilla compatible.

Share this post


Link to post

I usually play GZDoom for singleplayer, and Skulltag for multiplayer, and if I can't find a good game on Skulltag I'll play ZDaemon. Sometimes It's hard to find a game (I really only like to play co-op and I love the invasion mode of Skulltag) so that's when I play singleplayer. I also have ZDoom on a computer at my school.

Share this post


Link to post
Psycho Siggi said:

I play Doom with a keyboard and mouse, sometimes a gamepad.

Oh, yeah.
And Godmode. Can't forget that!

Share this post


Link to post

almost exclusively ZDoom at 1024x768, mouselook, no autoaim.
the controls feel the best to me and i love software mode at high-res.

prboom+ every now and then.
i have 3 different versions of ZDoom, prboom+, Legacy, Edge, Risen3D, GZDoom, and Chocolate Doom installed on my computer though, just in case i want to play a map that requires a certain port or feel like going oldschool (choco.)

Share this post


Link to post
Intel17 said:

Godmode? BLASPHEMY! =)

The game Star Wars Dark Forces has that as a legit option.

Share this post


Link to post

Zdoom is preferred, ultra violence, keyboard and mouse with mouselook with autoaim off. I'll use other source ports if it's required by the .wad. I see no problem with using source ports with higher resolution and mouselook. We have the technology! It doesn't detract from the game play in my opinion, it just makes it more responsive, less of a strain on the eyes, and funner.

Share this post


Link to post

Slightly off topic -- does anyone here find modes other than UV (and by extension NM) to be much less fun?

Share this post


Link to post
Intel17 said:

Slightly off topic -- does anyone here find modes other than UV (and by extension NM) to be much less fun?


No, not if the WAD is made properly. I don't like all this UV is the only way to play posturing bullshit (that has always been part of Doom - right back to the days of BBSs and the Compuserve Action Games forum). If a WAD is set up properly, HMP should be right for most Doomers, UV should provide an additional challenge for people who find the HMP setting of that WAD too easy or to provide additional challenge for a second/third/whatever time through. The easier settings should, of course, be there for the people who find the HMP setting of that WAD too tough. I can't count the number of times I've seen people making stupid-ass comments like "teh map is too hard" because they have gone straight to UV despite the fact it was a properly set up modern WAD with proper modern difficulty curves. It doesn't make you less of a man to play a video game on a less than the toughest difficulty setting.

Share this post


Link to post

I find that HMP better suits my style of play and slower reflexes. UV is reserved for easier maps - otherwise it becomes more like hard work and less fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Enjay said:

I don't like all this UV is the only way to play posturing bullshit (that has always been part of Doom - right back to the days of BBSs and the Compuserve Action Games forum). If a WAD is set up properly, HMP should be right for most Doomers, UV should provide an additional challenge for people who find the HMP setting of that WAD too easy or to provide additional challenge for a second/third/whatever time through. The easier settings should, of course, be there for the people who find the HMP setting of that WAD too tough.

I have to agree here. Mappers usually implement difficulty settings for a reason, so we certainly should use them. Most users, I think, play the original games on UV because they are not that challenging otherwise, but that does not mean that other WADs will have the same difficulty at corresponding skill settings (e.g., just because one likes Doom II on UV doesn't mean one would enjoy Hell Revealed on UV or even HMP).

Of course, because many WADs have difficulty settings that are different from the original games, I like it when the WAD's text file mentions how the skill levels are set up, and I am occasionally annoyed when it does not. Alien Vendetta, for example, gives a direct comparison when it mentions in av.txt that its skill 3 is about equivalent to Plutonia's skill 4. A lot of maps don't even bother implementing skill levels properly, which is disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Enjay said:

It doesn't make you less of a man to play a video game on a less than the toughest difficulty setting.

It does!
Only wimps play on lower skill levels ;)

I second your opinion in 127% NJ. The maps I'm doing now are going to be easy on ITYTD, normal on HNTR, hard on HMP, almost impossible on UV, and impossible on Nightmare (which I hate and I will frustrate anyone who tries to play this).

Share this post


Link to post
Enjay said:

because they have gone straight to UV despite the fact it was a properly set up modern WAD with proper modern difficulty curves.

Why should you dictate that "proper" difficulty WADs are meant for HMP and HAVE to be ultra-hard on UV? I consider UV to be the right skill level, and people to play on HMP (or even HNTR) only if they can't take it (if it's too hard, indeed), but therefore miss stuff they would see on UV. There's the Nightmare! skill level, and its usefulness would be destroyed if Ultra-Violence were already too hard for the standard Doomer, I GUESS. No offence, but I wanted to post.

Share this post


Link to post

Enjay sad:
despite the fact it was a properly set up modern WAD with proper modern difficulty curves.

Hopefully the text file didn't just say "this is a properly set up modern WAD with modern difficulty settings" if the author wanted to get anything across to the players. If it did, perhaps it explains why people are apparently so obnoxious.

MikeRS said:
Nightmare itself was a joke for people that complained UV was "too easy"

Citation needed. It's evident it was added in jest and initially believed to be too hard, but I can't recall any particular statements saying it was specifically a response to people saying UV was too easy.

printz said:
There's the Nightmare! skill level, and its usefulness would be destroyed if Ultra-Violence were already too hard for the standard Doomer, I GUESS.

There really isn't a "standard Doomer", as skill varies quite a lot; it's just important to give the player a good idea of the difficulty involved, by comparing the wad to something against which it can be judged (such as in the AV example given by Reckoner above). In any case, considering the quicksave capabilities of some modern engines, harsh difficulties may encourage green or slow players to rely heavily on (or get used to relying on) this feature, especially if no one gives them any hints or instructions in regard to difficulty. But often these wads aren't that hard because their authors aren't so demanding as far as challenges go. It might occasionally make some butt-ugly cramped, health stingy, or otherwise unbalanced or dull gameplay, though.

And it's clear why most people try UV first. The games themselves, and tons of patch wads, are decently playable on UV, for the most part. So many people will try any wad that doesn't explain it is particularly nasty on that skill level, while others crappier players will rely on saves, which can reduce any one monster encounter to a one-time achievement.

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

Why should you dictate that "proper" difficulty WADs are meant for HMP and HAVE to be ultra-hard on UV? I consider UV to be the right skill level, and people to play on HMP (or even HNTR) only if they can't take it

Setting UV as the "default" skill would be very limiting. If the average player plays on UV, then what should the above-average player play on? Don't say NM, because that is a completely different style of play, and the jump in difficulty is far higher than, say, the jump from HMP to UV. Similarly, if the average player is on UV, and the below average on HMP or HNTR, then who is playing on ITYTD? It would be a waste. Instead of having the highest (normal) skill be "average" and the lowest skill practically useless, a more balanced distribution would make more sense:

Skill 1: Inexperienced, unskilled players
Skill 2: Below average, or more casual players
Skill 3: Average player
Skill 4: Good players, or average players looking for more challenge
Skill 5: Doom gods

This setup gives some much better options. Do you not agree?

Share this post


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