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

The Doom Confessional Booth

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, GarrettChan said:

Congrats. That map is definitely quite hard. Now try to beat it without taking damage, wait... I'm joking.

I actually almost did that. I managed to kill all the shotgunners without taking damage. It was when I was punching a few of the imps and barons that I got hit.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, rehelekretep said:

imagine being the only person who doesnt like aaliens

 

Imagine being the only person who finds Valiant easier than AA. 

 

I kinda am alone here :v .

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, rehelekretep said:

i still havent played valiant

 

Most unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post

I've played Valiant only like 2 months ago. Haven't played AA except the first 4 levels lol Gotta play the rest the of wad someday.

Share this post


Link to post

I still haven't finished Sunlust.

I also wasn't a bad enough dude to beat Magnolia without cheating. On HNTR. And I still endorse it for a Cacoward.

Here's one for the Ironman competition: I never actually finished either of the Darkening Episodes.

Share this post


Link to post

oh boy Sunlust intimidates me. im up to map05 before i took a break.

i played it on hmp with save scumming ages ago but never since

Share this post


Link to post

I got to MAP07 on my Hewlett-Packard and even found all the secrets and that secret fight. It killed me only three times, I think. I was on HMP.

I haven't finished it because my HP's hard drive crashed, so I'm trying to procrastinate until I have a new machine with room on its HDD.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Inno said:

I don't mind 'hard' if there's a genuine difficulty to it. I'll probably still die, because I know I'm probably only an above-average player, but that's fine. If I die too much, even on fair, but really hard wads, I'm not averse to the idea of bumping it down to HNTR. AA is 'harder' because the enemy placement is isn't very good.

People talking about what's "the right difficulty" and the "wrong difficulty" and "genuine difficulty" just makes me want to scream into a pillow.

 

I'm just gonna point out that AA is not a "one man effort", so obviously there is some variance across the maps in terms of gameplay and such. And it's this variance that makes it such that you find stuff you enjoy at times, and other times maybe not so much. But all of this is entirely subjective, and has very little to do with "genuine difficulty"as if that was an objective thing that existed (because it doesn't). What's also worth pointing out is that some of the maps in AA, in particular the earlier ones, have been designed with a different mindset than others in the set (there's some ammo starvation early on and such, for example).

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

 

I actually also heavily considered starting up a project of sorts titled 'The Slaughter H8 Brigade'

Look what we have here.... This is gonna be fucking golden!

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

a sterilizing patch for all these crazy difficulty megawads; and try and balance them so that the difficulty levels actually more match what is to be expected from HNTR/HMP/UV standards

Might you clue us in on what's the objective "expected standard" for difficulty settings?

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

fix enemy placement so it is more considerate of the terrain and less concerned with bum-fucking the player.

How about you sit down and practise instead? Are you one those "if I can't beat it then it's objectively too hard" kinda people, who feel like for some reason they're entitled to get just exactly the sort of gameplay and difficulty they want all the time?

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

But expecting me to fight a Mancubus with a pistol in MAP 1?

I can beat a mancubus just with the fist if it's possible to get near it. A pistol is more than you need in such a case.

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

Starting the map with two alerted Barons when you have a single shotgun with 9 shells?

Sounds like a good map with a hectic start. No problem there.

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

Thinking 300 monsters should be the standard amount in a map?

I like it better when maps have over 1000 monsters, but 300 is also fine.

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

Dropping an Archie on you without any cover?

No problem, either you will be provided with enough health to tank a hit, or you will have enough firepower to kill the vile right away. Didn't Evilution do something like this? There surely was a plasma gun and a BFG in the map that I'm thinking of, and a soulsphere on top IIRC. So no problem there.

6 hours ago, eharper256 said:

All of these are quick and easy ways to grind me to frustration and just terminating the map set

Just because it frustrates you it doesn't make it wrong or bad.

 

 

5 hours ago, GarrettChan said:

I really like there's a map by someone here where there's no ammo and you need to fight 3 Cyberdemons and platform at the end.

That is a good map.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

and has very little to do with "genuine difficulty"as if that was an objective thing that existed (because it doesn't).

 

On that matter, I'll try to avoid starting a pointless debate, but my 2 cents on this anyway: I think there might actually be such a thing like "genuine difficulty" and what I refer to as "artificial difficulty", such as the kind of enemy encounters seen in the first half of HR2, the vast majority forcing you to take damage in a way or another.

 

There is nothing fun or challenging (or, a sense of real difficulty if you will) because it doesn't do (or makes you do) something smart or push/test your skills, that's just plain bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

People talking about what's "the right difficulty" and the "wrong difficulty" and "genuine difficulty" just makes me want to scream into a pillow.

 

I'm just gonna point out that AA is not a "one man effort", so obviously there is some variance across the maps in terms of gameplay and such. And it's this variance that makes it such that you find stuff you enjoy at times, and other times maybe not so much. But all of this is entirely subjective, and has very little to do with "genuine difficulty"as if that was an objective thing that existed (because it doesn't). What's also worth pointing out is that some of the maps in AA, in particular the earlier ones, have been designed with a different mindset than others in the set (there's some ammo starvation early on and such, for example).

(1) People talking about difficulty on a forum *really* shouldn't be that stressful for you. Chill.

 

(2) It's mostly a one-man effort, however, as the vast majority of the maps are made by skillsaw.

 

(3) You erroneously appear to have the idea in your head that my problems are on some maps, and things I enjoy are on another. Or that I'm not aware of which maps are skillsaw's, and which are not. Don't jump to conclusions so quickly next time. No, my problem is that, in a single map, there can be displayed brilliance both in map design and in occasional encounter design, but also total shit. Pure and simple. You have made it very clear that you like hard maps, and that you're oh, so professional at playing a video game. That's great, bud, that's what the higher difficulties are for, and I'm glad you are catered to. The more people enjoying Doom to their liking, the better. But on 'normal', it should play well. Occasionally, the wad does. Mostly, however, it doesn't. Simple rule is that if getting through your encounters isn't just 'tiring' (Serious Sam can be 'tiring'), but *tedious*, then you've fucked up. Ancient Aliens is mostly tedious, most of the time. Period.

 

(4) I'm well aware of the "mindset" that different levels have. You mention ammo starvation in the early levels. Yes, that's present, and I don't have a problem with it. My complaint isn't about ammo starvation, it's about enemies placed poorly. 

 

1 hour ago, rehelekretep said:

its not the enemy placement thats messed up; its you!

Nope. I just think everyone else's tolerance for enemy placement bullshit is higher than mine. Trying to go, "Well, it's well-liked by others, so that means that it's actually super good" is also not a good platform upon which to base your argument. Hell Revealed is also quite well-liked, but it doesn't stop the fact that the enemy placement is the hottest of garbage after the first several maps in that, too.

 

Now, you can all complain about what I've said all you like, but I'm frankly not invested enough in the subject to continue arguing with people over the placement of enemies in a video game. I'm fine with discussion about it, but it's clear you and NIH aren't, so I'm just not going to reply to any further fussing about it, especially not in a thread entitled 'The Doom Confessional Booth', where the expression of unpopular Doom opinions is intended, without others responding like bothered children. Waste your time as you wish, but I'm not going to waste mine for you.

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Agent6 said:

 

On that matter, I'll try to avoid starting a pointless debate, but my 2 cents on this anyway: I think there might actually be such a thing like "genuine difficulty" and what I refer to as "artificial difficulty", such as the kind of enemy encounters seen in the first half of HR2, the vast majority forcing you to take damage in a way or another.

 

There is nothing fun or challenging (or, a sense of real difficulty if you will) because it doesn't do (or makes you do) something smart or push/test your skills, that's just plain bullshit.

 

unfortunately, you can probably count the amount of FPS games ever released with no unavoidable or RNG damage on one hand XD

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, Inno said:

People talking about difficulty on a forum *really* shouldn't be that stressful for you. Chill.

It's not talking about difficulty in general that I mind, it's proclaiming to know what "genuine difficulty" is and what isn't. If a map is difficult to beat for reasons that aren't down to making the map literally unplayable, then what's not "genuine" about it?

33 minutes ago, Inno said:

No, my problem is that, in a single map, there can be displayed brilliance both in map design and in occasional encounter design, but also total shit.

That's what you say, unfortunately you have yet to give an actual example here. Nobody knows which map you refer to, which fight was causing problems for what reason. There's just your individual statement which you present as objective fact. Shouldn't come as much of a surprise that people might have questions about where you get your "facts" from.

33 minutes ago, Inno said:

But on 'normal', it should play well.

You have yet to define "play well".

33 minutes ago, Inno said:

Simple rule is that if getting through your encounters isn't just 'tiring' (Serious Sam can be 'tiring'), but *tedious*, then you've fucked up. Ancient Aliens is mostly tedious, most of the time. Period

I'm calling BS, period. Skillsaw is known to be one of the mappers who usually gravitate a lot towards reasonably fast paced run and gun type of gameplay. If something plays supposedly "tedious", again, you could just give an actual example from the WAD.

 

51 minutes ago, Agent6 said:

what I refer to as "artificial difficulty", such as the kind of enemy encounters seen in the first half of HR2, the vast majority forcing you to take damage in a way or another

I'm not in the "hell revealed 2 fan-camp". Not at all. But there is something to be said about exposing people to "mandatory damage" to keep their health totals low. It creates a sense of threat and fragility, and there is nothing "bullshit", or "artificial" about it. Not to mention that the difficulty of not taking any more damage than is necessary still is very "real", and "damage mitigation" is an actual gameplay skill that exists. You're free to not like "mandatory damage", but it's far from "artificially difficult" when you look at how it influences the things that follow in the map, and how much attention you need to pay then and there because of the previously taken damage.

Share this post


Link to post

In fairness, I can think of situations I'd consider to be somewhat "artificial difficulty" -- usually involving Arch-Viles, such as one Vile, no cover, no spheres, SSG only, hope for flinches.  Or 2 viles, one pillar, no plasma/bfg.  That said, I only recall one such situation in AA (in the first Joshy map, not any of Skillsaw's stuff).

 

As for whether the enemy placement in AA is good, I will say that I think some of the more "reveal placement/setpiece" driven maps don't really play to Skillsaw's strengths -- his layouts are really flow-y and fun to run around at a macro-scale, and that lends itself better to "pressuring incidental/sniper" driven placement.

Share this post


Link to post

AA never expects you to fight the Mancubus on level one with your fists, pistol, or even a shotgun. He's trapped in a cage and the level has a rocket launcher in it. Not only that, but there's even a teleporter accessible at the end to telefrag him. The Mancubus (He's a Cyberdemon on higher difficulties!) is there to make running around the edges of the map unlocking areas more dangerous and exciting.

 

It's really weird to jump into a level, see a Cyberdemon and assume "The mapper wants me to kill this Cyberdemon with the pistol" or even "I should be given the tools to immediately kill this Cyberdemon". Even if that Cyberdemon is a Mancubus.

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

I'm not in the "hell revealed 2 fan-camp". Not at all.

 

Well, I never said you were in the first place :v .

 

Fair enough, I think you have a valid point, I agree with reminding the player of how fragile and vulnerable he is, in addition to not taking more damage than he should (if at all).

 

I only gave HR2 as an example because, from my POV the kind of enemy encounters seen in its first half were the most representative for the point I was trying to make, how not to do "mandatory damage".

 

1 hour ago, xdarkmasterx said:

unfortunately, you can probably count the amount of FPS games ever released with no unavoidable or RNG damage on one hand XD

 

You're missing my point but whatever.

 

E: @Inno "That's great, bud, that's what the higher difficulties are for, and I'm glad you are catered to. The more people enjoying Doom to their liking, the better. But on 'normal', it should play well."

 

You're forgetting something here. Keep in mind that no author is required to make their work as accessible as humanly possible. AA is a megawad targeted primarily at veterans and very skilled players since they're the only ones who could enjoy it to the maximum and accept it for what it is, everyone else will struggle to find something enjoyable. I am no "ultra player" either, but what I'm trying to say it that what that audience will find great in AA will be seen completely different from someone else's perspective (just like you and NIH are demonstrating, 2 opposing views), which is why I'd say it very much does play well and consistently for its entirety (and doesn't feel tedious), but it just doesn't work for you because its style does not resonate with you.

Edited by Agent6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

 

8 hours ago, eharper256 said:

 

I actually also heavily considered starting up a project of sorts titled 'The Slaughter H8 Brigade'

Look what we have here.... This is gonna be fucking golden!

Preach, sister! I'm not a slaughter player myself, but I really don't think the "Slaughter H8 Brigade" is a good idea by any possible (or impossible) stretch of the imagination.

 

1 hour ago, Inno said:

But on 'normal', it should play well.

What does that mean? Play well by what standard? I'd be willing to be a thousand dollars that Ribbiks' maps wouldn't "play well" on normal.

 

1 hour ago, Inno said:

Trying to go, "Well, it's well-liked by others, so that means that it's actually super good" is also not a good platform upon which to base your argument.

So the thought process of it's generally accepted as being high quality and concluding that it probably is is stupid and/or bad?

 

You're not making legitimate arguments here, because you're not backing up any of your statements. On top of that, you've backed out (which is probably wise) of this discussion.

Not only that, but you complain about "poor enemy placement" a lot. You did in the Doom Eternal superthread and you did it here. It's no wonder we're getting irritated with you.

 

About artificial versus genuine difficulty, the only distinction I can make between the two is how involved skill is. If skill has zero bearing on the outcome (think a slot machine), then it's artificial difficulty.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

But all of this is entirely subjective, and has very little to do with "genuine difficulty"as if that was an objective thing that existed (because it doesn't).

you appear to be the only person on the planet who doesn't understand the concepts of genuine and artificial difficulty

 

47 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

Skillsaw is known to be one of the mappers who usually gravitate a lot towards reasonably fast paced run and gun type of gameplay.

that literally means nothing. a lot of slaughtermaps could be considered "fast paced" or "run and gun" type gameplay, but they still get extremely tedious.

 

i haven't even played aaliens but i really needed to point out these bizarre statements

 

1 hour ago, Inno said:

Trying to go, "Well, it's well-liked by others, so that means that it's actually super good" is also not a good platform upon which to base your argument.

it's sad how many people on here completely disagree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Aquila Chrysaetos said:

About artificial versus genuine difficulty, the only distinction I can make between the two is how involved skill is. If skill has zero bearing on the outcome (think a slot machine), then it's artificial difficulty.

 

Ooooo, bingo, ya nailed it.

 

1 minute ago, bonnie said:

it's sad that most people completely disagree with this.

 

Also playing something yourself and making your own opinions is for the best indeed, like I do.

Share this post


Link to post

aaliens is perfectly balanced on the lower settings. the only thing I hate about that wad is that there's way too many mancubi but this is skillsaw's problem for putting too many of them in his two most famous wads so far.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, bonnie said:

you appear to be the only person on the planet who doesn't understand the concepts of genuine and artificial difficulty

 

What I do understand is that in most cases people talk about "artificial difficulty" because something is difficult for reasons they personally do not like, but that does not make something any more or less difficult than it "really" is. Not to mention that AAliens is far from RNG-heavy, all of the maps there can be beaten reliably and consistently, also they're far from grindy.

 

1 hour ago, bonnie said:

a lot of slaughtermaps could be considered "fast paced" or "run and gun" type gameplay, but they still get extremely tedious.

 

Let's not pretend you're particularly well informed about slaughtermaps. Least have the minimum decency to be upfront about your bias here: You hate slaughtermaps. Therefore I'd wager your "sample size" is far from comprehensive.

 

1 hour ago, bonnie said:

i haven't even played aaliens

LMAO okay, I just wanna get something straight here:

 

You're telling me I do not understand what "artificial difficulty" means based solely on my statement that I don't think this "concept" applies to Ancient Aliens, which is a WAD you yourself have never even played. Good luck selling that nonsense.

 

1 hour ago, Aquila Chrysaetos said:

About artificial versus genuine difficulty, the only distinction I can make between the two is how involved skill is. If skill has zero bearing on the outcome (think a slot machine), then it's artificial difficulty.

That's "purely random". At least it's the best descriptor in such a case as far as I'm concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, rehelekretep said:

imagine being the only person who doesnt like aaliens

 

Nothing wrong with that, and he isn't the only one ;) aa sucks.

Share this post


Link to post

I have not played all the way through any Doom game, ever. If you count pwads and pk3s, I've only beaten Shadow Of The Wool Ball once.

 

Edit: More confessions:

I always play with freelook, jump, and crouch. ALWAYS. 

I always play on HMP.

Edited by A Cacodemon

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

Let's not pretend you're particularly well informed about slaughtermaps. Least have the minimum decency to be upfront about your bias here: You hate slaughtermaps. Therefore I'd wager your "sample size" is far from comprehensive.

I dunno, I'd say I'm fairly well informed about slaughtermaps, since most of my "hate" comes from actually playing them. Maybe try to keep your own bias out of it?

 

4 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

You're telling me I do not understand what "artificial difficulty" means based solely on my statement that I don't think this "concept" applies to Ancient Aliens, which is a WAD you yourself have never even played. Good luck selling that nonsense.

oof except you didn't say that, now did you? you said, as I will quote again, "But all of this is entirely subjective, and has very little to do with 'genuine difficulty' as if that was an objective thing that existed (because it doesn't)."

you explicitly said genuine difficulty didn't exist at all, not just in aaliens. better luck next time though, friend! c:

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, bonnie said:

you explicitly said genuine difficulty didn't exist at all, not just in aaliens. better luck next time though, friend! c:

I don't think "artificial difficulty" is a thing, neither is "genuine difficulty". Nobody has provided a clear definition what these terms mean. It's that simple. It's quite telling you quote things out of context to make a point though.

Share this post


Link to post

I have yet to play any of the more popular and loved megawads or more hardcore megawads all the way through, I have only really played older more "user friendly" (or "more comfortable" you could say) like Icarus Alien Vanguard or The Rebirth, the typical "starter" megawads you could say, I prefer the laidback yet still engaging gameplay.

 

I need to play stuff like Alien Vendetta, Momento Mori, Ancient Aliens, Hell Revealed... I wish there was convenient tool or site that did something like a list of wads you've played and reviews of them (like just star ratings), something like this site would be cool and it would give me more incentive to play more wads.

 

EDIT: Jesus Christ what is this argument?

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

I don't think "artificial difficulty" is a thing, neither is "genuine difficulty". Nobody has provided a clear definition what these terms mean. It's that simple. It's quite telling you quote things out of context to make a point though.

it's even more telling that you literally just flip flopped.

 

"But all of this is entirely subjective, and has very little to do with 'genuine difficulty' as if that was an objective thing that existed (because it doesn't)." [it doesn't exist]

"You're telling me I do not understand what 'artificial difficulty' means based solely on my statement that I don't think this 'concept' applies to Ancient Aliens" [it exists but not in aaliens]

"I don't think 'artificial difficulty' is a thing, neither is 'genuine difficulty'." [it doesn't exist again]

 

if you'd like to fill us in on the extremely important context i'm apparently leaving out, I'd love to hear it. otherwise you really need to chill out friend.

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
×