Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Playing With Fire

Doom 1 or Doom 2?

Recommended Posts

It's been YEARS since I last made a WAD (I think it was back in 1999!) but I want to get back into it. My question is: what are the pros and cons to choosing Doom 2 over Doom 1 for an IWAD?

Sorry for the newbie question, but it's been a while.

Share this post


Link to post

There's almost no advantage of using (Ultimate) Doom as the IWAD other than the neater episode format.

Share this post


Link to post
Du Mhan Yhu said:

Doom 2 has more monsters

This. The variety will help you with creating interesting gameplay scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Playing With Fire said:

It's been YEARS since I last made a WAD (I think it was back in 1999!) but I want to get back into it.
My question is: what are the pros and cons to choosing Doom 2 over Doom 1 for an IWAD?


About 90% of pwads made nowadays are made with the resources from DOOM2. The only difference would be, as
already mentioned, the game structure, as in 32 maps in one go or maps broken up into groups or Episodes.

That being said, I do hope that you will check out some ports (not those from Portugal) and start mapping with
the new resources which they do provide.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, Doom 2 has WAY more monsters and a couple more weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
purist said:

There's almost no advantage of using (Ultimate) Doom as the IWAD other than the neater episode format.

I wish people weren't stuck with the terrible vanilla Doom (2) episode model. But hey, you can use advanced port MAPINFO. But it has problems: it either attracts you to turn the game into something non-Doom that doesn't even render like Doom (GZDoom), or baits you with revolutionary incomplete glitchy features that make the map unreleasable (Eternity).

PrBoom+ seems nice because it's lightweight while still having a fairly powerful Dehacked, but you're still stuck with the idiotic Doom 2 level progression.

Quake started off much more awesomely: you were already able to make your own story, branching it off any way you wanted.

Share this post


Link to post

There is also that magical Doom 1 feel... Like, even if you take a Doom 2 map and convert it to Doom 1 100% faithfully with all the same textures, etc, still it will suddenly feel different somehow, simply because it is for Doom 1 now, which is a different game. I guess people will disagree.

Share this post


Link to post

Doom1 vrs Doom2 depends if you want a make a short Episode, or a 31 Maps campaign.
If it is one or a few maps, and you care about the TECH nature, or actually have a theme, then choose Boom.
Boom has more capabilities, which saves you from creating hacked solutions to implement your theme.
If you want to make a challenge map, then Boom has more interesting tools to make challenges.
If you want to make a single 1990's id style Doom level, then you can choose which ever fits best, Doom1, Doom2, Plut, TNT.
It MAY depend upon which player user sub-group you want to please.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see anything in the original question about making a multi-map WAD so the episodic nature of Doom versus Doom2 may not be relevant if PWF is only planning on making a map or two.

Of course, as others have pointed out, if aiming at a port that supports MAPINFO, the episodic structure becomes irrelevant anyway.

And let's be honest, most of the WADs on idgames and elsewhere don't try and replace either an episode or the entire game anyway and nobody really cares if the map set just stops wherever it stops.


[Devil's_Avocado]
It's also interesting to note people recommending Doom2 over Doom because of the variety that helps create interesting gameplay. Yet ask Doomworld for a map format recommendation and people will tell you that ZDoomHexen or UDMF should not be used because they lead to feature bloat and unnecessary, detracting fanciness that spoils gameplay whereas the restricted feature set of Doom/BOOM compat instils creativity. ;)
[/Devil's_Avocado]

Share this post


Link to post
Enjay said:

[Devil's_Avocado]
It's also interesting to note people recommending Doom2 over Doom because of the variety that helps create interesting gameplay. Yet ask Doomworld for a map format recommendation and people will tell you that ZDoomHexen or UDMF should not be used because they lead to feature bloat and unnecessary, detracting fanciness that spoils gameplay whereas the restricted feature set of Doom/BOOM compat instils creativity. ;)
[/Devil's_Avocado]



For that note, you can always have the best of both worlds by restricting yourself to Vanilla Doom standards initially and, once the structure is done, you can then move to Hexen or UDMF to add some extra flare to it. Sort of like baking the cake first before you put the frosting on it.

Share this post


Link to post

That's only if you regard the features that those map formats allow as frosting. Personally, I think it usually works out better if you consider them an integrated part of the map (yeah, I know, I dropped the metaphor, I'm tired OK :P) from the outset.

If you do the former, they feel like add ons, if you do the latter, they are more likely to feel like a genuine part of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Enjay said:

[Devil's_Avocado]
It's also interesting to note people recommending Doom2 over Doom because of the variety that helps create interesting gameplay. Yet ask Doomworld for a map format recommendation and people will tell you that ZDoomHexen or UDMF should not be used because they lead to feature bloat and unnecessary, detracting fanciness that spoils gameplay whereas the restricted feature set of Doom/BOOM compat instils creativity. ;)
[/Devil's_Avocado]

It's about finding a good middle ground, in attempt to point in a generally good direction that easily leads to good mapping.

<MONSTER CAST>

Doom => Too few monsters, all have same-y straightforward attacks, unnecessary limitation for the mapper, little challenge for the player.
Doom 2 => Increased versatility of enemy roles, seems like a good middle ground.
Abusing Realm667 custom monsters => Too much distraction from basic gameplay principles, easy to break balance, might be uncomfortable for some players.

<ENGINE>

Vanilla => Too restrictive static limits, bothersome to care about.
Limit-removing/Boom => Unlimited experimenting with basic designs and triggers that Doom uses (plus some more), seems like a good middle ground.
ZDoom/UDMF => Lots of features, easy to be misused or to distract the mapper from focus on basic good gameplay principles.

Share this post


Link to post

Damn, scifista put that really well. I agree wholeheartedly.

I've always been mapping somewhere between vanilla and Boom, occasionally using fast lifts to avoid tedious waiting around or instant teleporters for the Duke-style multi story buildings. Of course, my favorite thing about Boom and beyond is the increased visplane limit.

Sometimes it's fun to force yourself to be so restricted that your wad can run in Doom2.exe - You'll find yourself coming up with clever and interesting ways to get things to work as you intended. I find that Doom1 is a bit too limiting, I've often ripped a few extra textures from Doom1 to help give it that classic feel, while still having the advantage of extra monsters/the SSG.

Sometimes it's fun to have the freedom of multiple linedefs and super fast lifts/doors, easy dehacked support, sky transfers, unlimited visplanes, deep water and so on. They have served to breathe new life into Doom mapping, so no one ever has to feel too restricted.

Before choosing Vanilla or something more advanced, it's best to have at least a vague vision of exactly what kind of experience you're after. If you want an actual story, and you want some "real world" flare, I recommend going with something more advanced. If you want a "pure" doom experience that can be played by any Doomer on any port, vanilla is the way to go. That said, I always prefer mapping for Doom2, because of the additional content. If you want to use a few D1 textures in your wad, ripping them is super simple.

Share this post


Link to post

scifista, what do you think of making minor changes to the standard bestiary, via DEH/Decorate, as a default in all of one's levels?

I've been thinking about making the Hell Noble's fireballs significantly faster -- at least the Baron's -- and reducing the Arachnotron's pain chance to that of the Archvile. The originals feel weak in those respects. For one, the Arachnotron's pain chance hurts its versatility a lot and doesn't even make sense logically (brains don't feel pain, after all). I'd make the Mastermind's pain chance low too, but I don't plan on using one anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post

It's a double edged sword in some regards because, while having more restrictions can force you to be more creative, it can also prevent you from doing many things that you'd really like to do, which can also bind someone's creativity. Besides, even GZDoom is positively full of limitations as I can testify from experience so it's not like you don't still have to be creative at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Memfis said:

There is also that magical Doom 1 feel... Like, even if you take a Doom 2 map and convert it to Doom 1 100% faithfully with all the same textures, etc, still it will suddenly feel different somehow, simply because it is for Doom 1 now, which is a different game. I guess people will disagree.


I always preferred the Doom 1 experience.

A couple years ago I used dm2cnv32 to convert the Doom 2 IWAD levels to a Doom 1 PWAD, just to see... It was pretty fun until I got to E1M7 and got stuck. I should go back and try this again, but this time edit the special levels and add manual exit switch or something. And then some further fine-tuning of the monsters and other things could make it even more interesting...

Share this post


Link to post

Mind that even if you map for Doom 1, you can still use Dehacked to make the Doom 2 monsters work in Doom 1, modifying their properties and behaviour as you see fit. Of course, I don't recommend you to just rip the Doom 2 resources; try to pick something else instead, such as Realm667 resources. You can do evil things such as placing Double Chaingunners and Diabolists in Doom 1. If you conserve resources or raise the limit to something like MBF, you can have a lot more monsters than even in Doom 2.

One technical warning if you use Dehacked for this: do NOT use Doom 2 thing ID (doomednum) values in Doom 1! The things with Doom 2 editor numbers, along with anything else placed after them, will simply not spawn. Let's say that you replace the Arachnotron with a bestiary Arachnophyte (flying non-boss spiderdemon), but keep its "ID #" to (68). The monster won't appear in Doom 1 maps even if all its resources are available, and anything you place after it won't spawn either (which will seem weird). Replace the DoomEd number 68 with something safer, such as 20000 or higher, and it will work, but you might want to configure your editor to list 20000 among the monsters.

Share this post


Link to post
rdwpa said:

scifista, what do you think of making minor changes to the standard bestiary, via DEH/Decorate, as a default in all of one's levels?

They can be great. I like them in most wads, and dislike them in some others. In my belief, they need to follow these 2 principles to be good:

1. Improve the game and/or balance and/or serve a specific purpose, meaningfully utilized in the game. Just no random changes for the sake of changes, that might possibly mess with the player's expectations and betray him "randomly". For example, speeding up the Pinky Demon (running + attack) might be good, in order to make him more of a challenge. Reducing pain chance might and might not be good, because it may lead to forcing the player to significantly change his habits when fighting the monster, which will furthermore confuse him when he gets to play normal wads again. Randomly messing with projectile speeds would break player's intuition, and needs more justification to be considered good.

2. Announce presence of the changes to the player clearly. My favourite way to do so is using custom sprites for modified game objects. That will make the player understand that something may behave differently that what he's habituated to, and that's why I like them. For example, change a monster's sprites and its projectile sprites as well ("claim it a new monster type"), and then feel free to alter its properties as you wish - but still with respect to balance and purposefullness. The "new monster type" should distinctly differ from existing monster types, to help the player understand its unique traits. That's how I see it, at least.

Share this post


Link to post

scifista, I'm not disagreeing with you. It just amused me to see people arguing in favour of Doom2 using almost exactly the same reasons that I have seen on a number of occasions from some people to explain why certain practices are bad. Equally, "finding middle ground" could also be regarded as "finding a compromise" and I have heard it said that compromises merely mean that there are two unhappy people instead of one. ;)

What I would say though is that in your reasoning for both the bestiary and the map format you coupled the words "abuse" and "misuse" with your description of what people do. The obvious point there is that abusing/misusing is unlikely to work out well regardless of what IWAD, port or map format you ware working with. Equally, if things are not being abused/misused, then they are unlikely to be a problem. Indeed, your description of a DEH modified enemy with suitably altered sprites fits very well with some of the more subtle Realm667 enemies that can be used to bolster the game bestiary very effectively.

Of course, what constitutes abuse/misuse will vary from person to person.

Share this post


Link to post
Enjay said:

"finding middle ground" could also be regarded as "finding a compromise" and I have heard it said that compromises merely mean that there are two unhappy people instead of one. ;)

Not at all necessarily! The trick is that only the result matters. If you find a good middle ground, you're more likely to easily have good result. And if the result is good, everyone should be happy. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps the better answer is that there's no definitive answer. Some people work better in a more restricted environment where they're forced to be creative to get what they want while others are dripping with creativity and they need more tools and freedom to really bring it out. Experiment and see what works best for you.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×