Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
baja blast rd.

Post Your Opinions About Doom (Whether Controversial or Not)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, stinkfist said:

TNT Evilution was more fun than plutonia

Well, I enjoy both games, but I enjoy TNT more, because of the night episode, I would have enjoyed Plutonia more it didn't bore me to death, especially in the last few maps.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, rdwpa said:

so say goodbye to BFG spam

Which is kinda the point. Being the Ultimate Weapon, it should be treated like an Ultimate Ability in games that have them, or at least like a powerup; a game-changer when put to use, to swing a desperate situation to your favor. It's not just another routine workhorse weapon; you don't spam powerups. If it has a higher cost like 100, then the value-per-ammo becomes lower than the Plasma Rifle... but it produces faster value-per-time (dps). That's the tradeoff: when you're backed into a corner and don't have time for efficiency, when you need to delete those enemies at any cost: the BFG delivers. But you can't just big-dick your way through the battle: it's inefficient, so you have to use it wisely. The BFG is for when you're out of options; but when you do have options, a player should be encouraged to choose them well.

Share this post


Link to post

My first paragraph is already what my response would be to that. 

 

One can come up with philosophical arguments for what a Real BFG is, but the important litmus test is fun. A weapon is meant to be enjoyed, more than it is meant to fit a theoretical schema. I wouldn't want sensible BFG use cases to shrink to a small fraction of what they currently are. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Rainne said:

Which is kinda the point. Being the Ultimate Weapon, it should be treated like an Ultimate Ability in games that have them, or at least like a powerup; a game-changer when put to use, to swing a desperate situation to your favor. It's not just another routine workhorse weapon; you don't spam powerups.

From the "I make maps" perspective, I'd very much prefer if you could somehow stop implying how I (or anybody else) should treat weapons or powerups, when I build something.

 

10 minutes ago, Rainne said:

But you can't just big-dick your way through the battle

I made fights you couldn't "big-dick" your way through even with unlimited ammo on the BFG, since these fights still take more than just holding down the button. Those absolutely require liberal use of the BFG, as well as a high degree of mobility. And I can't just give out an infinite ammo BFG either, because sometimes I might want the BFG to also be a tactical nuke in the same map/WAD.

 

Raising the ammo consumption to levels like 100 or even nonsense degrees like 200 cells per shot would make deliberately spammy encounter design like that either impossible, or just godawful to look at because I'd need to "vomit" Cell charge packs all over the place to account for the +150% (or +400%) consumption. That would also ruin any kind of surprise, because the moment people see the "cell charge pack floor texture", they already know what's coming.

 

Besides, it strikes me as weird to blame the weapon for how much it can be spammed, when in reality it's the mappers who give out the BFG with ample supplies to use it. So maybe, instead of blaming the power levels of the BFG, it's actually on the mappers to balance the weapon appropriately by way of ammo distribution.

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Rainne said:

or at least like a powerup; a game-changer when put to use, to swing a desperate situation to your favor. It's not just another routine workhorse weapon; you don't spam powerups.

 

The game already has powerups -- they're literally called powerups. Soulsphere, Megasphere, Invulnerability Sphere, etc. I agree, they would lose their impact if a mapper just spammed them, especially the Invulnerability. That's why most don't. The BFG is just part of your arsenal. These are my two cents on the subject, for whatever they're worth.

Share this post


Link to post

The populated Zandronum servers that are overloaded with every gameplay mod imaginable are incredibly stale, repetitive, and boring, and it sucks that there's really no active general Deathmatch or Co-Op games anymore.

 

Share this post


Link to post

I don’t know how controversial this is, but Memento Mori is better than TNT, Plutonia and the Master Levels.

 

It feels more professional in the visual/detail department, features greater variety in design and challenge, better custom textures and a legendary soundtrack - one of the greatest to this day, to my ears.

 

I know a lot of people are going to say Plutonia is better. It’s more annoying to play, IMO. Go into an area, die, work out what the Insta-death trick was, roll your eyes once you realise what it is, load your save game, circumvent the “haha dead” trap now that you know how it works, and move forward. Rinse and repeat. That’s how it always feels for me, anyway.

Share this post


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

Raising the ammo consumption to levels like 100 or even nonsense degrees like 200 cells per shot would make deliberately spammy encounter design like that either impossible, or just godawful to look at because I'd need to "vomit" Cell charge packs all over the place to account for the +150% (or +400%) consumption. That would also ruin any kind of surprise, because the moment people see the "cell charge pack floor texture", they already know what's coming.

That's fine. Let "deliberately spammy encounter design" be seen for what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, The Civ said:

The populated Zandronum servers that are overloaded with every gameplay mod imaginable are incredibly stale, repetitive, and boring, and it sucks that there's really no active general Deathmatch or Co-Op games anymore.

Even back in their own day, it was hard to find just no-nonsense straight-up DM/CTF/etc in Quake II and Quake III. Instead, everything has to be some gimmick with lots of flashy colors for the easily-impressed.

 

Like, I wonder whether there's even value in adding coop starts to maps anymore, except maybe as placeholders for bots or custom actors or something.

 

Or whether there'd be value in something like a matchmaking/queue system. Like, if you want to play coop or something, queue for it, and when enough other players are also queued for it, round them up and off you go. Rather than having to host a server and wait for people to join which no one's gonna do anyway because there's no one on the server and you don't know whether the host is even there or has been AFK for a week.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Doomkid said:

I don’t know how controversial this is, but Memento Mori is better than TNT, Plutonia and the Master Levels.

Being a person who absolutely loves Plutonia, I have to say I agree with this assessment...however...

 

Let's take TNT and Master Levels out of the equation, those don't even belong in this comparison.  Just comparing Memento Mori and Plutonia, you have a wad that was designed by 2 guys under pressure to get it done in a short period of time (6 months?  4?) And another that was made by a relatively large team in...oh wait, just 5 months, but still...very big team distributing the workload vs 2 guys.  One thing is gonna be better than the other.  But that's just, like, my opinion, dude...

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Rainne said:

Like, I wonder whether there's even value in adding coop starts to maps anymore, except maybe as placeholders for bots or custom actors or something.

 

Most CP's and projects typically require contributing mappers to place coop starts, if that answers your question. If not, then I guess you can look at it as: if you want people to have the option to play your map in coop, then place coop starts. The vast majority of mappers here, myself included, seem to value that and a lot of sets that people like wind up also getting some coop/surv action, (there are even weekly coop/surv events on constantly new wads, the zdaemon TNS you can see in the multiplayer forum as an example, but ultimately when it comes to your maps you do you.

 

Quote

Or whether there'd be value in something like a matchmaking/queue system. Like, if you want to play coop or something, queue for it, and when enough other players are also queued for it, round them up and off you go. Rather than having to host a server and wait for people to join which no one's gonna do anyway because there's no one on the server and you don't know whether the host is even there or has been AFK for a week.

 

None of this makes any sense. Have you ever hosted a server on Zand? What you're suggesting would amount to forcing players to wait for an arbitrary number of other people before being able to play, whereas the current setup allows players to join the game immediately and at least play while they wait. The doom mp scene is pretty sparse so it's not uncommon to have to wait a little while to find people to join and also very regular to have to be able to set aside the wad you want to play in favor of what other people are playing, because there simply are not that many people on for the majority of the day. That said a lot of people are going to just join servers that are not empty to play immediately, so as long as you're in a server, (and if you want people to join your hosted server make sure you actually join it) your server will be seen by all the likely five doomers that will open their doom explorers and look for a game to join, but if you want to get people together on something specific your best bet is to gather them up beforehand in discord, on each of the 3 main mp ports' irc's, or on a forum like here and then join up together; you make your own queue. If you want randoms to join then you need to host something the average doomer will want to join.

 

I think a useful, revolutionary idea for the doom mp scene would be the ability to join servers or otherwise find a way to allow one group of people to run multiple duels while all staying as one group in a server, which would cut waiting times for duels immensely.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Most CP's and projects typically require contributing mappers to place coop starts, if that answers your question. If not, then I guess you can look at it as: if you want people to have the option to play your map in coop, then place coop starts. The vast majority of mappers here, myself included, seem to value that and a lot of sets that people like wind up also getting some coop/surv action, (there are even weekly coop/surv events on constantly new wads, the zdaemon TNS you can see in the multiplayer forum as an example, but ultimately when it comes to your maps you do you.

Well, yeah, adding coop starts is easy, but it feels more like a formality than a practical thing. But from what you say, looks like there is value to it after all. 👍🏻

Share this post


Link to post

What about DM starts? I assume those remain optional and DM players would rather play maps designed with it in mind.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah I think most dm players are highly averse to the idea of dm'ing on an otherwise sp map. I had the fun idea to make dm heretic maps and then convert them to also be playable in sp and the small few people actually interested enough to respond railed on me for even that until I finally stopped telling people these maps are also playable in sp. I'm being a bit facetious on it but it actually wasn't that much different in reality, which is a shame because converting maps from dm to sp does nothing to hurt the dm experience and is actually easy and fun to do and I'd like to see some projects like this.

 

That all said, there is also some good logic to the standpoint of not wanting to dm on an otherwise sp map, including how very important it is that areas flow and are balanced, as well as the importance of the size of the map. DM maps that are fun to play have a different set of core designs to a lot of sp maps, though there are also a lot of interesting similarities I think could be explored further.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Fonze said:

I had the fun idea to make dm heretic maps and then convert them to also be playable in sp

Kinda like E6M2? And all of E6, for that matter, but E6M2 is the most SP-like of the set.

 

SP and DM certainly have different design requirements, but I agree that it'd be easier to retrofit a DM-specific map for SP than vice versa.

Share this post


Link to post

Another "unpopular opinion" even if I also like to make large maps requiring a lot of hours of work.

 

I tend to think that small or rather moderate size speedmaps usually have better and more fun gameplay than "normal" maps. In my wadography, my ambitious maps have better aesthetics but I have more fun on my speedmaps.

 

Also , to bring a brief definition of what I consider as a "speedmap" : A map made in few hours or a in a few days.

 

The main reason why I like speedmapping is that the time constraint forces you to focus on the essentials: the gameplay, the layout and the general atmosphere of the map (music, choice of textures...). 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Unregistered account

hell yeah dude

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Doomkid said:

I don’t know how controversial this is, but Memento Mori is better than TNT, Plutonia and the Master Levels.

 

It feels more professional in the visual/detail department, features greater variety in design and challenge, better custom textures and a legendary soundtrack - one of the greatest to this day, to my ears.

 

I know a lot of people are going to say Plutonia is better. It’s more annoying to play, IMO. Go into an area, die, work out what the Insta-death trick was, roll your eyes once you realise what it is, load your save game, circumvent the “haha dead” trap now that you know how it works, and move forward. Rinse and repeat. That’s how it always feels for me, anyway.

Funny, because I think the Opposite, I think TNT, Plutonia and Master Levels are better than Memenot Mori.

 

I think Memeto Mori's level design is very inconsistent, you could expect anything from Awesome to Terrible, the soundtrack is good thu but it's not as good as the the Doom 1 or TNT soundtracks, the level arrangement is a mess, they have a trend to follow good maps with shit ones to kill any sort of momentum the game has (I'm looking at you Cesspool), Fort Hades and City of the Unavenged back to back!?! Really!?! and the fact that the game was designed for Co-op doesn't help the game, it makes it less smooth.

 

Let's go to TNT and Plutonia, while TNT has some backtracking and mazy like levels, if you know what you're doing you'll get pass through it without a problem, and as much as Hard Plutonia gets, the maps are shorter and encourages you to get better, Memento Mori however does the worst of both games at times, it's mazy in a way that becomes overbearingly long, and it's less smother and more annoying than the both Final Doom games, and less accessible than both.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, xdarkmasterx said:

Doom 2016 has the best boss fights

That's not saying much considering its competition is the likes of Spider Mastermind,  Icon of Sin, and the Cyberdemon (D3). But I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Super Mighty G said:

 considering its competition is the likes of Spider Mastermind,  Icon of Sin

 

Second unpopular opinion: Spider Mastermind is the best boss in D1 (from a pistol start) and Icon of Sin is the best Boss in the first 2 Doom games :3

Share this post


Link to post

While Memento Mori is a very important wad in Doom's history (its the first Doom 2 megawad), I feel that it has aged poorly. I feel that even wads like TNT:Evilution and Icarus are better than MM1. Perdition's Gate in-turn is better than both TNT and Icarus..

 

And all of these don't even hold a candle against Plutonia.

Share this post


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