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

Post Your Opinions About Doom (Whether Controversial or Not)

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, seed said:

 

Funny you mentioned that, Carmack himself admitted he phrased that very poorly and people have been misinterpreting what he said back then for literally decades.

 

I think that post is still up on his Twitter somewhere.

I half agree with you here. I don't think people "misinterpret" the quote (there isn't much to read into about it) as much as he changed his mind. Your point still stands though.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Arbys550 said:

Alright here's a controversial one: Doom Eternal is better than Doom 2016 in every way.

Eh, not exactly controversial. Most people agree with this in some way.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it goes along with the times. think of any game from Atari or NES. Mario had the simplest storyline. Kill the bad guy, save the girl. the original Wolfenstein games were simply ESCAPE!!! So, why should DOOM have an intricate story? The story being as important as the gameplay became big with releases like Metal Gear Solid, and now the greatest games (of the 21st century) have super detailed stories. One of the best games (in my opinion) was Red Dead Redemption 2, and that won all sort of awards. one of the crappier games that didn't have a shitload of story was No Man's Sky, and we all know what happened to that. So I think Carmack changed his mind as the best games have great stories that grab the players attention. Still, I don't think DOOM should have a detailed story, as it was never like that. I mean, would you like one of those little yellow texts after every level in the original DOOM? No, I'd like to just rip away at hell monsters and not be interrupted by a screen saying, "Oh, the station exploded, and now you have ended up in the sewers."

 

That's just my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, LiT_gam3r said:

I'm sure many can agree with me when I say the Master Levels suck! Not all of them, but most of them. I can't stand Express Elevator to Hell, and Mephisto's Mausoleum is just a giant middle finger. I liked the Titan levels, though. 

Not exactly controversial too. Most agree that the Master Levels are merely an official curiosity (in that it was released by id Software themselves). Quality-wise, they don't hold well.

2 minutes ago, LiT_gam3r said:

I think it goes along with the times. think of any game from Atari or NES. Mario had the simplest storyline. Kill the bad guy, save the girl. the original Wolfenstein games were simply ESCAPE!!! So, why should DOOM have an intricate story? The story being as important as the gameplay became big with releases like Metal Gear Solid, and now the greatest games (of the 21st century) have super detailed stories. One of the best games (in my opinion) was Red Dead Redemption 2, and that won all sort of awards. one of the crappier games that didn't have a shitload of story was No Man's Sky, and we all know what happened to that. So I think Carmack changed his mind as the best games have great stories that grab the players attention. Still, I don't think DOOM should have a detailed story, as it was never like that. I mean, would you like one of those little yellow texts after every level in the original DOOM? No, I'd like to just rip away at hell monsters and not be interrupted by a screen saying, "Oh, the station exploded, and now you have ended up in the sewers."

 

That's just my opinion. 

Stories can supplement already good games into an interesting topic for some of the more dedicated player. I think it's definitely more than just modern gamers looking for a more enjoyable alternative to traditional literatures.

Also, video games evolve all the time, as does DOOM. Hardware used to be very limited, so most developers went with the simple way for video games (emphasize simple gameplay, exclude deep stories/lore). Nowadays, video game development is limited only by mind (hardware having evolved a lot since mid-end 1990's), most AAA game developers want to include at least one complex thing to fascinate modern gamers, with some also keeping many old things at the core of their products.

Share this post


Link to post

If RAGE somewho was done with Demons instead of mutants in mind in the develploment, could be used as a Doom 3 Sequel without too much problem.

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Lila Feuer said:

Doom 3 is a Doom game.

 

Which really should not be all that controversial of an opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure how unpopular this one, but eh, whatever.

 

Eternal's storytelling sucks ass. The way it both forces the story and characters down your throat in cutscenes, while at the same time forcing you to read dozens of codex entries just to understand what's happening is awful. It's frankly one of the worst told stories I've ever seen in a game, and it's especially egregious given that's it's Doom of all things.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, CasualScrub said:

Not sure how unpopular this one, but eh, whatever.

 

Eternal's storytelling sucks ass. The way it both forces the story and characters down your throat in cutscenes, while at the same time forcing you to read dozens of codex entries just to understand what's happening is awful. It's frankly one of the worst told stories I've ever seen in a game, and it's especially egregious given that's it's Doom of all things.

Holy shit is it really that bad??

 

I'm playing through DOOM 2016 RN and I like the story and how it's presented.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, MassiveEdgelord said:

Holy shit is it really that bad??

 

I'm playing through DOOM 2016 RN and I like the story and how it's presented.

Yup. They took the sprinkling of lore that was in 2016, and shoved it front and center. But they don't establish anything beforehand, like they assume you already know the lore, and as a result the story is incredibly convoluted.

 

It's a mess, and rarely explains anything without you having to dig through the codex.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, that's exactly what happens when you try to cater to two very different parts of the fanbase, those who want more story (actually includes me BTW), and those who really wouldn't care less for it.

 

The end result will be convoluted, especially when you're trying to achieve something but try to hide it to please others.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/9/2020 at 1:40 PM, MassiveEdgelord said:

I'm playing through DOOM 2016 RN and I like the story and how it's presented.

It gets weird once you get to Eternal, ancient civilizations, characters that you have no idea where they came from, It doesn't pick up where 2016 left off. They dropped the minimalistic storytelling approach of 2016.

 

The upcoming DLCs aren't going to bridge the gap between the two games and are just going to carry on where Eternal ended, so It's likely that they didn't have enough material to work with to make what happened between 2016 and Eternal worth playing through, and just wanted to get you straight to the meat of the action. It's not the best way to handle it but eh.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know, I enjoyed the story. Cutscenes are skippable and you don't have to read the codex entries.

 

However, I do understand that doing these two things results in the player not knowing what's happening, so I see where people are coming from on that front. I personally didn't mind, though.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the new DOOM games are DOOM, just not classic DOOM. I think that if you were to change the name of the game and the design of th, e enemies, it would still feel DOOMy, but not like the DOOM's you originally played. It is great for a new audience of DOOM, but it also makes sense that some of the classic DOOMers don't enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Arbys550 said:

I don't know, I enjoyed the story. Cutscenes are skippable and you don't have to read the codex entries.

 

However, I do understand that doing these two things results in the player not knowing what's happening, so I see where people are coming from on that front. I personally didn't mind, though.

It's not the story itself that's really the issue, but the way it's presented. The problem is that they do an incredibly shit job of trying to convey the story and lore through the game itself, leaving the player itself incredibly confused.

 

They introduce all these new world, locations, and characters to the player, but they do nothing to establish them to you beforehand. They do nothing to connect Eternal to 2016 and don't at all attempt to explain what happened between the games, why the Doomslayer is on his big floating, fortress, etc. It feels like there was an entire game between 2016 and Eternal where this all made sense, but we never played it. Even something as simple as an introduction before the main game would've helped.

 

Look at how 2016 did its storytelling and lore. It's very simple, point A-to-B. Olivia Pierce is trying to unleash a Hell portal, and you have to stop her. Easy to understand and get, you don't really need to know much more beyond that. Any extraneous lore was either environmental or in codex entries you find, but it wasn't necessary. But it absolutely is in Eternal, and Eternal does a shit job of helping the player understand the story.

Share this post


Link to post

Based on what I have noticed in anothet topic, it seems id just didn't settle on a way of telling the player what happened between the gap, and haven't settled on it still.

 

With sequels however, it isn't unheard of them not making sense if you didn't play the original, and explaining that is, IMO, not something they should actively try to establish since it's not be their goal anyway, their goal is to tell their own story and move on. Maybe put a short recap at the beginning for better context, but that's about it. The players should check the previous entries in the series if they want the full details.

 

Case on point, Half-Life 2, which also makes little sense if you haven't played the original. What's Black Mesa, what's a Resonance Cascade, who's Eli, what's Xen, why are the Vortigaunts friendly and who are they or who they used to be, why is Barney owing you a beer, and the list goes on. It still works as-is, yes, but you're missing a lot of context and many pieces of the puzzle without playing the first game.

 

Again, coming back to newDoom, considering the two very different audiences that they try to cater to simultaneously, I really don't think they could've handled it better. And frankly, I think the series should move on and stop trying to cater to nostalgics, that's never going to work as we've seen with other franchises, and those care more about classic Doom than they ever will for wherever the series is heading, they're more attached to its past, not its future.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, seed said:

And frankly, I think the series should move on and stop trying to cater to nostalgics, that's never going to work as we've seen with other franchises, and those care more about classic Doom than they ever will for wherever the series is heading, they're more attached to its past, not its future.

 

I dunno, I'm kind of a hardcore oldschool purist, and I may not think the new games are better... but I still appreciate them. They're fun games, and they mimic the old ones in certain ways.

 

I don't even really consider them to be the same universe, like Doom 3... it's more of a Quake-inspired shooter version of Doom. But that's ok. Different people were involved, the industry has changed heavily, and a new fanbase will inevitably rise to meet the challenge. I'll always be a die-hard oldschool id fan, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy a different take on a timeless series. *shrugs*

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Hellektronic said:

I dunno, I'm kind of a hardcore oldschool purist, and I may not think the new games are better... but I still appreciate them. They're fun games, and they mimic the old ones in certain ways.

 

I don't even really consider them to be the same universe, like Doom 3... it's more of a Quake-inspired shooter version of Doom. But that's ok. Different people were involved, the industry has changed heavily, and a new fanbase will inevitably rise to meet the challenge. I'll always be a die-hard oldschool id fan, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy a different take on a timeless series. *shrugs*

 

I'm glad to hear that, but just a note here:

 

Unlike the other games in the series, Doom 3 is actually the one that does not take place in the same universe. Despite its name, Doom 3 is a reboot and re-imagining of the events of the original game set it its own universe with a different Marine - no, the D3 Marine is not classic-nuDoom Doomguy/Doom Slayer. However, its events and character are still acknowledged in the new games. The multiverses are also acknowledged.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, seed said:

Unlike the other games in the series, Doom 3 is actually the one that does not take place in the same universe. Despite its name, Doom 3 is a reboot and re-imagining of the events of the original game set it its own universe with a different Marine - no, the D3 Marine is not classic-nuDoom Doomguy/Doom Slayer. However, its events and character are still acknowledged in the new games. The multiverses are also acknowledged.

 

Yeahhh... but the whole multiverse idea might as well be the same as Doom 3, lol. Seems like it's just a very extravagant take on the same idea in a lot of ways, mostly just meant to be a nod to the original games, which are nothing like the new games. You know, kind of like a superficial sequel. One could even argue Doom 3 did take place in the multiverse, just with a different hero involved. *shrugs*

 

When I think "multiverse", I think of like... Marvel comics, and you want to talk about a convoluted mish-mash of radically different concepts just for the sake of variety and continuity? Lol.

 

Of course I'm sitting here like a rabid wolverine waiting for the new Eternal DLC to hit, but that's beside the point, lol. In the end, I think it's more of a game based on a game than a sequel. Obviously though that's just my opinion and how I manage to sleep at night, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, seed said:

Case on point, Half-Life 2, which also makes little sense if you haven't played the original. What's Black Mesa, what's a Resonance Cascade, who's Eli, what's Xen, why are the Vortigaunts friendly and who are they or who they used to be, why is Barney owing you a beer, and the list goes on. It still works as-is, yes, but you're missing a lot of context and many pieces of the puzzle without playing the first game.

Except HL2 does a much better job filling in the gaps between both games. At numerous points, they take the time to connect the dots to where you can very easily see how they connect. Key example being in the chapter "Black Mesa East", there's a posterboard with newspaper clipping talking about the "7 Hour War", and Eli even explains why Dr. Breen is in charge. And with characters like Eli and Barney, even if you never knew them specifically in Half-Life, they make it very clear in HL2 that these were people from Black Mesa. The way Half-Life 2 is built storywise means that, no, you don't need to have played Half-Life to understand what's going on.

 

My point with this is that Half-Life 2 does a fuck-load of a better job at informing the player of previous events they had not seen, and in a way where one doesn't necessarily need to play the first game to enjoy it. But Eternal completely fails in this regard; not only does it shit the bed in filling in the player on unseen events that connect the games, but because of some of the characters crossing over to the next it requires you to have played 2016 just to know who they are.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Arbys550 said:

The idea of meeting a seemingly impossible brick wall of a fight, analyzing it, and finally conquering it is very gratifying.

People are too lazy to analyze anything. Therefore there's no grace after that :P

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, CasualScrub said:

My point with this is that Half-Life 2 does a fuck-load of a better job at informing the player of previous events they had not seen, and in a way where one doesn't necessarily need to play the first game to enjoy it. But Eternal completely fails in this regard; not only does it shit the bed in filling in the player on unseen events that connect the games, but because of some of the characters crossing over to the next it requires you to have played 2016 just to know who they are.

 

Obviously, a lot happened between 2016 and Eternal... but I think the idea of jumping into it all chaotically was an attempt to mimic how 2016 starts. Pretty sure they said DLC will further explain it later on, but for now we just have to extrapolate.

Share this post


Link to post

City maps are an interesting concept.

 

I mean, the inherent dimensions and features possible mean lots of potential for interesting encounters and gimmicks. Valiant's MAP06 is a shining example.

 

On that, remember DOM-Condemned?

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Hellektronic said:

Pretty sure they said DLC will further explain it later on

As far as I know they said they will be sequels to Eternal as they will 'continue the story that began with 2016', confusing but maybe they'll try to explain it.

Edited by sluggard

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds like a very difficult task. It'll just entangle the story, which may (or may not) be detrimental. It is quite the risk, especially for a franchise like Doom's.

 

Then again, I am sure they can pull it off. The Doom Team knows what they're doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, sluggard said:

As far as I know Hugo said they will be sequels to Eternal as they will 'continue the story that began with 2016', confusing but maybe they'll try to explain it.

 

For now, DLC 1 is obviously going to be a direct sequel to the events of Eternal. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure how they'd do prequel content considering a lot of the gameplay is based off of things you get in Eternal like dash and ice bombs, but hey, they've always got something silly up their sleeves.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

For now, DLC 1 is obviously going to be a direct sequel to the events of Eternal. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure how they'd do prequel content considering a lot of the gameplay is based off of things you get in Eternal like dash and ice bombs, but hey, they've always got something silly up their sleeves.

 

Like simply giving the player different arsenal. Really not that difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/1/2016 at 10:22 PM, Fonze said:


"Into the Beast's Belly" was a great track off TNT: Evilution. Could have been longer, though.

I like the IoS and MAP30 of TNT's beginning puzzle was creative and fun to figure out.

i agree

Share this post


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