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

1 minute ago, jamondemarnatural said:

Doom 3 BFG is best that Doom 3.

finally someone who agrees with me. i love bfg edition

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, starfruit said:

finally someone who agrees with me. i love bfg edition


Fixed some problems. It's available for many consoles, and without the ammo limitation you can use more the power weapons as plasma, BFG and Chaingun without hestistation.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, MassiveEdgelord said:

How come? Never played it so IDK.

idk. i just like it more than the others. probably because it kinda drifts away from the formula that most doom games have. because believe it or not "kill demon feel like badass" can get old sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, LiT_gam3r said:

I did. I say I like them. No reason why. 

Um, I think he means what do you like about them. Why not respond to that?

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Ant1 said:

Mouselook doesn't make the IWADs any more fun.

 

I find Doom less fun with mouselook/freelook. It always feels wrong because I know the maps are not designed with it in mind, and it provides advantages that you're not supposed to have.

Share this post


Link to post

And if you're not using autoaim when using freelook, that's even worse.

 

So that would kinda be another one for me, playing Doom without autoaim is wrong, simply because it gives you advantages you're not supposed to have. Unless the wad was designed with it in mind, in which case that's fine, obviously, but for vanilla/limit-removing/Boom/MBF, turning autoaim off is in the same category as cheating in my book.

 

I keep it enabled even in the Build games, it's especially BS in Blood due to its horrendous target prioritization, but I keep it ON anyway because it makes me feel like I'm cheating otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, seed said:

playing Doom without autoaim is wrong, simply because it gives you advantages you're not supposed to have.

 

I don't consider being able to hit the demon I'm ACTUALLY aiming at rather than the other bloke standing next to him to be an advantage heh. That's just fucking annoying when autoaim does that and has gotten me killed for it plenty of times. Turning it off also helps me not kill myself with a rocket if I, for example, wanted to kill a Cacodemon floating a bit above from the higher platform I'm standing on, rather than blowing my goddamn feet off because the autoaim thought I wanted to shoot at the Hell Knight down on the ground.

Edited by Biodegradable

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Pseudonaut said:

 

I find Doom less fun with mouselook/freelook. It always feels wrong because I know the maps are not designed with it in mind, and it provides advantages that you're not supposed to have.

EXACTLY!!!

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, seed said:

And if you're not using autoaim when using freelook, that's even worse.

 

So that would kinda be another one for me, playing Doom without autoaim is wrong, simply because it gives you advantages you're not supposed to have. Unless the wad was designed with it in mind, in which case that's fine, obviously, but for vanilla/limit-removing/Boom/MBF, turning autoaim off is in the same category as cheating in my book.

 

I keep it enabled even in the Build games, it's especially BS in Blood due to its horrendous target prioritization, but I keep it ON anyway because it makes me feel like I'm cheating otherwise.

 

I mostly agree... but there were time where the original games were just plain dickish about putting hitscan enemies outside the range of the autoaim and higher than the default height. You have to drop everything and get close to them before they kill you. Same with Blood. In Blood, that flare gun is a complete and utter liability using autoaim... it borders on madness. You're trying to hit a moving target with a single projectile that behaves like a plasma orb in Doom. It hits walls, it hits this, it hits that, it's madness. Playing Blood on the hardest difficulties you wont even beat the first level without dying like 40 times.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

I mostly agree... but there were time where the original games were just plain dickish about putting hitscan enemies outside the range of the autoaim and higher than the default height. You have to drop everything and get close to them before they kill you. Same with Blood. In Blood, that flare gun is a complete and utter liability using autoaim... it borders on madness. You're trying to hit a moving target with a single projectile that behaves like a plasma orb in Doom. It hits walls, it hits this, it hits that, it's madness. Playing Blood on the hardest difficulties you wont even beat the first level without dying like 40 times.

 

Heavy disagree... without autoaim the Flare Gun is horrendously unpredictable with the flare glitching out into walls, breaking on contact, not attaching to enemies, etc. The Tommy Gun is a weapon that is bad with it ON in certain circumstances, the only weapon that may suffer from it sometimes, if you run into Spiders and Cultists, guess which enemy it's going to target. Also the difficulty of Blood is blown out of proportion, it's ruthless at times, but fair.

 

That's my take and my 0.02 on the topic of autoaim in these games, and I'm set on my ways, I'm not actually looking for a debate on this matter, no argument is going to change my mind. Full stop.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, seed said:

 

Heavy disagree... without autoaim the Flare Gun is horrendously unpredictable with the flare glitching out into walls, breaking on contact, not attaching to enemies, etc. The Tommy Gun is a weapon that is bad with it ON in certain circumstances, the only weapon that may suffer from it sometimes, if you run into Spiders and Cultists, guess which enemy it's going to target. Also the difficulty of Blood is blown out of proportion, it's ruthless at times, but fair.

 

That's my take and my 0.02 on the topic of autoaim in these games, and I'm set on my ways, I'm not actually looking for a debate on this matter, no argument is going to change my mind. Full stop.

 

I always use autoaim in Doom, I just kinda draw the line in Blood when it comes to the flare gun.

 

I will say though, it's been a long time since I've played Blood. I don't even own it anymore. I had a nice setup for DOSbox once upon a time, all the expansions, everything... but that computer melted in a horrendous fire that destroyed pretty much everything I own. So my opinions might've changed since then, I can't say.

 

As for Doom though? I don't like getting sniped and being unable to return fire, that's just... immoral. Lol. I still use autoaim, but the prospect of having to rush snipers for the autoaim to be able to nix them is bullshit however you spell it. Depends on the map, depends on the enemies. But a bunch of chaingun zombies on a far away, high ledge are just plain obnoxious.

Edited by Hellektronic

Share this post


Link to post

It's called, "Tricks & Traps" fam, it's supposed to be mean. Nirvana is worse for it is guilty of the greatest sin imaginable when it comes to a Doom map: Being boring.

Share this post


Link to post

I enjoyed the crazy over-the-top storyline of the DOOM comic, and wish more comics had been produced. It would have been great to see a series of insane amounts of gore with little context other than Rip n' tear written hundreds of times! Most indy comics these days have the most convoluted stories, and others are just strange. DOOM was more than that, it was readable. 

Share this post


Link to post

I hate this idea that Doom was originally this uber-fast constantly non-stop running type of game. That you never got a moment to breath. With the exception of a few maps in the original game, you always had plenty of time to explore and relax, so I'm not sure where this misconception comes from.

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, CasualScrub said:

I hate this idea that Doom was originally this uber-fast constantly non-stop running type of game. That you never got a moment to breath. With the exception of a few maps in the original game, you always had plenty of time to explore and relax, so I'm not sure where this misconception comes from.

 

Nostalgia and false memories most likely.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, seed said:

Nostalgia and false memories most likely.

 

It bothers me that nostalgia and false memories have become the direction of what Doom is now and what it will become, lol.

Share this post


Link to post

I remember Ultimate DOOM and DOOM II being strategic, fast paced and you have to manage your ammo resources and health for tougher enemies and traps including the knowledge you learned from previous levels. this same applies for DOOM 3, but it's a bit more of a modern shooter from that time which it remained slow paced most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post

Dunno but many PWADS of Doom 2 play for me mega action way, fast paced and i really love more that aspect that in the IWAD.

Glad they pushed forward to that direction the rigth way, with some balance on the newer games.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Hellektronic said:

It bothers me that nostalgia and false memories have become the direction of what Doom is now and what it will become, lol.

 

Doom was never ultra serious, no fun, no jokes, all horror either ;).

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/23/2020 at 2:53 PM, seed said:

 

Nostalgia and false memories most likely.

 

More like the popularity of gameplay mods like Complex Doom, Brutal Doom, etc. Mind you, I love GZDoom and Zandronum mods as well as classic maps and ports, hell Skulltag was my first port, but you gotta remember that the modding scene is what brings a lot of new players to the old Doom games. So of course someone who started playing Doom in 2015 after seeing a video of Project Brutality is going to have a different interpretation of Doom than someone who was there when it started.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, TheMightyHeracross said:

More like the popularity of gameplay mods like Complex Doom, Brutal Doom, etc. Mind you, I love GZDoom and Zandronum mods as well as classic maps and ports, hell Skulltag was my first port, but you gotta remember that the modding scene is what brings a lot of new players to the old Doom games. So of course someone who started playing Doom in 2015 after seeing a video of Project Brutality is going to have a different interpretation of Doom than someone who was there when it started.

 

But it's still their fault if they won't try to play vanilla afterwards, even if only for the sake of curiosity or for comparison. They'll immediately notice these mods basically turn the experience into something else entirely. BD, PB etc. are not classic Doom, nor do they aim to be anyway.

 

I also returned to Doom in 2015 thanks to BD, but I moved away from it after its novelty factor had worn off, which was sooner rather than later, and when I played vanilla, it immediately dawned on me, that these mods were nothing like the original game was. They're not even my jam anymore, gameplay mods just aren't for me, unless they come with the mod itself, I prefer mapsets and TCs.

Share this post


Link to post

@seed He's right though, I think a lot of the elements in the new Doom games are meant to appeal to a totally different breed... the kind of people who'd feel that Doom needed to be changed.

 

I mean I realize they're just trying to sell a game to diverse audiences and not go bankrupt in a cut-throat industry, I just... I dunno. I feel like the reaction to the original Doom only happened because it was one of the first of it's breed, and it was fun and shareware. It's actually kinda niche by today's standards, because most shooter fans now would rather play something else like Call of Duty or Player Unknown's Battleground or something like that. But back in the 90's? There wasn't a whole lot of choice, so most people just played Doom.

 

If you tried to sell a game based on Doom 1 in this day and age, you probably would go bankrupt. And that's pretty depressing. Not that I blame them for changing the formula, it just makes me sad.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

If you tried to sell a game based on Doom 1 in this day and age, you probably would go bankrupt. And that's pretty depressing. Not that I blame them for changing the formula, it just makes me sad.

 

Evidently you haven't been paying much attention to the retro-shooter-renaissance these past few years that's rejuvinating the very gameplay and design principles Classic Doom and other games of its era laid out that we've been enjoying from the indie game scene today: Dusk, Amid Evil, Project Warlock, Nightmare Reaper, Ion Fury, Hellbound and many more have done very well and there's more on the way such as UltraKill and Prodeus that are both coming out this year alone. Niche? Bankruptcy? HA! There is absolutely a market that well and truly still exist for this style of shooter and it's doing gangbusters!

Edited by Biodegradable

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

If you tried to sell a game based on Doom 1 in this day and age, you probably would go bankrupt. And that's pretty depressing. Not that I blame them for changing the formula, it just makes me sad.

 

Yeah, just like Bio said above, you must've been missing out on all these retro shooters that have been coming up in the recent years, and sure, they are niche products because they target a very different demographic, have lower budgets, they're not blockbusters, don't sell millions and millions, and the people playing these games are not the same people who play military shooters and their ilk, they're people looking for something else, something that the triple-A industry has moved away from for decades now and isn't there anymore.

 

Sure they aren't as popular and made by and large by indie studios, but indie is pretty much the shit these days, isn't it? The triple-A medium has been stagnating with few offerings that I would say are truly a must-play.

 

24 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

@seed He's right though, I think a lot of the elements in the new Doom games are meant to appeal to a totally different breed... the kind of people who'd feel that Doom needed to be changed.

 

I'm not seeing what the problem is here, and I hear this all the goddamn time it's become obnoxious at this stage.

 

There's absolutely no reason to make something new without the actually *new* part in it. That some people are stuck with classic Doom because it's perfect for them, fine by me, but that doesn't mean the series also has to stagnate just because they can't accept it moving forward without them. Classic Doom has its audience, new Doom has its own, sometimes people liking both, but by and large their target demographic is different.

 

New Doom does not appeal to nostalgics and people who want the same thing over and over again, for that, there's other developers milking their franchises out there, Doom doesn't have to be another one of those. If they want more classic Doom, well guess what, they can have just that, it's not going away anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Biodegradable said:

 

Evidently you haven't been paying much attention to the retro-shooter-renaissance these past few years that's rejuvinating the very gameplay and design principles Classic Doom and other games of its era laid out that we've been enjoying from the indie game scene today: Dusk, Amid Evil, Project Warlock, Nightmare Reaper, Ion Fury, Hellbound and many more have done very well and there's more on the way such as UltraKill and Prodeus that are both coming out this year alone. Niche? Bankruptcy? HA! There is absolutely a market that well and truly still exist for this style of shooter and it's doing gangbusters!

 

They're all pretty much shit, no offense if you like them.

 

49 minutes ago, seed said:

Sure they aren't as popular and made by and large by indie studios, but indie is pretty much the shit these days, isn't it? The triple-A medium has been stagnating with few offerings that I would say are truly a must-play.

 

No, indie is not "the shit" these days. It IS shit. At least that's how I feel.

 

49 minutes ago, seed said:

I'm not seeing what the problem is here, and I hear this all the goddamn time it's become obnoxious at this stage.

 

Maybe because it's true?

 

No need to become a raging fuckhead about it, let people have their opinions.

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
×