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

Specific Things in Doom that annoy you

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Roofi said:

When the mapper gives you an automap (usually in a secret area) whereas all linedefs in secret zones are marked "hidden on automap"  so you are still humping walls in order to find the secrets. it's even more frustrating for me because , I find the automap useful only for searching secrets.

What he said, except with the secret only opening from a hidden switch in a location completely unrelated to said secret.

Share this post


Link to post

I just got done playing some doom 1 wads. I've ragequit many times already. Can't be overstated how much is sucks, that imps don't die to 1 shotgun blast every time. 3 fucking times I had to shoot an imp once....aaaaargh.

 

Also cacodemons munching on your face while they are in the ceiling or below you, because you know infinitely tall...

Share this post


Link to post

Mappers being inconsistent about which liquids damage you, and when.

Levels that only give you the allmap after you've explored the whole freakin' level. (TNT MAP13 is a good example.)

Forced pistol-starts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, pulkmees said:

Also cacodemons munching on your face while they are in the ceiling or below you, because you know infinitely tall...

Or the Imps clawing at my scalp, or Pinkies gnawing my feet. Infinite Z-axis is only good for abusing the rocket launcher's splash damage.

Share this post


Link to post
On 29.1.2018 at 5:13 PM, SatanaInArte said:

The incredible paradox of the partial invisibility.Monsters can't hit you properly,but this makes projectiles and fireballs attacks more unpredictable and hard to avoid.

I secretly wish for the unpredictable attacks to be the norm, while the blursphere would render them predictable. Would help make fighting imps and Knights more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post

In that case the blur sphere would become a "bulls-eye" sphere.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, rdwpa said:

People not realizing when they are playing with mechanics specific to ZDoom that change the experience significantly and provide commentary oblivious to that fact.

Well damn sir, I had no idea you'd get so pissed over this.

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/3/2018 at 11:01 AM, 94's the best style said:

I secretly wish for the unpredictable attacks to be the norm, while the blursphere would render them predictable. Would help make fighting imps and Knights more interesting.

That's interesting. I've always found the (mostly) predictable attacks in Doom gave a sense of pacing and control to players rather than push a randomized hectic experience. In fact, I find that predictability in attacks adds mechanical complexity and improves player skill. It also ties into the infighting mechanic quite well, since you can 'force' an infight due to the more controlled nature of projectiles (Hitscan is almost guaranteed to start an infight, even with barely any planning. This is also justified by the mutually destructive nature of the hit-scanners in Doom).

 

That being said, I find myself increasingly annoyed with the random nature of Doom's damage values. In no way do I find this RNG contribute to the overall skill floor/ceiling of the game.

 

Enemy-based RNG like random enemy movement and random enemy fire-rate improve the skill requirement because they create a very dynamic environment that the player can almost always overcome. Similarly, Player-based RNG like hit-scan spread of weapons adds to the mechanical complexity of the game as well, since effective use of these weapons requires good positioning (Shotgun and Super-Shotgun) and input control (Chaingun).

 

However, when it comes to Doom's damage values I find RNG more tedious and annoying to deal with.

 

Stray bullets that deal 15 damage, killing you at low health. A kiss from a Revenant's missile, while you dodge 50 other projectiles, that deals 60 damage, killing/crippling you at medium health. And of course, a Sergeant's point-blank shotgun blast, which ranges from deadly to dead. Similarly, you shoot an imp with a point-blank shotgun blast and it survives. Or you feed lead to a Revenant/Mancubus/Arachnotron/Hell Knight/Cacodemon/Pain Elemental from an SSG and they eat too many servings.

 

Stuff like that doesn't really improve Doom gameplay all that much since the only layer of decision-making added would be "To Health or not to Heath (or to Restart)", which would be present if the damage numbers were more controlled (Either solely based on projectile/hit-scan hits with constant damage values or a smaller RNG range). This really got to me while replaying Double Impact (my favorite Doom 1 PWAD). That map-set is a constant war of attrition and possibly the best in its class, but it's held down by these random damage values, which can neither be controlled by the author nor the player.

 

Possibly the most egregious combination of annoying RNG would be Nightmare! difficulty. Demos on that difficulty always seem like a constant struggle against RNG rather than a demonstration of extreme skill (although surviving that difficulty on some maps is an achievement unto itself). Zeromaster's NM speedruns demonstrate survival, while their UV speedruns demonstrate finesse. I find that very disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, rdwpa said:

People not realizing when they are playing with mechanics specific to ZDoom that change the experience significantly and provide commentary oblivious to that fact. No, the mapper of a Boom-format map didn't make a mistake because you can use a tree to eat projectiles from and cheese a cyber fight. 

 

 

I used G/ZDoom or rather more specifically Skulltag for so long once that when I used PrBoom+ I was thrown off when the big tree in an area did not in fact shield me from a Fatso's projectile volley.

I remember being a little annoyed when Romero released his E1M8b and in his commentary for it saying to take cover behind a column near the start of the map to avoid Imp projectiles during an initial attack spawn. This may of been what he intended for his map with the source port in mind, but it wasn't exactly a map brimming with limit-removing features to my knowledge, just a regular vanilla level.

E: Oh, and to make things worse when I was playing Hell Revealed and most of Eternal Doom in Doomsday in 2009 that port also makes decorative objects solid, so I was further enforced in thinking this was normal behavior!

Share this post


Link to post

Good post, SGS Man. The weakness of imps/HKs and other straight-line firers isn't so much the predictability as it is that they are simply effortless to evade if you have enough space (which is why space restriction is such an important part of creating challenge). An always-blursphere effect while retaining simple attacks and more complex attacks (e.g. spreadfire patterns, or arcing attacks, or whatever) while retaining predictability are both improvements to the intrinsic fun level of monsters, but the latter plays nice with difficult encounters better, because RNG is less of a limiting factor when it can't collude to form a big undodgeable wall of shit or something.  

 

RNG is an odd thing. Would agree entirely about the damage RNG: I don't think a raw revenant projectile being able to land a 10% hit or a 80% hit is a good thing, except in, like, really casual play where you can go "haha oh shit I survived a revenant missile at 11% HP, thank goodness!" (At least armor is a thing.) The other sorts of RNG, eh. They are sort of a crutch for encounter design, tbh. Monsters behaving in unpredictable ways that you have to react to can make "easy" encounters more fun . . . but they put a limit on how difficult many classes of really hard encounters can get before surviving them has an unavoidable component of RNG -- "really hard" being stuff that is harder than the typical Sunlust encounter by the same margin that the typical Sunlust encounter is harder than, idk, Valiant encounters or something. Unfortunately those are quite susceptible to that -- "something went really wrong, now you die no matter what" -- which is what you see in the harder maps of Dimensions, which even MrZzul felt was a design misstep. This goes back to the first paragraph: monsters that have a much higher difficulty floor, with more demanding attacks and movement, but are more predictable, would put more of an emphasis on "reading" the precise array of monsters and how the situation will evolve and executing well, without egregious monster misbehavior spelling certain death. 

 

If you want pure finesse in runs btw, you have to look at nomonsters. Inasmuch as getting a good time is the goal, basically every run with monsters has a lot of RNG, unavoidably so, even when it doesn't look like it. (And if it doesn't, it would once if it starts to use a more ambitious, aka faster, route.)

 

33 minutes ago, cyan0s1s said:

I remember being a little annoyed when Romero released his E1M8b and in his commentary for it saying to take cover behind a column near the start of the map to avoid Imp projectiles during an initial attack spawn.

lol I haven't looked at the map again, but I really hope he was just using the column to refer to the general space one should seek cover -- like maybe there's a cubby. Because for shame if not. 

 

Edited by rdwpa

Share this post


Link to post

I'm pretty sure he counted on you using that object for shielding you from some Imp fireballs, he demonstrated it flawlessly as he was in a corner and firing away at other enemies before getting to the Imps. Otherwise your footwork here would be pretty limited given it was a tight spot so you'd most certainly take some damage if you didn't take his advice. It's been a while since I played it though.

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, cyan0s1s said:

E: Oh, and to make things worse when I was playing Hell Revealed and most of Eternal Doom in Doomsday in 2009 that port also makes decorative objects solid, so I was further enforced in thinking this was normal behavior!

Yeah, Romero uses Doomsday.

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Gez said:

Yeah, Romero uses Doomsday.

felgromero 

Share this post


Link to post

@rdwpa Thanks! I mostly agree, but I'll address a few points.

 

I don't necessarily agree with either suggestion. The former introduces too much RNG and strips away player control almost completely. Even in good slaughtermaps, where choice is relatively restricted, there are strategies and routes that can minimize potential problems (although the overall RNG-reliant nature of Doom may eventually catch up, as in the Dimensions example you gave). The latter places enormous restrictions on monster counts in my experience.

 

Here's the thing, I think Doom isn't mechanically all that complex. You have 10 weapons to work with, and a lot of them are context-based in their usage. Your movement options only include walking and running. Complex yet predictable enemies may make singular encounters better but they would conflict with one of Doom's defining mechanics - infighting. Doom (or good maps at least) succeeds in making excellent interplay between these simple mechanics. All of the best players in modern single-player Doom specialize in slaughter/challenge maps since they are the maps that utilize all of Doom's mechanical nuances to varying degrees. However, I find that they also epitomize the issues with RNG-reliant gameplay.

 

Complex move-sets may also inculcate camp-heavy playstyles. Like the best players of Complex Doom (especially with LCA) have very similar strategies to newer players. The same cannot be said about simple move-sets in Classic Doom. Combine this with the relatively low skill floor of Doom gameplay (due to simple mechanics), we have a very small skill gap for Complex Doom, but a massive skill-gap for Classic Doom.

 

I still think RNG in enemy movement and enemy attacks works since you can't jump or dodge-roll out of danger (and it creates more engaging gameplay).

 

(This also extends to my views on mechanical depth and complexity in gaming in general. The best games for me are those that have mechanical depth regardless of complexity. Doom has a good deal of depth because of effective usage of its simple mechanics. I personally prefer games with High skill floors and/or ceilings even though I may never git gud)

Edited by SGS Man

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, SGS Man said:

 

 

Possibly the most egregious combination of annoying RNG would be Nightmare! difficulty. Demos on that difficulty always seem like a constant struggle against RNG rather than a demonstration of extreme skill (although surviving that difficulty on some maps is an achievement unto itself). Zeromaster's NM speedruns demonstrate survival, while their UV speedruns demonstrate finesse. I find that very disappointing.

Nightmare! is a beast unlike the other difficulties, UV included. Which is why I consider Zero's Nightmare! run of Doom 2 one of the best, if not the best, Doom related video I have ever seen. I couldn't do that well, even if I was dreaming. But I digress. Nightmare! difficulty is a douchey difficulty simply because of the respawning monsters, imo. I can take the faster monsters and projectile speed/s, but the respawn part of Nightmare! kills it for me, unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, SGS Man said:

Stray bullets that deal 15 damage, killing you at low health. A kiss from a Revenant's missile, while you dodge 50 other projectiles, that deals 60 damage, killing/crippling you at medium health. And of course, a Sergeant's point-blank shotgun blast, which ranges from deadly to dead. Similarly, you shoot an imp with a point-blank shotgun blast and it survives. Or you feed lead to a Revenant/Mancubus/Arachnotron/Hell Knight/Cacodemon/Pain Elemental from an SSG and they eat too many servings.

 

Stuff like that doesn't really improve Doom gameplay all that much since the only layer of decision-making added would be "To Health or not to Heath (or to Restart)", which would be present if the damage numbers were more controlled (Either solely based on projectile/hit-scan hits with constant damage values or a smaller RNG range). This really got to me while replaying Double Impact (my favorite Doom 1 PWAD). That map-set is a constant war of attrition and possibly the best in its class, but it's held down by these random damage values, which can neither be controlled by the author nor the player.

I think RNG weapon damage is an important factor in causing chaos in an encounter. A predictable encounter is a boring encounter. If you know you can take the hit of a Revenant every time it becomes strategy to simply eat the bullet once in a while. On the other hand, with its current damage level, the rule really is "do not ever get hit by a revenant" and the RNG part allows a weaker player to sometimes survive while still getting hit. In multiplayer high RNG values allows a lesser player to sometimes kill a better one.

 

The war of attrition is unfortunately something mappers introduced. If you look at the original games, the general rule is that if you survive a pack of monsters there's plenty of health packs around to heal up with. Most mods on the other hand have greatly reduced the health pack to the degree that whether you got RNG'ed high or low by that Revenant now decides whether you have to load a save game or not.

Share this post


Link to post

High RNG is annoying as hell in multiplayer games though. Especially when it is shit like random crits in TF2 or procs in WOW. They are fine in a single player game (hell they make games more fun to replay in the end) but that shit has no place in pvp.

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

I think RNG weapon damage is an important factor in causing chaos in an encounter. A predictable encounter is a boring encounter. If you know you can take the hit of a Revenant every time it becomes strategy to simply eat the bullet once in a while. On the other hand, with its current damage level, the rule really is "do not ever get hit by a revenant" and the RNG part allows a weaker player to sometimes survive while still getting hit. In multiplayer high RNG values allows a lesser player to sometimes kill a better one.

 

The war of attrition is unfortunately something mappers introduced. If you look at the original games, the general rule is that if you survive a pack of monsters there's plenty of health packs around to heal up with. Most mods on the other hand have greatly reduced the health pack to the degree that whether you got RNG'ed high or low by that Revenant now decides whether you have to load a save game or not.

 

Fair enough. Although I do wonder if fixed or more controlled RNG damage values would enhance the decision-making in Doom. I mean the values could be substantial enough so that a player would prefer not to take a hit, but tanking could still be part of the player's strategy. Also, tanking a hit or two consistently might allow for less potential RNG problems to crop up later. 

 

I think that the chaos is generated by the other RNG affected enemy attributes - movement and fire-rate. I appreciate them because they contribute to the number of decisions a player has to make at any instant (i.e you can respond to them). However, like you said, if a Revenant rocket has the potential to take you down to unwinnable levels, then choices are cut down for the player. Now the only choice in combat is to avoid the rockets altogether. And if you get hit, RNG decides if you load a save game or not, and that is completely out of player control. I don't think a player can respond to that.

 

So basically, I think that some types of RNG enhance the decision-making involved in a game, while others just don't.

Edited by SGS Man

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, SGS Man said:

I think that the chaos is generated by the other RNG affected enemy attributes - movement and fire-rate. I appreciate them because they contribute to the number of decisions a player has to make at any instant (i.e you can respond to them). However, like you said, if a Revenant rocket has the potential to take you down to unwinnable levels, then choices are cut down for the player. Now the only choice in combat is to avoid the rockets altogether. And if you get hit, RNG decides if you load a save game or not, and that is completely out of player control. I don't think a player can respond to that.

 

So basically, I think that some types of RNG enhance the decision-making involved in a game, while others just don't.

I think you're focusing too much on conscious decision making. Think of it this way: imagine you're a mediocre player that isn't very good at the game. If all RNG elements are removed from a game, it will almost immediately become clear to you that you actually suck at the game and humans generally quit things they suck at. Now, if a dice is introduced in such a way that your poor play sometimes succeeds you get a rush from your good fortune. Heck, you might even think you're really good and the times the dice go against you that's just bad luck. Ask any fish in Poker and they'll tell you about the day where they were winning at the poker tables and what a magic night it was.

 

I know you didn't say ALL RNG elements, just the weapon damage. But once you go down that rabbit hole your next complaint will be the huge spread on the shotgun or whatever next ruins your play. The thing that you're really complaining about is your bad fortune. It will always be there, until you've reduced all the RNG parts to be insignificant. Once it is insignificant, no poor player will want to play online (they will always lose every single game), and single player will be boring and predictive.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Pegg said:

High RNG is annoying as hell in multiplayer games though. Especially when it is shit like random crits in TF2 or procs in WOW. They are fine in a single player game (hell they make games more fun to replay in the end) but that shit has no place in pvp.

Games among the biggest esports prove you completely wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, cyan0s1s said:

I enjoy crits in TF2, so satisfying.

Blasphemy!

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah IDK, getting a crit in TF2 feels really good. They can also save you and keep the game interesting or cap off a nice rampage (or keep it going!)

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Arctangent said:

Games among the biggest esports prove you completely wrong.

Like dota 2 where rng heroes\items are only used if they are batshit overpowered on average (cough ogre magi and old CK)? Stupid heroes like PA with heavy rng disappear off the surface of the earth the moment they aren't op. Mechanics like rune spawns and height advantage aren't high roll bs because they are there to encourage warding rune spots\positioning and defending high ground. Not to mention a lot of mechanics follow prng instead of pure rng.

 

I have no idea about cs:go but am sure the stuff people call rng in it tend to be spray patterns and the opposite of rng. Don't think starcraft 2 has much if any of it. Hearthstone is a dumb outlier full of rng but don't think many people take it as the face of competition. Heroes of the storm replaced rng with stuff like consecutive attacks cause a bonus. Don't think OW has it. TF2 disables random damage, spread and crits in competitive mode (and players themselves ban rng weapons in serious matches). 

 

I don't know much about lol but am sure it'll be similar to dota or heroes of the storm. And no I am not against things like random crits in casual tf2, they are even rigged to let people stomp worse players, it is still annoying as shit the moment it starts getting in the way like Ruining a battle between 2 equal teams in a pub thanks to one nuke pill\rocket. 

Share this post


Link to post

 

1 hour ago, dpJudas said:

I think you're focusing too much on conscious decision making. Think of it this way: imagine you're a mediocre player that isn't very good at the game. If all RNG elements are removed from a game, it will almost immediately become clear to you that you actually suck at the game and humans generally quit things they suck at. Now, if a dice is introduced in such a way that your poor play sometimes succeeds you get a rush from your good fortune. Heck, you might even think you're really good and the times the dice go against you that's just bad luck. Ask any fish in Poker and they'll tell you about the day where they were winning at the poker tables and what a magic night it was.

 

I know you didn't say ALL RNG elements, just the weapon damage. But once you go down that rabbit hole your next complaint will be the huge spread on the shotgun or whatever next ruins your play. The thing that you're really complaining about is your bad fortune. It will always be there, until you've reduced all the RNG parts to be insignificant. Once it is insignificant, no poor player will want to play online (they will always lose every single game), and single player will be boring and predictive.

Perhaps I value decision-making in skill-based games too much. That's probably baggage I carry from action games. But if we are considering human behavior, I feel you are discounting the human desire to improve at things they like. I'm pretty bad at deathmatch, but I never claim that RNG is the reason I lost. I am merely not skilled enough and was hence outplayed. Doom deathmatch is a hotbed for skill and knowledge (and occasional lag). Players who have better mechanical skill and map knowledge will end up winning, RNG or not. But even without RNG, a mediocre player can win sometimes. (I may be biased, but I prefer newer deathmatch maps where I find damage to be more consistent and solely reliant on aiming and reflexes rather than dice rolls).

 

I feel you consider my argument a slippery slope, even though I added several caveats that demonstrated why some types of RNG enhance gameplay rather than hinder it. Stuff like shotgun spread can be exploited to handle groups of enemies at medium range, or one single enemy at close range. RNG in enemy movement and firerate create interesting scenarios. That's "good" RNG according to me. Removing them would make Doom incredibly boring. RNG in damage values are way more annoying conceptually.

 

I haven't been too unfortunate when it comes to damage values though. What gets to me is that there are hidden aspects to the game that I can neither control (Input and Infighting are controllable) nor respond to (RNG in enemy movement and firerate can be responded to).

 

Also, I think Doom has a relatively low skill floor. Almost anyone can complete Doom 1 / Doom 2 and have a general idea about the mechanics even if RNG reliant damage values were removed. As for the skill ceiling, I think eliminating/reducing RNG reliant damage values would increase it, making it less boring (and tedious) at all levels of play, in both online and singleplayer.

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, SGS Man said:

@rdwpa Thanks! I mostly agree, but I'll address a few points.


I don't necessarily agree with either suggestion. The former introduces too much RNG and strips away player control almost completely. Even in good slaughtermaps, where choice is relatively restricted, there are strategies and routes that can minimize potential problems (although the overall RNG-reliant nature of Doom may eventually catch up, as in the Dimensions example you gave). The latter places enormous restrictions on monster counts in my experience.

Yeah, to be clear, I'd actually want neither in stock Doom as it currently is, but if I had to make monsters more challenging I'd go the "more complex but still predictable attacks" route, rather than the "unpredictable simple attacks" one. 

 

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
×