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

Doom 1 or 2?

Which one is your favorite?  

296 members have voted

  1. 1. Which one is your favorite?

    • DOOM/The Ultimate DOOM
      145
    • DOOM II: Hell on Earth
      151


Recommended Posts

Making secretes hard to find are fine. They are after all, secretes. But the goal of "get to the exit" should not be something that takes hours of banging ones head ageist a wall to achieve. The odd puzzle can make things interesting, but there has to be a logic to it. The developers need to sitting down and thinking "is this something someone a sane person will solve?" is the difference between the Monkey Island games and Kings Quest games. The two examples I posted before are more on the side of Kings Quest logic.

Share this post


Link to post

I can sort of see where this point of view comes from, despite my massive bias in favour of Doom and Doom II. I come across the occaissional puzzle or section in some maps (particularly ZDoom maps from the first half of 2000-2009, if I'm honest) that are incredibly difficult to solve or beat and I find myself not enjoying them, so I just cheat to skip them.

Maze-y levels I can live with quite happily though, as exploration is a big part of Doom for me. Modern FPS games do largely lack any kind of exploration factor.

Share this post


Link to post

There's a difference between a few examples of doing it wrong here and there and the whole level design being faulty. Characterizing Doom level design by the few times a switch isn't obvious would be the same as characterizing linear shooter design by the few times an essential script doesn't play correctly.

This article just seems to bash Doom level design as a whole, which is an odd stance to take as there isn't any non-linear shooters these days to compare linear shooters with. Graphisms, multiplayer and pseudo-realism are, I think, much better reasons to explain people enjoy (i.e.) the latest CoD than Doom. Perhaps it can be argued some streamlining is necessary for a given level of quality, as making things non-linear require much more time and resources, but going from that to assume linear is superior makes about as much sense to me as considering fast food as the finest food simply because it's much faster to get to the customer than at a traditional restaurant.

By the way, I do eat and enjoy both fast food and linear shooters, so that's not some kind of pretentious moral high ground thing going on here. It's just the confusion between popularity and quality, with an additional layer of pairing the wrong causes with specific consequences, that I disagree with.

Share this post


Link to post
hex11 said:

Coming from a heavy D&D background (playing since early 80's), I found the mazelike maps a pure joy to explore and lose myself in. Sometimes the map IS the challenge, even going so far as to dangle visible secrets in front of your face, taunting you. ;)


I second this. Always liked the first-person dungeon/maze concept.

That reminds me... what are some wads with huge maze-like levels with tons of secrets where it's easy to get lost?

Share this post


Link to post

I have no issue with Doom II's level design. I can see where some find fault with it, but the maps reflect the principles of the game itself. Thinking back on all the maps I've played so far, the glut of them hearkening back to 1994-1996, I believe that most if not all of them reflect an emphasis on exploration and adventure gaming to varying degrees, with Jim Flynn's maps circa 1995 (especially MANOR) taking the concept to the farthest point. Even recent stuff I've played (2011) shows love for this aspect of Doom's gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post

There's a big difference between non-linear map design and running around a map for ages confused about what to do next. Doom II has much of the former but little of the latter in my view. Modern FPSs have very little of the former.

Share this post


Link to post

The Gamespot author's apparent lack of skill reminds me of how when I watched David Lynch's Dune back when I was 11, I didn't find the movie confusing and in fact it very quickly become one of my favorite films of all time. And yet there were numerous complaints from adults about how lost they were. At that point I had not read the book and had barely touched the game, but it didn't stop me from understanding the basic plot. So either I was some genius kid that understood the complex plot with ease, or most people are dumb-dumbs and shouldn't be watching it in the first place. I think the same can apply here.

Share this post


Link to post

I preferred old-school FPS games like Doom and Duke Nukem 3D since they offered a lot of exploring and puzzles to solve which does play a part in the run and gun action. In my vote, the level designs of Doom to the Pwads created back between 1994 and 1995 were somewhat simple, though there were some complex maps at the time, though it was really Team TNT that were the primary key figures of the evolution of Doom mapping, since with their megawads Evilution and Icarus, presented elements and concepts that were never found in previous wads in the time. To put it bluntly, I felt that Ty and the rest of Team TNT were visionaries back in 1995 and 1996, pushing the engine past its limitations, improving the design aesthetics with more advanced architecture and innovations, as evident in Icarus and Eternal Doom. The megawads may seem primitive nowadays, but back then, the folks of Team TNT were ahead of their time. I even can't play Hell Revealed without noticing the influence of the Casali brothers' Plutonia. Heck even the gameplay of Plutonia foreshadows HR and other wads that follow its style like Alien Vendetta and Kama Sutra. All in all, I look back and think about how the Doom and Doom 2 maps now and then are still regarded as more enjoyable compared to today's FPS games.

Share this post


Link to post

What? Modern shooters are supposed to have "map design"? And I who thought that "map design" today consisted of throwing some height-mapped terrain in an otherwise open space, some trees, some prefab bunkers and calling it a "map".

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

What? Modern shooters are supposed to have "map design"? And I who thought that "map design" today consisted of throwing some height-mapped terrain in an otherwise open space, some trees, some prefab bunkers and calling it a "map".


Don't forget a cutscene every two minutes

Share this post


Link to post

This review has been posted here before. I recall saying that it's what you'd expect from someone used to newer games. Can't find the thread it appeared on, though.

Share this post


Link to post

That reviewer is part of this younger instant gratification group of gamers. They don't find it gratifying to play games. They find it gratifying to achieve (achievements anyone?) goals no matter how trivial or easy they are to achieve.

I recently played through Doom and Doom2 for the first time in over a decade and never found myself confused or lost and I loved every simple moment of it. It was all over too quickly and I was left with better memories and experiences than when I played in the 90's. I can not relate to this review but many more people do. He is the majority and represents the present and future of gaming. Too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Captain Red said:

Making secretes hard to find are fine. They are after all, secretes. But the goal of "get to the exit" should not be something that takes hours of banging ones head ageist a wall to achieve. The odd puzzle can make things interesting, but there has to be a logic to it. The developers need to sitting down and thinking "is this something someone a sane person will solve?" is the difference between the Monkey Island games and Kings Quest games. The two examples I posted before are more on the side of Kings Quest logic.


Yeah I think a sane person would solve it. I mean, the person has clearly completed 28 levels before it (or including Ultimate Doom, 55+) I think it's safe to assume the player had some experience locating secrets and appreciating their value. Even on a map as difficult as MAP29 you're probably dying for a soul sphere. Not to mention the secret isn't even very difficult to locate. It's in a small circular shaped room. If the area had to revealed somehow, there has to be something important about it. Voila, angry hopeless wall-humping has paid off!

Share this post


Link to post

@40oz: More importantly than that, you actually get locked in to that area, so if it takes you more than 30 seconds to find it after you've killed the baron, you're probably not trying.

I also find it odd that Red is using MAP29 as contrast when it's one of the more linear maps that Doom 2 has to offer -- I'd have expected someone to cite MAP15/MAP13 or somesuch right off the bat.


Anyhow, this has probably come up before and I've probably already commented on it, so whatever. Blah blah, silly reviewer, blah whatever.

What we really need is for some evil genius game studio to come out with something that features nonlinear map design in a modern-style shooter and trick people into liking it. Problem solved. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Xaser said:

I also find it odd that Red is using MAP29 as contrast when it's one of the more linear maps that Doom 2 has to offer -- I'd have expected someone to cite MAP15/MAP13 or somesuch right off the bat.

I cited map 29 becasue it's been mentioned here before.

Share this post


Link to post

The strange thing is, there's plenty of linearity in Doom 2's maps..but not as much as today's shooters ofc. I wonder if he's not even used to stuff like backtracking to locked/remote doors etc. and having optional areas to explore. (let alone full non-linearity such as map 21)

phobosdeimos1 said:

Don't forget a cutscene every two minutes


And cover spots approved by Sir Wally McChesthigh.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm a newer gamer myself, and I think some of you are being too hard on modern games.

I've seen a couple complaints about how modern games have too many cutscenes. I don't think I've yet played a newer game where there was a cutscene where it shouldn't have been. It just seems to me that over the years shooting games have moved their focus from complete total fragfests to be more focused on plot.

For example: When I've played through DOOM II, I know it has a story and all, but I never really felt like I was fighting on earth and saving humanity. Halo, on the other hand, has a good plot and intricate backstory that makes it feel like your saving humanity from an alien onslaught. Reach, particularly, has some touching cutscenes.

And for all of you who say that modern games are overly linear and don't give you the sense of hard-earned success from finding all the secrets, talk to me when you've found every last datapad in Halo Reach.

There are still some good modern games.

Share this post


Link to post

This chick sounds like a reject from EDGE magazine circa 1993. This review serves only to reinforce my opinion that modern gamers are a bolus of uncultured fucks who need everything spoon-fed to them or else it sucks.

Doom is an 18-year-old game, so it is antiquated by default. To mark it down on that basis is complete folly, and merely shows the reviewer up as being the shallow, skill-free retard that she is. Since when is needing to consult the map a bad thing?

How fortunate for the reviewer that there doesn't appear to be a "comments" box on that site ...

@Rafenator: Cutscenes in and of themselves aren't the issue. The issue is that increasingly more and more attention is being paid to those that the actual game itself. Halo is a particularly egregious offender - the cutscens are indeed lavishly produced, but the SP campaigns can be beaten within a day, leaving only the overrated multiplayer component as remuneration for platers who've just dropped £50 on the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Rafeinator said:

And for all of you who say that modern games are overly linear and don't give you the sense of hard-earned success from finding all the secrets, talk to me when you've found every last datapad in Halo Reach.



Oh yeah datapads, that sounds exciting. I bet they have a huge impact on the gameplay too.

Share this post


Link to post

The last FPS I can remember that actually had enjoyable secret-hunting was Wolfenstein (2009). Even without secret pushwalls, gold and intel could be hidden in some really clever places, and then you could unlock/buy upgrades for your guns, which had a real impact on how you play the game.

It's a shame that game was so buggy on release. It was really good after it was all patched up.

Share this post


Link to post
Xaser said:

I also find it odd that Red is using MAP29 as contrast when it's one of the more linear maps that Doom 2 has to offer -- I'd have expected someone to cite MAP15/MAP13 or somesuch right off the bat.

That's actually what I intended to do after reading the first quote.

I know we've gotten used to it by now, but Map15 sent me to the strategy guide at least 3 times, one of which was for that ridiculous backtrack-into-the-teleport-to-not-go-back trick. Teleport consistency was quite well established until that point, and undoing it for one awkward instance isn't really clever as much as annoying.

It's not that I don't appreciate the obscurity factor in certain games, but I do think it requires the correct context, and Doom2 didn't usually have it. Hexen, on the other hand, almost always did.

Share this post


Link to post

Doom 2's level design is antiquated. You know what else is antiquated? John Carpenter's The Thing, a 1966 Chevelle, The Beatles, Super Mario Brothers ect. ect. ect.

Don't take it like it's such a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Ed said:

Doom 2's level design is antiquated. You know what else is antiquated? John Carpenter's The Thing, a 1966 Chevelle, The Beatles, Super Mario Brothers ect. ect. ect.

Don't take it like it's such a bad thing.


But the review that started this discussion specifically treats the antiquated nature of DOOM II's levels as being a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I was just saying how even though modern FPS games like Half-Life, Halo, Call of Duty, and others offered realistic visuals, it's not the same like Doom and Doom 2 in terms of enjoyment and gameplay. That's not to say the modern FPS games are bad, as some are classics as well, so I apologise to the reviewer who got angry at my response.

Share this post


Link to post

LMAO Swiss_Cheeseman!!!

+1 for the simplest explanation.

A picture is definitely worth 1,000 (sometimes very rude) words.

Best,

Dusty

Share this post


Link to post

This discussion is antiquated

Doom wasn't so bad for the most part, but Hexen and Strife both got me really pissed off at being lost sometimes.

I like exploring but running from end to end on the map trying to figure out what you are missing for more than 30 seconds starts to get annoying.

The reviewer did say "isn't always fun" instead of "is always bad" which would imply it can be fun. However, they totally lose when they complain about consulting the map. Also, I thought it was an automap, not a minimap

Share this post


Link to post

What isn't fun is running around Jurassic Park on the SNES looking for obscure eggs and keycards just to open a single door on the other side of the island only to get eaten by dinosaurs while listening to good sounding music.

Reminded me of Zelda: Links Awakening, nobody could figure out how to beat the first half of the first dungeon. Then I figured it out, got Roc's Feather and continued on from there.

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
×