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


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tarnsman

  • Rank
    President of the Damaging Floor Appreciation Fan Club

Recent Profile Visitors

108995 profile views
  1. Another project that only existed in forgotten legends sees the light of day.
  2. Tarnsman

    Unpopular Doom Opinions

    There are only two bad levels in The Master Levels, one of which is a complete shitpost, and most of the rest are actually good. I hope one day Master Levels trutherism becomes as accepted as TNT apologia has been.
  3. Above and Below by Rob Berkowitz (1999) Eternity / UV / 100% kills / 100% items / 100% secrets The layout is a series of square rooms with an upper level and a lower level. The texturing is mostly monotonous marble alternating between two different variations. There is some lighting variation which keeps the map from looking absolutely hideous. While I thought the gameplay would be extremely boring due to the layout, the start of the map was actually quite fun. The limited armaments as well as the use of beefy monsters on the lower levels such as hell knights, barons, and demons actually made for some interesting pressure gameplay as you are encouraged to run away from one room into another due to the bulk, only to find you've woken up more high threat monsters like chaingunners or pain elementals as well as more bulk to push you around. The gameplay becomes less enjoyable once you get through the initial pressure and the map turns into a series of pushing switches to raise various walkways and clean up. The walkway section does still contain gameplay and has several ambushes that if you were confined to the walkways (via something like the lower level being damaging floor or some such thing) would be engaging uses of barons, revenants and an archvile but sadly are not as the moment the monsters pose a threat you can drop down to the lower level to engage them from a better position. As this is a map from 99 there is plenty of 90s design jank. The walkways being lifts is not conveyed as they use the same textures as everything else around them, the keys are hidden in "secrets" due to the choice of door texture for their rooms as well as the light levels said doors are located within. There is some platforming over inescapable pits. You know the drill. Overall it was a fun little 10 minute side adventure and I am glad that I played it if nothing to experience that 90s charm.
  4. Tarnsman

    Most frustrating gameplay moment in Doom

    Imps taking multiple punches would be the most annoying out of the choices. The rest I really don't mind.
  5. Tarnsman

    Ask me something about one of these maps...

    That's an interesting assessment and I'm totally using "Microtactics for Survival" as a map name somewhere. Talk about DMP2015a map18: "The Dragon Rooms" by dt_ because I don't know the map and it's the only map I haven't seen asked about yet.
  6. Tarnsman

    Ask me something about one of these maps...

    Why should I have given "Alfonzo Tries to Prevent Donald Trump from Starting Third Impact" by AD_79 1st place instead of 2nd?
  7. Tarnsman

    WAD recommendations for doom newbie

    The Way Id Did series would be a good place to start if you're looking for something in line with the IWADs. There's also several sets that follow that type of formula if you like it. Earthless by Jimmy or Arrival by Pavera would be good to check out.
  8. Tarnsman

    Unpopular Doom Opinions

    I fully understand why Ribbiks chose to put that barrier in place. The ardant refusal by many people do take advantage of the choices given to them by a creator can be extremely frustrating. When you design UV to be a difficulty that's very blind unfriendly you can hope that people realize that and lower the skill level, but unfortunately many people do not. When you put a lot of effort into balancing lower skills so that they can still be enjoyable and intend people to play on them, then constantly get feedback that's basically people complaining about the choices they made, that can lead to you wanting to remove that choice from the player. Since UV was intended to be fore people who played HMP and wanted to play it again, the way he implemented it makes sense.
  9. Tarnsman

    The Power Rankings: TNT: Evilution

    TNT 17 shows up a few times in Maximum Doom. Along with the deathmatch version in #1dwango.wad a version that's pretty close to the map that's in TNT is in one of the other map compilation packs. There's a few maps from classic Megawads that show up in random places like that, I think because they were originally stand alone releases before being scooped up into the projects most people know them from. Memento Mori Maps 8 and 21 for example.
  10. Tarnsman

    The Dean of Doom series (companion thread)

    Calling a map "soulless" is fine. Even if I think the map is a masterpiece. A map can be technically well made but when you play it, you think it feels manufactured and lacks identity. Criticism of the actual product doesn't need to be nice. It's about what your experience with it. I don't agree with getting upset over that. Evaluating criticism should be about the critic's approach or if they're trying to get the wrong thing out of something (like if someone plays DTWID and is upset that it's not Sunder) it should be about the process and not about them liking or disliking a thing. I don't think it's fair to compare the experience of Doom to a far more passive experience like a film or music.
  11. Tarnsman

    The Dean of Doom series (companion thread)

    The ego comment to my understanding was about the entire team, not exclusively me. My entire critique also had nothing to do with that comment. It was about reading to much into authorial intent and it hampering his criticism by making it not make sense. He can call me an asshole I don't care about that. But "radiating smugness with it's unorthodox weapon pick up order" is where you're getting too artsy for your own good. Criticism shouldn't make the recipient say, "what are you even talking about?". That said I also wouldn't call Magikal sadistic or really make any assumptions about him as a person, even though I would say CC1 Map 6 is a terrible map and CC1 Map 29 is one of the most exhausting Doom experiences of all time. Same thing goes for HR2. I can say The Inmost Dens 3 is one of the worst maps ever made while also not saying anything about the person who made it or getting into what they were thinking when they made it.
  12. Tarnsman

    The Dean of Doom series (companion thread)

    I don't think that's a good way to engage with a map. A conversation is two ways and there is an exchange. Playing a map isn't a conversation. It's an experience. How you experience it is going to be a vastly different, personalized thing based on a multitude of factors ranging from how you play it, what settings you used, your skill level, what traits you do and do not like in something, and even how you were feeling specifically at that time. Things like what the mapper intended or what they wanted you to feel are almost honestly ancillary to that experience.[1] They can inform or enhance the experience if you approach it with secondary knowledge but at the end of the day the most important aspect of map enjoyment or lack thereof comes from you. Like knowing a map was designed to be played as a 10-15 minute choose your own adventure doesn't really do you much good when you choose to 100% it multiple times. That's why it's an experience not a conversation. When you try to read into what the mapper intended without actually talking to them about it you get the kind of responses you are getting because you're now moving beyond your personalized experience. Most mappers make things that they think are fun or interesting. Sometimes those things can be acerbic or confusing, particularly when they're the more adventure aspects of Doom or if they're niche high difficulty things, but they're almost always something that the mapper actually enjoys. Making something specifically to evoke a negative reaction in the player is honestly awful, as is assuming someone did that. [1] If you're confused about something then having context can help you understand an idea or concept but that's rarely going to drastically impact your enjoyment as often times it's just interpreted as "oh so it's bad on purpose" rather than actually understanding it. (This is most common when people try to emulate the things they love about janky maps, primarily from the 90s.)
  13. Tarnsman

    The Dean of Doom series (companion thread)

    The great thing about giving the player freedom is allowing the player to experience the map how they choose. Be it the way AD likes it or the way you prefer. That's why optional areas and non linearity are great in larger maps. It's also fun as a mapper to try to make the map work in different ways with different routes. I don't really have many complaints about the review beyond "the radiating smugness of unorthodox weapon pickup" being the most nonsensical line. I do have trouble understanding giving a map that you "never want to play again" a grade higher than "F" and find his final grade a bit confusing given the actual words that preceed it. I think my biggest problem is more with the ruleset and the concept of forcing yourself to 100% something, even when you're not enjoying it. Complaining about length while elongating the experience.
  14. MAP 25 - UV MAX in 7:45 d2iso25m745.zip