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

Macblain

Members
  • Content count

    112
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Macblain

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. Macblain

    how often do you save?

    Interesting. Do you always jump in to fresh content on UV? What sorts of maps do you play most? How long does it take you to play through a large project with modern standard-level difficulty (say Resurgence or Valiant or whatever)? Do you often find that you have to rehearse a map a number of times? Do you ever give up on or avoid or skip maps that are long, or maps that strongly punish lack of foreknowledge? Like the old fish-in-a-barrel cage trap where you have to find the shootable switch within seconds to escape?
  2. Macblain

    doom needs more lore

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proteus
  3. Macblain

    I just learned that Sgt. Mark IV has a Patreon.

    I don't believe paid content would diminish free content. I think it could diversify and stimulate the community's output. Here's my perspective: I don't spend money on videogames, aside from a handful of indie and GOG purchases per year. The last big budget game I played was Halo 3. I would like to contribute to the communities that I enjoy. If there were a sort of "Nobel Prize in Dooming" awarded to stimulate hard work and creativity, I'd contribute to the pot.
  4. Macblain

    how often do you save?

    This question can't be answered properly in isolation. Ironmanning the iwads with carryover is fun. Blind pistol starting modern megawads on UV is beyond me. I tried no-save playthrus of AV and Epic 2 and I'd be stuck on the same level for weeks. Doom level design incentivizes foreknowledge much too strongly. So an archvile pops up. NBD. Quickload and have the rockets already in the air when he appears. I wish Doom didn't work this way but that's that. I never could have finished Valiant without frequent saves. By the by, I find carefully rehearsed UV/max demos very boring. It's like watching a Sikh Gatka routine pretending to be a swordfight when it's really more of a dance. Same with most martial arts movies, really. I've started to theorize that modern map design is largely unconsciously shaped around creating bubbles of action where it isn't practical to save until the player gets things under control. It's only in those stretches where real danger exists.
  5. Macblain

    Doom 3 Textures for Doom

    Ahh this is great. I'd really love to see some "Doom 3 in Doom" projects. Those converted enemy sprites from Doom 3 models look really good paired with Back to Saturn. The only Doom 3 weapon mod I could find requires an old version of ZDoom, though. I never had the desire to play Doom 3. It looks pretty boring. But the art direction is quite good. (Despite being incredibly drab after the modern fashion, of course.)
  6. Macblain

    Just now finally playing 1993 Doom in 2017

    Poke around on the Wolf3d Dome. A case could be made that Wolf3d has matured just as fully as Doom. I might say that Doom is ultimately superior, but Spear Resurrection and Project Totengraeber gave me a thrill of 'pure videogameness' that can exceed Doom. Again I argue that it's just a different animal. Generally I find that I get to enjoy things more if I'm willing to be genuinely curious and approach them on their own terms instead of according to my preconceived expectations. The OP has considerable willingness to approach Doom in that way, and I think that's something to applaud. I think a big part of the Doom community's strength is its pluralism. Weapon mods don't hold my attention very long, and I don't have the patience to rehearse slaughtermaps or speedruns, and it baffles me that so many Doomers don't share my awe for the genius of Doom's fundamental hitscan/projectile dynamic, but Doom is different things to different people. One has a very active, self-defined relationship with the game, which is far removed from the modern trend of having larger and larger quantities of semi-interactive audiovisual content administered through a feeding tube.
  7. Macblain

    Just now finally playing 1993 Doom in 2017

    Ditto to what Xaser said. I respect the OP's open-mindedness. I submit that this is not so much a question of oaks and acorns as of apples and oranges. I personally find modern videogames unbearable because I have different desires. Also, let's not dump on someone for putting french vanilla in his coffee and ketchup on his steak. Those moments of apotheosis (I call them "doomgasms") won't happen until someone groks the game in his bones and bile. I'm not crazy about Plutonia, but it's a good place to start. Or perhaps, I dunno, AV? And then something like Valiant or Sunlust. I've played Doom since the shareware episode appeared on my BBS, but I didn't really develop a deep appreciation for the game until I got drawn into Epic 2 several years ago. Also I would strongly recommend always playing from a pistol start. You just don't get the structure of the level's progression otherwise. I never cared for Doom 2 until I UV/PS ran it and all the careful game design revealed itself. One little thing: the AI isn't in the baddies themselves. The level itself is the AI. This is the sort of assumption you might try reexamining. It dawned on me very gradually what a beautiful, sophisticated game Doom is.
  8. Macblain

    Heretic Wand vs Doom Pistol

    I find it interesting that shooting imps and demons with the pistol irritates me but shooting afrits and golems with the elfwand is quite pleasurable. I can't put my finger on what the difference is in game dynamics.
  9. Macblain

    Still the most immersive game

    I think I understand what you're articulating and I agree with you. I think "immersive" is a vague and unhelpful word which is most often applied to the sorts of games that I don't consider worth playing. When the word "immersive" appears in an article or video I always close it immediately and permanently disregard the author. I would say that Doom is the most engaging and compelling game. I quit playing mainstream videogames after Halo 2, but they look like a bland wash of numbing stimuli to me. Doom, on the other hand, strongly arouses my thinking and my imagination. The zdoom retroshader mod is now standard for me because it helps the game gel so much better visually and feel like a real universe.
  10. Macblain

    Fluid Motion for Weapons (Beta).

    This is great! Please keep working on this! I tend to play the game with minimal modification but I could see myself spending a lot of time with this one. In particular, the vanilla shotgun animation always seemed awkward to me but yours looks beautiful.
  11. Macblain

    What was the best year for doom maps?

    I think this is a really good point. On the flip side, Doom was also the Crysis of its day. I don't think the game could spread its wings until people stopped seeing it as a spectacular, novel toy. The staggeringly virtuosic, refined maps of the past few years have been some of the greatest gaming experiences of my life. I feel like Doom is getting better all the time.
  12. Macblain

    MiniDOOM sidescroller

    http://www.yoyogames.com/showcase Several of my favorite games are Game Maker titles. I hold Samurai Gunn in particularly high esteem.
  13. Macblain

    MiniDOOM sidescroller

    This screams Game Maker. You guys should check it out. It's easy to learn and fun to tinker with.
  14. Doom, at its best, makes me embarrassed for other videogames. Spending money on videogame hardware is unthinkable for me. There's always something more worthwhile. Especially considering that increased hardware is required specifically for those aspects of modern games that make them progressively more and more inferior to Doom.
  15. This paper illustrates how static and rudimentary modern shooters are in comparison to Doom. A modern shooter level is conceived, apparently, as a finite progression of discrete encounters in spaces whose function is strongly delineated. Combat space in Doom is usually continuous, and regions have broadly-applicable functional properties. I think starting with the phrase "Doom monster encounters" is a little misleading, because then we start talking about what kind of monsters and how many. Modern mainstream game design appears to be very entity-oriented. Doom is much less about the entities in themselves than it is about their arrangements, and their relationship to the space. For a start, I would divide monsters into 'loose' and 'trapped'. Trapped monsters can be either for denial or for pressure. It's often worthwhile to accept the discomfort of an imp or mancubus turret rather than spend the time and ammo completely controlling the area. If a monster is loose, where can it follow the player? The collective aggro environment in Doom is something completely different from modern games. If a monster is trapped, how much vantage does it have? Is it applying acute pressure to or denying a very specific area, or a having weaker more general effect? The Doom baddies are very simple in themselves, but in their placement and combination and their relationship to the architecture, the mapper is in essence imbuing them with very complex strategy and ai.
×