• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About felgro

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. You know why a "review" is called the way it is? It's because writing a review (emphasis on view) entails actually having looked at the thing in question, and by that I mean not just the readme, mmmkay..?

    1. dew


      "Just FYI from the text file - Not interested in even looking at it. But some like this stuff, so letting you know."


      What the hell. Kill this idiot's right to review wads RIGHT NOW, this is worthless garbage. Fucking troll.

    2. bzzrak


      Oh lol apparently all of his reviews were deleted.

      I absolutely love how felgro made us all so excruciatingly butthurt that we had to state it to him multiple times.

      Felgro my man, if you're reading this, you're the legend. Stay yourself forever. <3

    3. Gothic


      felgro was alright, when he wasn't complaining about "detail = crap", shitting on modern sourceports or complaining that mods slowed down on Doomsday.

  2. Dear felgro, 
    We get it, you dislike all those extended things in maps/ports(I could argue with your port choice, because doomsday isn't true vanilla port), but please stop with that "vanilla friendly, crap free" stuff. People already know(who stay here a bit longer) that you're hardcore vanilla dude. So please, can you focus what really matters in map reviews like gameplay, layout, executed ideas, visuals and so on. This would be more helpful that bashing all extended things,which isn't very cool to put in reviews, because as gamer/reader I don't really want to read how you hate extended stuff and there always included text file which states compatibility settings.

    P.s There more ports who supports vanilla stuff/behaviour like Chocolate Doom, Prboom+(have you ever heard of almighty complevel 2(Doom II) and complevel 3(for Ultimate Doom) for keeping vanilla/limit-removing stuff "crap free"(I mean stays faithful to all quirks/bugs) and it's basically better than doomsday in lots of terms), Eternity and so on. 

    Screenshot is from the last review and this seriously isn't helpful. 


  3. Loads and sort of plays on vanilla Doomsday - *but* load time is agonisingly slow and gameplay has severe lag which makes it unplayable.
  4. yeah, yeah, I get it. you don't like annoying flying skeltal.

  5. Not fond of my old work, hmm?


    Heh, to be fair I was more concerned with gimmicks and mechanics than gameplay in those days, so fair, albeit harsh, criticism.

    1. Myst.Haruko


      I didn't find anything broken or not working stuff. I hate to say that, but maybe it's time to use recomended ports, which won't break intended things. Yeah, it's sad to see cool stuff downgraded without telling why or trying to use other port for another gameplay and see if it's true before writing review. 

    2. Phade102


      I wouldn't worry about this troll. He only plays in a really shitty port, which means half his maps wont work.

  6. Your counts about map e3m8 of Bedlam.wad is wrong. In my map there is about 250 monsters indeed, but only around 50 lost souls. So it is 200 normal monsters + 50 lost souls. that is 1/5 of all monsters are lost souls. Yeah it might be too much, but it is not as bad is you make it sound. Also some lost souls do not appear or lower difficulties, so try to play on HMP next time.

  7. Hi, could you please stop blaming mappers for the fact that you're using a sucky port and deducting precious stars from them, and switch to a decent port instead? Thank you!

    No offence meant, btw.

    1. Show previous comments  6 more
    2. gaspe


      'Why do people make gameplay that they enjoy but I don't, waaaaah.'


      So is it wrong for the people to have their tastes or preferences?

    3. rdwpa



      So is it wrong for the people to have their tastes or preferences?

      Of course not. But that is directed at the 'Why do people do this?' question. Regardless of your tastes or preferences, that people make stuff they enjoy should not be a source of bewilderment. 

    4. bzzrak


      ^ stop overreacting and let the guy not like what he doesn't like


      Excuse the whiteknighting.

    5. rdwpa


      As I just said, people are entitled to dislike what they don't like. 


      But it's an indisputable fact that the answer to the question 'Why do mappers make slaughtermaps?' is 'Because the mappers that make them also like them.' That isn't up for debate and there's no reason to be ignorant about that.


      If you're going to respond again, please read my post clearly so that you understand what I am and am not saying.

    6. NuMetalManiak


      RE: "Apparently doesn't know what an 'episode' is -- No Sleep for the Dead is a full 9(+1) map set." He was refering to there being no full E2 I think.

    7. rdwpa


      Yeah my mistake on that one. :)

    8. 40oz


      hi, 40oz here with another contrarian opinion. Every review, whether it's sloppily written or not, overly negative, or generally annoying, is useful as long as the reviewer is honest. Some players may not have a fun time playing a wad that is generally well received. It's not the player's responsibility to adapt their reviews to the general consensus of the wad. If the guy can't get it to work in Doomsday, that may be useful information for Doomsday users. It could also be useful information for the creator to make play instructions more clear and apparent in the description or text file. If you're someone who doesn't agree with that particular review, you're welcome to post your own positive review with maxed out stars to negate the impact that bad review did to the wad. But you shouldn't harp on someone for writing a bad review, because sometimes people with a very low threshold for fun can actually be extremely valuable.


      There are some people such as myself, who are in a rare position where many people tend to enjoy whatever I make because they appreciate that I'm taking the time to map at all. So when I get positive feedback for that, that can actually be kind of annoying for me because the review is closer to dishonesty than about the quality of my work. 

    9. DooM_RO




      I actually fixed the WAD but it has a host of problems such as very low FPS for some reason and Doomsday does not support Boom features such as Transfer Sky, which breaks the atmosphere I tried to create in the first map.

    10. Phade102


      Doomsday is a rather inferior port imo, prboom+ or gzdoom are the way to go. If the player uses a port that your map isnt designed for, @DooM_RO then thats not your fault, but the fault of the players.

    11. Steve D

      Steve D

      Coming in somewhat late, but I will -- as usual -- agree with everything @rdwpa said. While I also agree with @40oz that noting a map doesn't work in Doomsday is important info for Doomsday users, I strongly disagree with removing stars from a review just because the reviewer hasn't figured out that Doomsday is the bat-guano of sourceports. Funny thing is that when I came back into Doom, Doomsday was my port of choice for a couple years, but when I got a game-killing error in one of my maps that was not present in any other port, the bloom came off the rose. As time went on, Doomsday's weird, confusing launcher and the way it chugged like crazy caused me to drop it completely. That saddened me, because for awhile it seemed the most attractive of the GL ports.


      If someone wants to remain loyal to Doomsday, that's fine, but if they write a review in a world where all sourceports are free, easily obtained and installed, and compared, I think it's at least worthwhile to let them know they should try the map on other ports. I generally test my maps on GZDoom and PrBoom, sometimes Risen3D. I don't test on Doomsday, nor has anyone who ever beta-tested my maps. I'm glad I stumbled upon this thread, because maybe I should include, "Doomsday not recommended" in my write-ups.