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


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pulkmees

  1. You're fighting demons in hell/earth/whatever. It's pretty damn specific to that. All that Sim City 2000 nonsense always takes me out of it. Definitely dark and eerie.


    If the map is fast paced, make it fast paced. 

    If you intention is creepy, make the music creepy.

    If you intend to to show danger....you know already.

    Experiment until it fits. Not going to be easy though.

    There is a reason the Ashes 2063 soundtrack is that good. It fits.

  2. On 4/4/2023 at 8:44 AM, Redneckerz said:

    Then you have to explain what you are doing. How are you loading this in for example?

    Same issue as Nickxcom. Same Missing rotations error. Would like to know what version of Chocolate Doom I'm suppose to be using just to confirm I'm doing eveything right.

    That's why a readme would be nice.


    Got it to work with PRBoom+ and LZDoom, but that aint what this is about. Got to see it at least. Had some fun. Grainy doom with brutal animations and reloading.

  3. Playing on UV pistol start. Ran out of ammo in E1M8 when dealing with the last wave of enemies. I know I could have run to the exit, but I was going for 100%.

    Even used infighting in the previous wave. Adding a backpack would help or just more rockets. The whole map is also a major step up from the previous maps. Although I can forgive that since it's the last map of the episode. Being stuck under cacos is not fun though.

  4. 5 hours ago, Super Mighty G said:

    Are you making it for you or are you making it for them? I tend to think most people make what they want to play, not what they think other people want to play.

    Both. If I think ONLY what I want to play no one would play that. I don't think that highly of anything I could do or have done. Some smoothing out is necessary. You need both sides.


    1 minute ago, DuckReconMajor said:

    well this is a sad way to think about things

    Should of added in well designed too, but that's intertwined with difficulty. Also I was exaggerating. If the 12 people are close to you, obviously it matters more to you. 12 months of work for 12 randoms though ? Now I'm not saying the worth comes from more people playing your wad. If it's good it's good because of your effort into making it good. Do you want your effort to be played by 12 or 1200 people ? Is all that time worth it for your ideas to reach a few random people ?


    Look it seems most of this comes down to - everyone does whatever they want in their own bubble.(Like I said in my first reply). There's no incentive to take advice from anyone it seems. Which means chaos rules. Which means people get pissed off in every new wad because the rules have changed.(unless specified in the txt file). I'd rather have less frustration than more, but yeah no incentive for people to change their ways.

  6. 2 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    No. It never existed, it never will exist. It's highly subjective in the first place, and I'm not gonna elaborate this any further. Get that weird idea out of your head.

    How do other games do it then ? You can't fathom playing as someone with lesser skill ? Missing more shots, not figuring out puzzles as fast, not knowing patterns, getting lost ? It's subjective, but not highly. Companies do it with loads of playtesters. We do it with less or by ourselves. Means we have to make more of an effort.


    7 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    It's additional effort, and more often than not this effort ends up feeling like wasted time, because some random person's sweetspot didn't get hit, and they end up being vocal about it, because they got left out. It's always a pick your poison kind of deal when it comes to harder stuff, and that's not gonna change.

    Having said that, providing the option is nice and all, if the mapper wants to work that out, but if they don't: C'est la vie. You have more options in the form of other PWADs than you'll ever have time to play. I suggest checking those out in case a mapper doesn't attempt to cater to your individual needs and preferences-

    How is it wasted time if more people play it? That's what it gives you. For me it's a waste if only 12 people end up playing it. Gorgeous well textured maps for 12 people.


    8 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    So? You want mappers to make these fights such that it doesn't matter how you play, you wanna just win by default when holding down "fire"? Sorry, "hard" genre isn't for you, because playing by the map's rules is part and parcel of challenge and slaughter maps. Deal with it, move on with life. I'm not even gonna get into the "luck part" here, because you didn't care to provide an exact example, so there is no basis on which anything can be discussed.

    No, that's not what I said or meant. I didn't mean handholding. I specifically described fights or difficulties that are not fun for newcomers. Also now we are apparently in the giving examples stage of this argument. I thought we were generalizing as this is a general issue imo. Everyone does their own thing in their own wad, but after 11 wads the same issue keeps popping up.(And any wads worth playing happen to be hard as well). This should be taken into account as new mappers make maps. I'm saying this as advice. How is this unreasonable ? Nothing has ever pissed you off in any game or wad that was cheap or luck based ? 

    25 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    Also no. I've yet to hear a good reason why a "niche product", aimed at doomers at high levels of play, needs to cater to newcomers. You didn't provide any reason whatsoever, and instead just claim it needs to be done, because you need it that way. Not good enough.

    Well yeah if the whole point of the wad is that, then yeah, no reason to cater to them indeed. But then that's why I'm asking if that effort is worth it for ONLY that niche audience ?


    57 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    How long this community has been around is irrelevant.

    Why ? Enough time has passed for some guidelines and standards to emerge. Means by this point when people make maps they should take it into consideration. If everyone has a fuck you attitude all the time, new people won't play anything new any more. I mean people have and are still coming here, but I think for other reasons. Again I'm not saying make a total crowdpleaser. You don't NEED to do anything, I'm saying it as advice. But I do mean that having it would make it worth the effort.

  7. 2 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    Quite a lot of "should bes" here, and frankly I'm not sure what to make of this.


    From personal experience, people are eager to call something "unfair" or "bullshit" just because they were unable to beat a fight right away. So, every time I see these words thrown around, I'd like it much better if people put that into perspective a bit, instead of hoping mappers can magically make any sense of a "non-content statement".

    What's wrong with having the option ? Games do this. Dying over and over again in Super Meat Boy and Hotline Miami might be fun, but those games are built around that mechanic TO make it fun. And I'm being honest here. I'm specifically talking about fights(also difficulties) involving either a combination of too much luck, skill ONLY a 20 year doom veteran would have and otherwise having VERY few ways to beat it. There needs to be SOME effort put into smoothing out the difficulty for newcomers. How is it entitled to think wads would have this after how long this community has been around ? I get it if you go screaming at the mapper after ragequitting, that'sa dick move, but otherwise...

    The more specific the solution is the less people will solve it. Fine if that's the sacrifice you've made, mappers call. Is it worth it to make it only for a select group of people though? All that effort...


    Yes, this is unpaid work, people do this as a hobby. But if you can add the option and want to do it and have the time to do it then why not. I'm just tired of playing wads where the focus was to make it hard. Gorgeous architecture, vistas, texture use, but too hard. After the 11th one it wears out your patience.

  8. 17 hours ago, Cynical said:



    And I'm tired of seeing players so entitled that they expect to beat a map without saves on their first attempt despite not having any skill.  No, the entire community isn't going to slow down because you suck.  Git gud.

    I'm saying have the option. Get good won't get people from outside the community to play your wad if you think only really really really hard difficulty is the only option.  That was my point.

    Get good should be what your wad does anyway during the course of it. But main focus shouldn't be its so hard you'll pull your hair out on the first try. I'm fine with it if you say it in big bold letters, that this will be hard. But then there's also the fact that there are many ways of making it hard. Some ways are just cheap and frustrating as fuck.

  9. All I gather from all of this is that every wad maker does their own thing and everyone, who plays it is does their own thing with it. There are some guidelines of what difficulty should have what, but no one can really enforce any of those. Every wad is a new game. It's Doom, but their version of Doom. Their wad, their rules. Be sure to write down the rules somewhere though to avoid wasting people's time and good mood, that's all you can do really.


    Now saying that I still have expectations when playing a new wad.

    1.I expect the wads difficulty to be consistent through out or at least scaling upwards slowly. Meaning it doesn't go fucking crazy after map 20 because you liked Scythe so much. If you mention it in big bold letters its fine, but otherwise it pisses people off. Hard to also do when you have many different authors, but then again not every megawad has to be 32-35 maps long. Way too much work for people doing it on their free time.


    2.There is one difficulty that is the sweetspot. It means someone, who plays your map for the first time doesn't have to savescum through it, but it's still challenging for the average fps player. Otherwise you're making this for 12 people. What's the point? Doesn't have to be a total crowd pleaser, but I'm tired of seeing wads so hard only a coked up Gollum could beat it.

  10. 1 hour ago, Revenant100 said:

    Has anyone made anything of the fact that, after defeating the loathsome Spiderdemon and hideous Cyberdemon lord, you discover the true final boss of Sigil in the last secret area of the episode: a tiny corner hiding a lone Zombieman?



    Who could this mysterious man be, a figure so important that he's personally protected by the most powerful demons in Hell's army? Is he the true mastermind of the invasion? Baphomet incarnate? Samuel Hayden before he became a robot? A thing Romero accidentally placed and forgot to delete? The possibilities are endless.

    That was the only secret I didn't find by myself since I couldn't think to go through a double sided wall there. And yeah the zombieman is probably some inside joke for Romero since there are Star Wars and Jedi Academy related secrets/parts in the 2016 maps he made.

  11. 30 minutes ago, Rathori said:

    I think a lot of people who complain about ammo starvation in SIGIL forget infighting is a thing in DOOM. A lot meatwall fights have both cacos and barons in them - I mean, it's pretty clear what to do there to conserve ammo ;)

    You can often berserk punch or saw the barons while they're dealing with cacos, spending literally 0 ammo.

    Yeah, but way the fights start you don't really have a lot of room to maneuver between them, so the first instinct is to shoot, which messes up the infighting. You only know to do that when you've died, but I don't like that you have to die to learn that.
     But even without the infighting I think there's enough ammo anyway, you just got to punch some of the weaker enemies with berzerk once a while.

  12. 12 hours ago, KVELLER said:

    It's strange to me to see so many people mentioning how tough the mapset is. I pistol started every map on UV and I thought it was pretty tame compared to some of the stuff the community has put out. I died, what, 10 times? I've died double that amount in a single room in some community maps on HMP :P

    You must have been extra patient in E5M4 then. Or gotten lucky with rng. Or somehow you knew exactly what to expect before something surprising happened.

    Did you also 100% it or was it more a passthrough run?

  13. Imps not dying to 1 shotgun blast or even 2.


    Depending on how many Lost Souls I have to fight, then...Lost Souls.


    Pinkies not dying to a SSG blast right when you have other pinkies around you munching you.


    Cacodemons managing to do that 2 quick plasma/fireball/whatever attack right when you are close to them and switching weapons.

  14. 10 hours ago, EtherBot said:

    Hey I'm a little confused by my need to clarify this immediately after already clarifying it, but like I said I'm not trying to make a value judgment here. I'm not concerned with whether or not a game is immersive at all in terms of my liking it. I look for different things in different games. My point isn't that Doom 1 is bad now, or anything, but that through time it has lost something, and the fans reaction seems to be to pretend that something never existed in the first place.

    I'm pretty sure a lot of people just posted to the response of "doesn't hold up" no more. But then you go to say that it does hold up in the paragraphs.

    That isn't even the main point of your argument. I guess it works to get people reading it, cause I did, but damn it took a lot text to get to it. Don't have a title like that if you don't even think that yourself. BUT..do use it if you want to get people interested I guess. :)


    The point from what I gathered is that Doom is not scary any more and lost it's immersion. Enemies are reduced to mechanics. And that people should talk about that and/or that people should not pretend it wasn't scary in the first place.


    And that people haven't analyzed Doom 3 properly and that you actually kind of like Doom 3(even though you say you don't prefer it over Doom 1 and Doom 2, which is a...contradiction.


    In response to the "people should talk about it not being scary any more" argument.

    Why ? We can't go back in time. People have made wads, gameplay trends have changed, people are better at the game. If you're new and young and getting into the game, then it probably still is scary. Granted not for the realism reasons as you can play games that actually scare you now(not counting only jumpscares, but also atmosphere). If it scares you because you actually think that that pixel'y mess on your screen is actual blood guts, then I don't know what to tell you... .


    If people do pretend that it wasn't scary, then so what ? Why do you care ? Who are these dumdums, who pretend it wasn't scary/immersive/[adjective] ?

    What do you base this on ? I remember a thread being here, where people talked about the reason why Doom 1&2 were scary some time ago. So people did talk about it, but I don't remember anyone pretending it was never scary/immersive. I feel like the argument is always about people defining scariness in different ways.


    I think your point should actually be guided towards mapmakers. I see a lot of maps made for the purpose of being a...map. It's taking the story is not important aspect a bit too far. What is the fun in completing your map if the only reason is just to be completed. Just kill all enemies, complete the gameplay. Aaaand repeat 31 times. It's too mechanical. You need some sort of nugget of...oo something happened here before I came in here.

    Doom 1 still has that, although playing it again and again has obviously lost some of it's magic. Depends how much you have replayed it obviously

    There are a lot of wads to play if you've exhausted the Iwads though.


    You seem to like Doom 3 and/or dislike people not analyzing it properly. Again, I feel like you're talking to dumdums and giving them too much credit. Also check your thread titles.


    I myself don't think there's much to be said about Doom 3. I have read and watched videos about it. They went with the scary aspect full on. But tempo was  slower and there were less enemies. Getting hit kicked your view. And it all took place in very similar looking space/industrial hallways. Now that last part would have been ok in Doom 1 and 2, but this game was made in a world where everyone had already played Doom 1 and Doom 2 and a bunch of other cool games.

    AAAand Half-Life 2 came out the same time. In the end the scary aspect is the only thing still kind of going for it. It's harder to make maps for it. I don't know what else to say about it. What do you see it having that was so fun ?

  15. Well their attack is still annoying as it has been since the beginning. Sometimes the rockets home in, sometimes they don't. There's a thread here from 2007 with people discussing it in more detail, but what matters is that in the game it's annoying as fuck to get hit by it. Random is fun the first couple of times, not the next 100 times. I bet speedrunners hate them with a passion. At least I would if a random element was involved.