Doom: Infamous 'talk to the monsters' review was on the right side of history

NO U

Actually, it's you who apparently thinks that the "smart" way is the only way. Otherwise why are you defending someone who thought that Doom would be better if it wasn't so combat-centric?

NO U

Linguica said:

I love that the game mentions Mass Effect as an example of a modern game that we could barely imagine in 1994. I guess he never heard of, say, Star Control II (1992), where you had to engage in interstellar diplomacy amongst 25 alien races.

Or, to give an example of a first-person perspective game, both Ultimae Underworlds (released before Doom for those who don't remember), in which you do chat with and occasionally befriend various creatures, including those that are traditionally kill-on-sight monsters in fantasy games (goblins, trolls, the undead, etc.).

JohnnyTheWolf said:

And while Doom 2016 does look like a decent shooter after all, it is disappointing to see the once-revolutionary Id Software rehash a 23-year old game *again* rather than coming up with new ideas, let alone new intellectual properties.

Id Software was never revolutionary for their game design ideas, if anything they were at their most successful when they were simplifying the game concept instead of adding further complexity. Doom did away with arcade notions such as score and lives, it abandoned its original plan to have cutscenes, NPCs, shops, persistent levels you can revisit, etc. Doom is, on many point, a dumbed-down (doomed-down, if you prefer) action game, and that's actually what made its strength. As a great man said, perfection isn't when there's nothing else to add, it's when there's nothing else to remove: Doom is definitely a perfect game in that way, devoid of any superfluous mechanic that would have diluted its concept.

Id Software was revolutionary for their engine technology, as they brought incredible performance to video games at an era when getting more performances out of severely limited hardware was the wild frontier.

Today, things are different. Even though AAA games continue to push the envelope and find ways to get people to update their hardware, developing your own hyper-optimized engine that will look better than anything else on the market isn't really anyone's priority anymore, most developers are happy using something like the latest iteration of the Unreal or Unity engine and go with it.

scalliano said:

We're still laughing today because such features would have been ultimately detrimental to a game like Doom. EDGE magazine had a habit of being unnecessarily contrary in the 90's, but for many this was just a step too far into the ludicrous.

Besides, Strife came out three years later. The difference? It makes sense in Strife. Strife has a coherent (enough) story that unfolds during the course of the game. Doom is an out-and-out blast-fest. And no one on these boards would have it any other way. Unless you're making a mod that's going for the survival horror angle, but I digress.

Also in Strife you can talk to monsters and it gives you wonderful conversations like this:



Replace the acolyte by an imp, but change nothing else, and you have Doom for Edge Magazine.

Gez said:

Id Software was never revolutionary for their game design ideas

I did not say that either.

Doom 2016 lacks innovation: that is my main problem with it. For a $80 CAD product, it looks disappointingly formulaic and forgettable. The gameplay may be fine for the most part, but I just wish Id Software had strived for something less middle-of-the-road. I had similar issues with with their previous title RAGE.

If only they added a few more "audio and visual cues" turning the game into a revolutionary first-person strategy game. Who needs dumb shooters in 2016?

Even though I can tell you are being sarcastic, I agree: we do not *need* dumb shooters in 2016. :)

Open-mindedness at its best.

JohnnyTheWolf said:

Even though I can tell you are being sarcastic, I agree: we do not *need* dumb shooters in 2016. :)

No. But some of us actually want them instead of barely-interactive pseudo-intellectual horseshit. If I wanted to know what it was like to talk to monsters, I'd read some sci fi or horror literature of that nature. If I want to play a videogame OH HEY LOOK AT THIS SHOOTY THING. Gimme.

It's really sad that in 2016, there aren't enough video games around so that people who want to talk to the monsters are stuck with only Doom, where they can't do that.


Now if you'll excuse me, I have to write a review of Sim City where I complain that I can't, as the mayor, fight the UFO monster like an action hero.

I talk to the monsters all the time, with my shotgun.

At least Sim City is a smart game where you do smart things and feel smart. It's the way of the future.

Da Werecat said:

At least Sim City is a smart game where you do smart things and feel smart. It's the way of the future.

In order to cheat, I opened random binary files as Simcity "savegames", and ended up with lots of money but also a chaotic map. Was that a smart thing? :-p

Da Werecat said:

Open-mindedness at its best.

Thank you! I believe it is important to remain critical of the things we enjoy.

Besides, it would not be very mature of us to get all defensive just because of one review that was not dithyrambic about our favorite games. ;)

Gez said:

Strife screenshot

Reminds me of many hack'n slash RPGs/dungeon crawlers/MUDs where you can attempt to talk to the monsters, but in 99% of the cases you simply get a "You receive no response" message.

Unfortunately for the author of the review, a lot of people decided to be critical of his thoughts. And they have a point.

i kinda like that review hee, it's a bit self-absorbed but the obvious criticism that Doom E1 doesn't have enough unique enemy types is dead on. Wish they'd have said the Baron of Hell was disappointing crap too

too bad they didn't really think about the larger ramifications of the engine's possibilities in making levels that didn't look like Episode 1

Maes said:

Reminds me of many hack'n slash RPGs/dungeon crawlers/MUDs where you can attempt to talk to the monsters, but in 99% of the cases you simply get a "You receive no response" message.

Also "flee" pretty much never works when you need it. :P It's almost like a joke option that exists just to tease you.

Maes said:

Reminds me of many hack'n slash RPGs/dungeon crawlers/MUDs where you can attempt to talk to the monsters, but in 99% of the cases you simply get a "You receive no response" message.

My first graphical RPG was like that:
http://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=1935
You can see in the second screenshot, it gives you two options:
1. Negociate
2. Fight
It's been like 3 decades since I played through, so don't remember much, but I'm pretty sure the odds weren't very good for talking.
The fights were pure arcade sequences (I guess like Archon?)
This was considered a "big" game back then btw. It took up both sides of a CPC floppy disk. That's what that one purple monster graphic is for. When side 1 finishes loading, he pops up and says "Turn over the floppy and hit Delete. It's in your best interest!"
Fun game, but it's sadly not that long to finish the dungeon, despite the amount of storage used.

Linguica said:

The same guy also just published his review of Doom 2016: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/doom-review-id-softwares-2016-reboot-best-shooter-over-decade-1560521

Ahahaha, what an absolute hack. I love the last paragraph that makes it obvious he's never even started up the goddamn game.

Also noteworthy is Doom's resistance to easy nostalgia and franchise in-jokes. It's frenetic and gory, but never knowing. Doom never makes a point of its own "craziness" or "wackiness." It's a straight-faced, earnest attempt to be something different and better than its contemporaries, and never tries to disguise a lack of confidence behind irksome video game humour.

JohnnyTheWolf said:

How do you know for sure? If Id had made Strife instead of Doom and the game had been just as big of a success, I do not think you would have been laughing at the notion of a first-person shooter where you get to talk to the monsters.

I think that, in a way, is what the EDGE review was trying to say: it is not that NPC interactions and different types of approach would have been detrimental to Doom, it is just that the developers gave their game a bare-bones story to justify its kill-or-be-killed gameplay.

Had that been the case, the game's impact would have been greatly diminished as it would have been most likely brushed off as "just another aloof PC game". The fact that it used such cutting-edge technology for such a bare-bones, action-packed game is what made it the killer app it ultimately became.

Also...

Is there going to be a version of Doom where you have lunch with the demons soon? I'm smelling a Cooking Mama tie-in here, the kids will love it. Guaranteed cash cow.

Seriously though the level of wank in that article is pretty impressive.

scalliano said:

Also...

Okay, I nearly want to play the new Doom now.

Doomkid said:

Is there going to be a version of Doom where you have lunch with the demons soon

Well, if you don't mind being the lunch...

JohnnyTheWolf said:

For example, some monsters could have been willing to lend you a hand after being fed, e.g. with corpses or power-ups. The Arch-Vile could have been neutral and been content with reviving its brethren; if you let it do so, it would be willing to heal you or resurrect you should you die. Killing a "commanding" demon like the Baron of Hell could inspire lesser enemies to rebel. Some of your weapons could have been ancient items that could be used to exorcise possessed humans and convert demons. Instead of just throwing Lost Souls at you, the Pain Elemental could have been the creature controlling the possessed humans; killing it would have freed fellow human NPCs from enthrallment. Heck, you could have been able to tame the beast and use it to enthrall demons instead! Instead of just shooting the Cyberdemon until it dies, you could have turned its thralls against their demonic overlord by showing how little it cared for them in the first place, thus making monster in-fighting an integral part of gameplay rather than just a funny gimmick. The game could have still been gorily ultraviolent and even ended on a darkly humorous note where you, as the new leader of Hell, join your fellow demons in feasting on the Cyberdemon's corpse.

A mod like this needs to happen it would open many doors.

Someone should make a jokewad by cluttering the game with so many gimmicks that it becomes unplayable.

Yeah that's the last 10 wads I've downloaded.

Da Werecat said:

Someone should make a jokewad by cluttering the game with so many gimmicks that it becomes unplayable.

Arguably ChubzDoomer kind of did that with this:

Linguica said:

The same guy also just published his review of Doom 2016: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/doom-review-id-softwares-2016-reboot-best-shooter-over-decade-1560521

Wait...did this guy just defend the Edge review and talk about how Doom shouldn't be just about shooting monsters and then give Doom 2016 a 5-star rating because of how it's really simple and keeps you constantly running around shooting monsters?

Or, to take his own words and use them in support of those who criticize the Edge article: "Doom proves that excitement, spectacle and even narrative cohesion can exist in games seemingly composed of the basest elements."

This immediately reminded me of the fourth Doom novel, Endgame, when they were trapped in a simulation of the original invasion and tried to reason with some of the simulated monsters and succeeded in getting some of them to help them.

The monsters do talk, I'm positive when the Spider Mastermind spots you, it screams YOU IDIOT.

Piper Maru said:

The monsters do talk, I'm positive when the Spider Mastermind spots you, it screams YOU IDIOT.

And the Mancubus says "I'm your mama!", everybody knows that.