Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Battlefield 1 vs Doom

Options
  • 23-11-2016 8:55pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭


    Hi all,

    Just looking for some opinions on this. Doom is about €20 on Steam and Battlefield 1 is €40 on Origin. Just wondering what, in your opinion, is the better of the 2? I'm not going to splash out for the more expensive versions of Battlefield, I don't play enough to bother with that but I will play a bit online.

    If you were comparing the 2 single player aspects which is better? Same for multiplayer? In all, is Battlefield worth the extra 20 quid?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,674 ✭✭✭Skatedude


    No comparision, Really. Doom is much more a single player game with mutiplayer added. Bf1 is a multiplayer game with a single player campaign added.

    So do you play multiplayer or single player. But bf1 hands down for me


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭YouSavedMyLife


    Doom could easily be my GOTY for 2016. Its one of the best single player FPS games i have ever played, but the multiplayer i wasn't fond of. If you're the kinda gamer to play through a game multiple times on increasingly brutal difficulty then Doom's single player could last you a while.

    Battlefields single player for me is a snoozefest. I had enough after the first mission where you guide the tank through the woods. The multiplayer is where it really shines though. I play solo online and its alot of fun, most likely double the fun if you got a few friends to play with. You will definitely get your moneys worth from the MP alone


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭adocholiday


    Yeah see that's exactly the thing. I think I'd consider myself more a single player than multiplayer kind of gamer, although Modern Warfare 2 is my most played game ever by a long shot, with an embarrassing amount of hours put in online.

    I just recently bought Titanfall 2 and I thought the campaign was far too short, with a half assed story thrown in. I do enjoy the multiplayer though and have clocked up a few hours on that. That's the only proper shooter I've played in some time, so I guess I was hoping one of the 2 games would be a 'stand out' option. It essentially boils down to SP vs MP and I think the SP option might win out for me.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,865 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    One is a standout multiplayer game. The other is probably the best single player shooter in the last 20 years.

    You can't really compare them, it's like choosing Mario Kart over Halo :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭adocholiday


    The best single player shooter in 20 years is a good selling point alright, however having looked at some gameplay videos of both of them and read some reviews in addition to the comments here I think Battlefield has won the toss of the coin.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75


    Both.


    And Titanfall 2 is a better SP than Doom :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,802 ✭✭✭Benzino


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    The other is probably the best single player shooter in the last 20 years.

    Better than Half Life? O.O


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I just want bro-hug machine games for making doom with such respect
    Game of the year for me

    Titanfall 2 is next, fantastic single and multi-player component.

    Battlefield has an excellent multi-player component but it's a formula that's been in play for years IMO. It's enjoyable but nothing new.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Benzino wrote: »
    Better than Half Life? O.O

    Hmmm toughie


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,865 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Benzino wrote: »
    Better than Half Life? O.O

    Well there's no Zen level! :D

    Doom is a tough one to compare as it's more like a Platinum fighting game than a traditional FPS. It doesn't need flashy set pieces and scripted sequences because the core gameplay loop is so good.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,932 ✭✭✭YouSavedMyLife


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    Well there's no Zen level! :D

    Doom is a tough one to compare as it's more like a Platinum fighting game than a traditional FPS. It doesn't need flashy set pieces and scripted sequences because the core gameplay loop is so good.

    Agreed. Its one of those games that just feels so good when you play it. Everything just clicks gameplay wise.

    adocholiday, since you said you bought Titanfall 2 already id go with Doom in that case. Who really has the time to play two, TWO online FPS games!?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,407 ✭✭✭✭gimli2112


    Yeah see that's exactly the thing. I think I'd consider myself more a single player than multiplayer kind of gamer, although Modern Warfare 2 is my most played game ever by a long shot, with an embarrassing amount of hours put in online.

    Thanked for the MW2 reference. God I loved that game.

    Agree with previous comments. Have Doom and BF1, both great games. I'll put far more time into BF1 for the MP but you won't go wrong either way.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Would Doom have much replayability? I haven't played BF1, but if the time I've sunk into BF4 is an indication to go by, and if the former is like the latter, then I'd personally go for BF1.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Would Doom have much replayability? I haven't played BF1, but if the time I've sunk into BF4 is an indication to go by, and if the former is like the latter, then I'd personally go for BF1.

    Game took me 20+ hours first play-though.
    I went again on thereafter.
    Add to that arcade mode has now been added which is a blast.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,674 ✭✭✭Skatedude


    I love the Doom games, but i would rate the latest doom game as just ok, Far too much repetition, Fight to an area, get locked in till you kill everything, then fight to the next area and repeat.
    Fun, but i honestly prefer the older doom games.

    As for single player games, I loved Wolfenstein the new order, It was one of if not the best single player game in years, and is a bargain now.


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Skatedude wrote: »
    I love the Doom games, but i would rate the latest doom game as just ok, Far too much repetition, Fight to an area, get locked in till you kill everything, then fight to the next area and repeat.
    Fun, but i honestly prefer the older doom games.

    As for single player games, I loved Wolfenstein the new order, It was one of if not the best single player game in years, and is a bargain now.

    What difficulty did you play it on?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,407 ✭✭✭✭gimli2112


    M!Ck^ wrote: »
    Game took me 20+ hours first play-though.
    I went again on thereafter.
    Add to that arcade mode has now been added which is a blast.

    Actually I haven't even completed it. I got stuck on the second last rune and due to OCD issues put it away. Then got distracted by something. I need to finish it. What's put me off is there's an 18gig update to download (presumably the arcade mode?) What is the arcade mode - too lazy to google?


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,407 ✭✭✭✭gimli2112


    Skatedude wrote: »
    I love the Doom games, but i would rate the latest doom game as just ok, Far too much repetition, Fight to an area, get locked in till you kill everything, then fight to the next area and repeat.
    Fun, but i honestly prefer the older doom games.

    As for single player games, I loved Wolfenstein the new order, It was one of if not the best single player game in years, and is a bargain now.

    Wolfenstein the New Order was a blast, really enjoyed it but couldn't get into the Old Blood sequel


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    gimli2112 wrote: »
    Actually I haven't even completed it. I got stuck on the second last rune and due to OCD issues put it away. Then got distracted by something. I need to finish it. What's put me off is there's an 18gig update to download (presumably the arcade mode?) What is the arcade mode - too lazy to google?

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-31-dooms-new-arcade-mode-is-doom-at-its-best


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    gimli2112 wrote: »
    Wolfenstein the New Order was a blast, really enjoyed it but couldn't get into the Old Blood sequel

    Old Blood didn't have a story tied to it really like The New Order but the game-play is still beast.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,865 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Would Doom have much replayability? I haven't played BF1, but if the time I've sunk into BF4 is an indication to go by, and if the former is like the latter, then I'd personally go for BF1.

    If you are someone who likes to replay games by Platinum at higher difficulty levels then you'll get a lot of play time out of it. The campaign is very generous as well in terms of content.

    My advice when starting is to go straight for ultra violence difficulty level. The other difficulty levels are too easy and kind of spoil the game. Ultra Violence was the right balance (I actually restarted the game on ultra violence as I was finding it needed an extra shot of difficulty). The game is more than manageable on that difficulty level but it's tough enough that you really have to juggle weapons and make full use of glory kills and chainsaw kills to keep your health and ammo topped up. It's feels a bit like how you regain health in Metal Gear Rising Revengeance and totally changes how the game flows for the better.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,870 ✭✭✭✭Generic Dreadhead




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,147 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Skatedude wrote: »
    I love the Doom games, but i would rate the latest doom game as just ok, Far too much repetition, Fight to an area, get locked in till you kill everything, then fight to the next area and repeat.

    Yeah this is my issue with it too. Don't get me wrong, the core gameplay loop is great, and arcade mode is a great way to bump up the difficulty and enjoy the rock solid mechanics in intense short bursts without any distractions. But the campaign IMO plays its cards early and then just lightly remixes it from then on. This has nothing to with its difficulty - it's simply that I felt there was a lot of filler and it would have benefited either from a leaner campaign or a little more imagination in the type of situations & settings it throws at you. You get that in the great Platinum games, but aside from 'more enemies' there's little of it in DOOM.

    At least the developers recognised the limitations of their own campaign and added that arcade mode where it's more focused on pure high scores, fast movement and short bursts of intense play. Still think Titanfall 2 takes the FPS campaign crown, though, for the sheer density of imaginative design on display - although that there's even a competition is a rare treat :)


  • Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yeah this is my issue with it too. Don't get me wrong, the core gameplay loop is great, and arcade mode is a great way to bump up the difficulty and enjoy the rock solid mechanics in intense short bursts without any distractions. But the campaign IMO plays its cards early and then just lightly remixes it from then on. This has nothing to with its difficulty - it's simply that I felt there was a lot of filler and it would have benefited either from a leaner campaign or a little more imagination in the type of situations & settings it throws at you. You get that in the great Platinum games, but aside from 'more enemies' there's little of it in DOOM.

    At least the developers recognised the limitations of their own campaign and added that arcade mode where it's more focused on pure high scores, fast movement and short bursts of intense play. Still think Titanfall 2 takes the FPS campaign crown, though, for the sheer density of imaginative design on display - although that there's even a competition is a rare treat :)

    I honestly think this all boils down to what difficulty you played Doom on.
    It deserves to be played at higher difficulty. It's a different beast than playing on Normal.
    I have it on both Xbox & PS4. Can't remember the last time I purchased a game twice for two consoles.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,703 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki


    I really must give Titanfall 2 a shot.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,865 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Doom definitely plays differently on the higher difficulty levels, it's a crime to play on the default and Id really should have went for the higher difficulty as standard.

    I did really like titanfall 2 but for all its imagination there's really not enough content in the single player campaign. It just ends before it really gets going.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Much as I did enjoy Doom you could predict the sequence of events after a point and what would spawn in the waves. It was the only negative about it for me. Was it any different on the higher difficulties?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,865 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Much as I did enjoy Doom you could predict the sequence of events after a point and what would spawn in the waves. It was the only negative about it for me. Was it any different on the higher difficulties?

    You just had to make much greater use of the mechanics. Even though you could tell what was going to happen with each combat area it was the environment and enemy variety that made it interesting. Even in some sections where I died a few times it was so much fun to try them again, taking a different approach. The higher difficulty levels have more enemies spawning in but also mean you are taking a lot more damage and as a result the only real way to keep your health topped up is to use glory kills. Once you start having to really startegise when to use them and also weapons then it just becomes a very different game.


  • Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    Doom definitely plays differently on the higher difficulty levels, it's a crime to play on the default and Id really should have went for the higher difficulty as standard.

    I did really like titanfall 2 but for all its imagination there's really not enough content in the single player campaign. It just ends before it really gets going.

    Disagree, Doom is brilliant as it shows what we played 20 years can actually be played now and i commend them for that.

    T2 shows that using the world around you and "items" can work in your favour, but they must be dropped when before they get stale.

    I find your opinion that it ends before.....means you wanted more? isnt that a good thing?

    I got 6-8 hours from SP and I bought it for the MP. I still think its better than Doom and HL2 as one of the best FPS games made!!! :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 50,865 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Well I disagree with you totally on your first point. Doom 2016 for me isn't like a game from 20 years ago. There's no other FPS like it. It's a FPS that focuses totally on it's mechanics, systems and gameplay loops pretty much in the same way as a Devil May Cry or Bayonetta. It's such a pure game experience with no pretentions to be anything but a videogame. I still think Doom 1 and 2 are stone cold classics and as playable as the day they were released but there hasn't been a shooter like Doom 2016 before or since.

    And yes I thoroughly enjoyed Titanfall 2 and the fact that it ended too soon is a good thing. I'm all for shorter condenser experiences but Titanfall 2 just felt a little too anaemic to me. Sure there's a lot more content in multiplayer but I don't really do multiplayer so haven't played a lot of it. Nearly every level of Titanfall 2 presented the player with the same mechanics but twisted them with new environmental challenges. It was pretty much the way Nintendo make their games, how something like Super Mario Galaxy would explore a new way to use mario's abilities then drop it in the next stage for something new different and exciting. It's great but there's so much more they could do with such great mechanics. Roll on Titanfall 3!

    I think arguing which is better comes down to personal preference. FPS games are probably the stalest genre around at the moment but 2016 has brought not one, but two games in the genre that completely turn the genre on it's head. They both throw away an over reliance on realistic ham fisted military fetishism and just go balls to the wall banana's trying to be as much fun as they can be. Both games brought fun back to the a genre that in the 90's started out with games trying to out do themselves with the wackiest arsenals available before becoming something so very stale.

    For me it's Doom that I like. I have too many games to play to go back and repeat them on harder difficulty levels. The exception to that is the top tier games from Platinum. Doom 2016 is another exception as it's a game I just love to go back to and experience that gameplay loop again (and that Mick Gordon soundtrack).


Advertisement