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
Doom Eternal
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Good for ya. It's nice to have modern games that you can enjoy. They're far and few in between.Well I know I can't make you like it! But I loved the 2016 Doom so there's bias in my replies (
Not pretentious at allThis is going to sound pretentious, but I think it's one of those titles that showing gameplay really doesn't do it justice.
I'd agree with that completely, which is why I encourage anyone to get into the other dimension that is the doom modding scene. I've played doom 2016 though. Not much of it since I thought it was boring and I went back to doom 1995 w/ mods, but I did play it.
Mouse all the wayYou have to be holding the controller to truly get it.
:pac:
Deleted User wrote: »I didn't think it was possible to compare the first doom and doom 2016
They're the same IP, from the same company with literally the same name (because companies hate numbers now or something), I think it's pretty fair and expected to compare them. The shocking thing is finding out that the 1995 version is more fun and better designed. I think even one of the the original devs said they had sympathy for the new devs since they're in an awful place of having to try and be better, keeping an IP on life support while probably never being able to improve it in any meaningful way.
Doom 2016's success, in my estimate was due to it being just a decent FPS in a saturated market of mediocrity, good soundtrack, straightforward violent action when everything else interrupts you every 5 minutes with a cutscene or pay F to pay respects nonsense.
In vacuum or surrounded by modern FPS games, Doom 2016 is pretty good I'd say. But pretty good is shallow to the masterpiece of the original. There's the technical side of things too. Doom 2016 accomplishes practically nothing in terms of technology. Just another bloated requirements, console shooter with low FOV, targeting windows and the 2 big consoles. Compared to doom, released as shareware, open source, indistinguishable from magic in how it ran on underpowered computers thanks to incredibly ambitious and skilled development. Its platform support is also second to none. I think USA's workplace productivity took a recorded dip due to the amount of people playing doom during work hours... it was that influential.
Here's some footage I captured of my fave mod FYI in case anyone was curious https://youtu.be/wEvkJ9jM12Y?t=1590 -
Robert ninja wrote: »Good for ya. It's nice to have modern games that you can enjoy. They're far and few in between.
Well (as I'm going to mention later), I'm a console scrub (still saving for a gaming PC), but I've enjoyed Prey, Dying Light, both the latest Wolfensteins... to name but four!Robert ninja wrote: »Not pretentious at all I'd agree with that completely, which is why I encourage anyone to get into the other dimension that is the doom modding scene. I've played doom 2016 though. Not much of it since I thought it was boring and I went back to doom 1995 w/ mods, but I did play it.
Yep, I NEED to get Brutal Doom! Looks fantastic.Robert ninja wrote: »Mouse all the way :pac:
See comment about me being a console peasant above! :pac:Robert ninja wrote: »Compared to doom, released as shareware, open source, indistinguishable from magic in how it ran on underpowered computers thanks to incredibly ambitious and skilled development. Its platform support is also second to none. I think USA's workplace productivity took a recorded dip due to the amount of people playing doom during work hours... it was that influential.
Also recommend reading Masters of Doom. I'm not sure how much is Chinese Whispers as some of the stories are a little hard to believe.
Robert ninja wrote: »Here's some footage I captured of my fave mod FYI in case anyone was curious https://youtu.be/wEvkJ9jM12Y?t=159
That looks amazing. Like the addition of the FF15 battle theme.0 -
-
The number of enemies in Doom 2016 eventually ramps up pretty large, and when it does, then the genius of the melee kills starts to be apparent. It's not just a button to see an animation, it get strategic once the fights start getting tougher, as you've got to balance the risk/reward of it. Do you go for the glory kill, hoping that the projectiles that are inbound will hit while you're invulnerable, and that the health boost afterwards is worth it, or do you just shotgun it and hope that you can finish the fight on the sliver of health you've got left?
Good while until Pinky is introduced from what I remember.
I think I mentioned this before, but I would highly recommend watching the noclip documentary on Doom.
Makes me want to go for a few scoops with Hugo Martin. Gas fella.
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
The number of enemies in Doom 2016 eventually ramps up pretty large
12 enemies. This is the new standard for 'pretty large' NPC counts?
Now I'm not saying you need spams and spams of enemies to be good or fun, but a dozen is laughable limitation in design and technology. Bloody goldeneye on the N64 had more variations than that. And sometimes overwhelming numbers in a certain location are actually not that hard to fight, especially when demons can friendly fire each other.hen the genius of the melee kills starts to be apparent. It's not just a button to see an animation, it get strategic once the fights start getting tougher, as you've got to balance the risk/reward of it.
Fancy way of explaining standard health management. Nothing new and Doom did it better with actual armour instead of 2 lifebars. I don't mind animations playing as long as they're optional but they're not. In my fave mod you can switch between smash or rip & tear melee modes. One is similar to doom 2016 (but with better animations) and the other doesn't make melee something that will interrupt moving momentum (smash) but both strategically are for ammo conservation, the invulnerability state which you mentioned, pure fun or to dismember enemies in ways that you can use their body parts as weapons, flesh shields or even just grab the fire skulls. If you're skilled enough to go fully hand-to-hand with demons it's an awesome experience and heart pounding knowing you can get turned inside out if you mess up your rhythm or fight yourself into a certain death position. Much more exciting action experience than pressing a single button on an NPC that is quite literally flashing to tell you to kill it... at least to me anyway.
There's also flying and sliding kicks which I bloody love, just had to mention that. So satisfying. 0 -
-
-
-
-
For the current standards of the market, perhaps. But overall every modern AAA game has exorbitant requirements when compared to older games and the graphical leaps. Take Crysis 1's minimum requirements, the size of the maps, NPC count, graphical fidelity, and compare it a modern FPS. It doesn't add up. The requirements are like 1000% higher but the games don't look 1000% better, bigger or do anything particularly more interesting in processing. It's all just heavier technologies used inefficiently and for no good reason.Bloated requirements? Doom 2016 is considered very well optimized, many reviews online show this.
I think they're just made to be good levels, not represent anything particularity aside from textures and a few props. There's areas in Master levels, TNT that don't make a lick of sense in terms of reality but are good levels to fight and explore. That's that difference I guess between the development attitude of Doom and Doom 2016 - One was just trying to be the best game it could be, while the other takes representing more seriously. I don't play Doom for any kind of seriousness. That's just me, though.instead of random sprawls of maps interlaced with exploding barrels and and toxic slim streams that are suppose to represent factories or research labs
If they share the exact same name, are the same IP and from the same company... yeah. I do in fact compare them to their previous releases. I don't compare every FPS to doom in its entirety, but I'll usually reference something back. As you said yourself, it pretty much invented FPS genre... and it's super old so it's not unfair to compare them. Most people would say it's unfair to the older game to compare it to modern games/standards, but we're actually discussing it as it being unfair to modern games to compare them to Doom. Just shows how well it really stands upI reckon its a bit harsh to criticize a game for not reinventing the wheel technology wise. Do you criticize all modern games for this failing? Like how it's unfair to demons to fight Doomguy :pac:
As for the technology side. They don't need to reinvent the wheel but most of the FPS (and games in general) released these days don't push anything except hardware requirements. They've either stagnated or even regressed in a lot of important ways. LAN removal, limited platforms, no mod support, DRM, no PIP. If Doom 2016 had any of this I probably wouldn't be so tough on it. Hell if it could be modded to the same degree as Doom then I think we could have mods that make it as good as it, much like there's Doom 2016 mods for doom
That's actually a design choice, not a limitation. My sis loves classic doom because of this actually and doesn't like mods that change that. I like bothIt wasn't actually true 3D, can't look up
4:3 doesn't have an FOV issue. I know some people who still prefer it for some games.35fps and its a bit strange to complain about narrow field of view (which can be changed) when at the time of the original Dooms release we were stuck with 4:3 monitors0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,106 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 27820
Robert ninja wrote: »For example modern FPS multiplayer games have some seriously low player limits for servers. Apparently despite decades since LAN FPS technology we just can't get past 6v6 on a server, we don't have the technology. Rediculous, right?
Except currently the trend is to in fact get large amounts of players on the same server... the two biggest hitters boast 100 player counts as standard, and most of the big-name multiplayer titles are rushing to hop on that bandwagon. Even if you don't like the Battle Royale games, it's clear technology isn't holding them back from bigger-scale multiplayer titles.
Let's also not forget the fact that many games are purposely balanced for small player numbers... Not some technical limitation (although surely the case in some examples), merely the fact the designers have carefully, well, designed the game mechanics to work within specific player limits. Plenty of multiplayer games which are hellish messes when you put loads of players in there, and are typically much more enjoyable when the scope is limited by design.I'm talking about platforms like Windows and Playstation. Doom runs on practically anything you'd want it to run on and the original released with support for Linux, Mac, Windows and DOS (with even Android now I believe) Has tons of console versions too. How's Doom 2016's platform ambitions? Just standard ass cut and dry Windows 7-10(10 never ending now), PS4, XBO. "Who cares about the other ones?" That's the new attitude the corpse of ID has about these things.
I mean, to a very large degree... yes? The game is available on all three major consoles (the Switch being an unlikely candidate to host a full-featured version of the game, incidentally, and a bit of a technical marvel in its own modest, 30 FPS way) and the largest *by far* PC market - the vast, vast majority of people interested in the game are able to play it, and very likely have a choice of hardware to play it on. These four biggest platforms (four is not exactly a small amount!) are the obvious focuses for any developer - big or small - to get their game into as many hands as possible, and all boast the infrastructure to fully support it.
I'm all for developers supporting Mac and Linux, let me stress, but it's no surprise whatsoever for all manner of reasons (technical, commercial) that they're relatively under-served gaming wise.
Incidentally, you could get Bioshock on a phone less than a decade after it was released. I'm sure Doom 2016 could well show up on Android and iOS (or their future equivalents) in the not so distant future too
As an aside, I was so-so about Doom 2016. I thought its mechanics were magnificent and immensely satisfying, basically becoming the FPS equivalent of DMC / Bayonetta at its best. Even purer in arcade mode. But sadly the game's level design let it down and it ran out of ideas well before the end though. Those basic mechanics though *chef's kiss*0 -
Robert ninja wrote:Fully aware of what they look like and the issues around Crysis. I use crysis as example purely based on the fact that its minimum requirements in comparison to its looks/gameplay vs minimum requirements for modern titles is so very different. It might run meh but it runs. For modern titles the requirements are exponential but the graphical and gameplay advances are not. For doom specifically, comparing the sequels to the original, this is a huge regression from such a good start.
Be honest, are you really fully aware of what both games look and run like on minimum spec requirements. What resolution and frame rate did the developers have in mind when the said minimum spec?
Also is a 2016 PC 1000% more powerful than a a 2007 PC.Robert ninja wrote:Also fully aware of this. Supreme Commander suffers from this and it's a shame. Crysis isn't a perfect game, again the only example I was using was its minimum requirements. However, it's not hard to make a better looking game when you've got decades on them, which is huge amounts of time in technology.
Odd you go to another game with severe performance issues after criticizing Doom 2016 for being un-optimized. You aware of the memory leak/bug that caused the game to continue calculate A.I pathing of destroyed units which effectively crippled performance over time when playing against the A.I in skirmish mode and was never fixed. Could never have a proper comp stomp in that game...tragic. You also complained about narrow FOV in Doom, well I'll take the liberty of bashing SupCom for cropping the vertical axis when in widescreenRobert ninja wrote:There's probably many places where we could measure it objectively (like texture resolution/mapping) but overall if it looks GOOD is indeed subjective. I would say a good screenshot of Crysis and other games that pushed the limits still impresses people today. While many big games from AAA publishers (bethesda's Falllout, Bioware's Mass Effect) can have screenshots that look very bad and like something out of an emulated upscaled N64 game at the worst of times.
Texture mapping in Crysis?, Go back to Crysis, its textures are now somewhat hit and miss. Its why when the game was released on PS3/Xbox 360 they went back and improved a lot of the textures. As for other games what are you referring too? And as creaky as Fallout 4 and ME are looking, no one who isn't taking cocaine would compare them to N64 games. Also screenshots don't capture frame rate!Robert ninja wrote:Main point is that game graphics and ambitions have been much slower than their requirements. They don't look as better than older games as their requirements have from older games. That make sense? Hard to describe it I think. Oh well.
Before I could categorically say your wrong I would need to do some research but my gut feeling tells me your being overall biased towards older games.Robert ninja wrote:If you say so. I was only responding to the claim that levels in Doom don't make sense... when I don't think they have to make sense.
They don't have to make sense sure but it helps if they do. Doom gameplay would be still be in good in completely blank corridor's but it doesn't hurt to have some variety in the scenery. Take Wolfenstein 2 or F.E.A.R good game play, but bland level design. Can we have both please?Robert ninja wrote:In the current day they're actually the result of 2 things.
1. Unethical companies who sell DRM and therefore market it with lies and misinformation about piracy (Denuvo arresting some lone hobby hacker in belgium recently)
Ah the DRM debate. A complex topic that I don't want to get into here as it would completely derail the thread, but from what I've read on gaming forum and websites many gamers are more than happy to lie and spread misinformation about it. Same thing happened with Starforce back in the day.Robert ninja wrote:2. Publishers wanting to control everything about their game to an insane degree. To the point of cheats in single player games practically becoming illegal due to DLC replacing them, save scumming being removed and basic operations being offloaded to the cloud for the sole purpose of data collection and experience tailoring (Hitman :mad:). Any company not run by complete fools knows piracy isn't an issue for them but they may use it as an excuse to regress on features anyway.
I agree cheats should not be restricted and charging money for DLC to offer the same features as what previously offered as a bonus should not be condoned.
I don't care if save scumming is being removed, learn to live with consequences ala "Thats X-Com Baby!"
Hitman was one of my favorite games recently. Its online component did cause me some minor inconveniences when I couldn't connect for an hour or so. Wasn't a huge thing but I'd rather saves where not located online. Data collecting (of in game activity and nothing else)for experience tailoring doesn't bother me though sounds like a way to improve the game. I rolled my eyes when the game was blinded criticized for being episodic when it actually really suited the game very well. That and the "OMG I don't have the ability to wield Duel Silver Ballers" or "where is my weapons briefcase" therefore this is the worst Hitman ever! "Ah guys a weapons hiding briefcase would render alot of the gameplay mechanics redundant"...."bah it doesn't matter no briefcase= this is not a true hitman game!"
Sorry rant over....gamers really get on my nerve sometime. I should stop reading game forums!
As for piracy not having any affect. I can honestly say I have no idea if it does or not but I have no idea how you can say it doesn't unless you have access to evidence I don't. I do recall seeing 3.5 million downloads of Crysis on bittorrent back in the day and similar numbers for Call of Duty games. I don't have evidence but I have a hard time imagining that none of those downloads are a lost sale.Robert ninja wrote:That's not the only reason. There's just good ole laziness. For example modern FPS multiplayer games have some seriously low player limits for servers. Apparently despite decades since LAN FPS technology we just can't get past 6v6 on a server, we don't have the technology. Rediculous, right? Here's a video explaining this malarkey in more detail https://youtu.be/tS9vvF1V1Dc
No comment for now I'll watch later.Robert ninja wrote:Picture in picture. As seen in things like Swat 4, Supreme Commander which also had it in mutli monitor map overview tech which was awesome... or straight up just any game with split screen. But apparently Halo can't do that anymore because they just can't do it according to the head of xbox. Never mind hundreds of millions of euros they can play with and have the networking links to hire practically anyone they want for anything, nevermind the technology advantage over things like the nintendo 64 which could do 4 player split screen... they just can't get split screen in Halo on modern hardware because it's too fecking hard for them. Boo hoo am I right? There's always an excuse with these modern FPS games, one reason or another to regress further and further. You can accept their excuses or not. I don't.
I remember PIP in Swat 4 now. Cool game. SupCom was multi monitor not PIP. The question is do those modes work in all games or are needed.
As for Halo I have no comment because I don't know anything about Halo. Don't play the games.Robert ninja wrote:Maybe you misunderstood or I didn't explain precisely what I meant, because I've got no idea what you're talking about with CPU cores n' such.
Sorry I thought you where criticizing consoles for holding back video game development and where referring to them as limited platforms. My mistake.Robert ninja wrote:I'm talking about platforms like Windows and Playstation. Doom runs on practically anything you'd want it to run on and the original released with support for Linux, Mac, Windows and DOS (with even Android now I believe) Has tons of console versions too. How's Doom 2016's platform ambitions? Just standard ass cut and dry Windows 7-10(10 never ending now), PS4, XBO. "Who cares about the other ones?" That's the new attitude the corpse of ID has about these things.
That's great they got support for all those platforms. I have nothing against MAC, Linux or Android (but I'd never want to play Doom on a mobile device...ughh). But at the end of the day games development a business out to make money and I don't begrudge them that. With Doom 2016 have covered off probably 96+% of the market (you forgot the switch version). What is the Lunix gaming market, less than 1% is it? Its a cost vs profit calculation. Also not being on Android or Linux or Mac doesn't make the gameplay any worse anyway. Infact if its anything like X-Com 2 which I tried recently on Linux your better off on Windows and not losing a third of your frame rate.Robert ninja wrote:Well getting slightly off topic, but I will call absolute BS on this. GOG said the same thing with witcher and then spent an insane amount of its budget (I think higher than its development budget) on marketing which was primarily for console. Games can target one system and be profitable, just name any successful console exclusive. There are AAA games that come out for single platforms and are successful, it can be done. It's all about how much they have to spend on development and how much money they can make back. Would Witcher 3 look different if 90% of its marketing budget was rerouted into a single platform only release? Definitely. Would it be better? Who can say for sure. But I'd wager a PC only release probably would've been a better designed experience, at least for my taste.
... or if they just released the damn modding tools they back-pedalled on.
Would you mind linking to evidence that indicate CDPR spent more on marketing than on game development.
Secondly do you believe marketing has no effect on sales. If they spent nothing on marketing and pumped into all into game development would the sales have been better, the same or worse?
This is what I don't get. Game developers/publishers have an aversion to losing money. You constantly hear from gamers how developers are throwing money hands over fist away on useless things like marketing or DRM or are being hoodwinked by shaddy publishers/DRM developers. Of course its extremely rare that anyone can ever backs up these claims or accusations with evidence. But maybe just maybe, they publishers/developers have access to information/sales figures the general gaming public does not!Robert ninja wrote:You quoted yourself and are replying to yourself I think? Was that just a correction?
The original Doom and Doom 2 engines are not true 3D games was the point I was making
Anyway sorry for wall of text gone way off topic.
Doom 1 Great
Doom 2 Great
Doom 3 A technical marvel for its time and I understand it went for horror over shooting gameplay which I was fine with but its the weakest game in the series.
Doom 2016 a good modern take on a classic formula that's so under used it feels fresh.
Doom Eternal, looks great, really capture classic Doom spirit IMO. Looking forward to it.0 -
-
-
This lad hits the nail on the head. Applies to quite a lot of outrage these days.
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PS6SBnccxMA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss8SyOhqk1I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh261nfSn3E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l63nY0AYebI
Advertisement