Doom Series V2 - Knee Deep in the Thread - Games

Yeah, the grenades were good at bouncing off the walls and floor and hitting you in the face. Also, the shotgun bothered me in Doom 3 because of its ridiculous wide pellet spread, which made it it frustratingly inconsistent in damage. I really hope they make the shotgun a more focused weapon in Doom 4.

I still don't know how they screwed up grenades when the ones in Quake were perfect for fucking shit up. [editline]19th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Sgt Doom;45153944] Compare that to the unending satisfaction of giving a pinkie double barrels to the face in Doom 2, or especially Brutal Doom.[/QUOTE] Blowing apart an Arachnotron with the super shotgun is the most satisfying sound I have heard in gaming.

[QUOTE=Joazzz;45153672]i can say. to me it looked fucking horrible. nothing in the visual design appeals to me, everything looks like it came out of some plastic toy factory. round shapes shoehorned absolutely everywhere, with even all the mechanical parts in the environments and creatures looking like big heaps of spheres. and all covered by the lighting gimmick that couldn't do basic light bouncing. yes this was 2003-2004 but the game would have looked (and PLAYED) so much better without the forced OMFG DYNAMIC SHADOWS thing. to me D00M3 felt like an overglorified tech demo and not a real D00M game.[/QUOTE] Those were before the days of specular maps being used to tune down highlights. Afaik. But I think the[I] aesthetic[/I] that they were aiming for was amazing. They just couldn't do it. I mean, I think the Doom 3 concept art is beautiful. They just weren't able to deliver at the time. [IMG]http://www.valvetime.net/attachments/doom3_0523_screen002-jpg.7721/[/IMG] [IMG]http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/6403/doom301.jpg[/IMG] But, like I said. I just like Kenneth Scott. Off topic, one weird thing I've noticed. A lot of the modern commercial artists I like are into bondage, or at least into drawing it. I--idk what's up with that.

Dammit people, is there anything you don't hate about DooM 3? :( So far the visuals were shit, map design was shit, horror was shit, action was shit, gore was shit, and weapons were shit. That doesn't sound at all like the 8.5/10 success DooM 3 was. :/

[QUOTE=Talvy;45156128]Dammit people, is there anything you don't hate about DooM 3? :( So far the visuals were shit, map design was shit, horror was shit, action was shit, gore was shit, and weapons were shit. Sounds more like some infamous 2/10 game that nobody bought. Not at all like DooM 3. :/[/QUOTE] It's Facepunch. Game has a lot of action, "not enough X, is bad" Game has more X and less action, "Not enough action" Game has more X and action, "not original or someshit" Nobody is ever pleased. Personally I loved Doom 3 and I hope 4 will be close to it.

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;45156185]It's Facepunch. Game has a lot of action, "not enough X, is bad" Game has more X and less action, "Not enough action" Game has more X and action, "not original or someshit" Nobody is ever pleased. Personally I loved Doom 3 and I hope 4 will be close to it.[/QUOTE] Or maybe people just don't like Doom 3

[QUOTE=ZeroTimesCookie;45155676]There were grenades?[/QUOTE] I think it was the first Id game (and only) to have grenades on their own without an accompanying grenade launcher. Problem was that while they packed a punch early in the game, before you have a rocket launcher to use at your discretion, they bounced like jumping beans and were extremely awkward to use. And since a lot of the early game combat's in close-quarters, you have a damn high chance of fragging yourself.

[QUOTE=TheCombine;45156230]Or maybe people just don't like Doom 3[/QUOTE] That's what he said. All you did here is simplify what he said to make it look like he's overdoing it. But he was simply saying WHY people don't like it... are you saying there's no reason why you dislike it?

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;45156185]It's Facepunch. Game has a lot of action, "not enough X, is bad" Game has more X and less action, "Not enough action" Game has more X and action, "not original or someshit" Nobody is ever pleased. Personally I loved Doom 3 and I hope 4 will be close to it.[/QUOTE] That's just the problem. It didn't have enough of either, so it was boring. There are still things I like about it, but the game is less than the sum of its parts.

I like it for what it is. It's not trying to be a Doom remake, it's not trying to be an action packed shootfest like Doom 1 and 2, it's just Doom 3. It's a Doom game as Quake 2 is a Quake game, even thought it has nothing to do with Quake 1 and never tried to be like it.

[QUOTE=xalener;45156044]But I think the[I] aesthetic[/I] that they were aiming for was amazing. They just couldn't do it. I mean, I think the Doom 3 concept art is beautiful. They just weren't able to deliver at the time. [IMG]http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/6403/doom301.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.valvetime.net/attachments/doom3_0523_screen002-jpg.7721/[/IMG][/QUOTE] [t]http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2012/102/8/1/pinky__doom_3__by_xombiexaero-d4vy5rl.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/236895-doom3-windows-screenshot-about-to-be-kissed-by-a-lost-soul.png[/t] Looks ok to me :)

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;45156545]I like it for what it is. It's not trying to be a Doom remake, it's not trying to be an action packed shootfest like Doom 1 and 2, it's just Doom 3. It's a Doom game as Quake 2 is a Quake game, even thought it has nothing to do with Quake 1 and never tried to be like it.[/QUOTE] I'm not criticizing it for not being just like 1 and 2, I'm criticizing it for being boring on its own merits. It's in this awful middle ground that makes it feel like it doesn't have that much of a direction, like they couldn't agree on horror or action.

Yeah, I don't really compare 3 to 1 or 2. I play each for different reasons. Doom 3 with the right mods can still look really good, even today. I don't play it unmodded anymore, there are a lot of gameplay mods that fix most of people's gripes, but then I don't play Doom 1/2 unmodded anymore either. :v:

my biggest gripe with Doom 3 gameplay-wise is the guns. i can deal with the darkness, but in a first person shooter the guns can bring the whole thing crashing down if they lack balls. especially the shotgun due to its silly spread and sound that goes POOF instead of BLAM. and because the bullet impact sounds in the game are often louder than the gunshots themselves, gunfights at ranges less than a hundred meters sound like PLONK PLONK PLONK PLONK PLOPLOPLOPLONK PLONK. shotgun goes PLONK, CHA-CHICK. PLONK, CHA-CHICK. just modding the shotgun spread and changing all the sounds made the gunplay feel much better to me

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;45156545]I like it for what it is. It's not trying to be a Doom remake, it's not trying to be an action packed shootfest like Doom 1 and 2, it's just Doom 3. It's a Doom game as Quake 2 is a Quake game, even thought it has nothing to do with Quake 1 and never tried to be like it.[/QUOTE] Even though Quake 2 was different from Quake 1 I don't think it strayed extremely far from big guns, big enemies big action. It's definitely more linear than Doom and Quake (But still way more open than some other shooters now) but it didn't lose those basic ideas.. And even as it did stray it wasn't really a "sequel" to Quake. It was a totally different setting entirely, just sharing a name. Doom 3 on the other hand was very different from Doom 1/2 but it was still Doom. I think if Doom 3 wasn't called Doom it would've been far better received.

I liked quake 2's semi open world. Like it was linear, but you could always backtrack and sometimes had to. I wish more games would do that kind of shit, just leaving things open like that.

[QUOTE=RikohZX;45156348]I think it was the first Id game (and only) to have grenades on their own without an accompanying grenade launcher.[/QUOTE]Quake 2 has hand grenades. [img]http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111103180151/quake/images/4/40/Q2hgrenade.JPG[/img]

[QUOTE=Marphy Black;45157298]Quake 2 has hand grenades. [img]http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111103180151/quake/images/4/40/Q2hgrenade.JPG[/img][/QUOTE] Read the "without an accompanying grenade launcher". Quake 2 had a grenade launcher.

[QUOTE=Talvy;45156526]That's what he said. All you did here is simplify what he said to make it look like he's overdoing it. But he was simply saying WHY people don't like it... are you saying there's no reason why you dislike it?[/QUOTE] No, he's implying Facepunch in its entirety does this for every game. Why are you so desperate to defend Doom 3?

Because DooM 3 was not a bad game.

[QUOTE=TheCombine;45157322]No, he's implying Facepunch in its entirety does this for every game. Why are you so desperate to defend Doom 3?[/QUOTE] I do think it gets kind of a bad rap. Doom 1/2 is just a hard act to follow, especially since FPS gameplay has shifted so much to different elements over the years. I think they learned what works and what doesn't from Doom 3 and The New Order, though, so I'm confident Doom 4 will be a good blend as long as it doesn't end up in development hell or something.

[QUOTE=Ghost101;45157377]I do think it gets kind of a bad rap. Doom 1/2 is just a hard act to follow, especially since FPS gameplay has shifted so much to different elements over the years. I think they learned what works and what doesn't from Doom 3 and [b]The New Order[/b], though, so I'm confident Doom 4 will be a good blend as long as it doesn't end up in development hell or something.[/QUOTE] id Software had nothing to do with Wolfenstein: The New Order.

[QUOTE=Ghost101;45157377]I do think it gets kind of a bad rap. Doom 1/2 is just a hard act to follow, especially since FPS gameplay has shifted so much to different elements over the years. I think they learned what works and what doesn't from Doom 3 and The New Order, though, so I'm confident Doom 4 will be a good blend as long as it doesn't end up in development hell or something.[/QUOTE] Judging by the fact that they're revealing the game next month and the principle of the promised Doom beta sooner or later from TNO, I say that beyond maybe some delays the game's well on its way. Whether it's this year or next year is a different matter entirely. [editline]19th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Whatsinaname;45157421]id Software had nothing to do with Wolfenstein: The New Order.[/QUOTE] Supposedly they offered suggestions, like the akimbo weapon wielding. Not to mention they personally gave Machinehead Games their blessings for the game and such.

[QUOTE=Joazzz;45153672]i can say. to me it looked fucking horrible. nothing in the visual design appeals to me, everything looks like it came out of some plastic toy factory. round shapes shoehorned absolutely everywhere, with even all the mechanical parts in the environments and creatures looking like big heaps of spheres. and all covered by the lighting gimmick that couldn't do basic light bouncing. yes this was 2003-2004 but the game would have looked (and PLAYED) so much better without the forced OMFG DYNAMIC SHADOWS thing. to me D00M3 felt like an overglorified tech demo and not a real D00M game.[/QUOTE] Just like you said, the game [I]IS[/I] 10 years old - if it looks plastic to you, then you can blame the texture technology on that. But to say it looked fucking [B]HORRIBLE[/B] is just uncalled for. I dunno what's your big point with "too many rounded edges"... [U]what?[/U] But just look at this, what's [I]so[/I] [B]horrible[/B] about this? I don't mean to be aggressive, I just don't see it. [IMG]http://blendogames.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/d3shot00004.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/535/535070/doom-3-20040801033640905_640w.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.cesspit.net/misc/d3/d301.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://bulk2.destructoid.com/ul/232545-quakecon-preview-going-to-hell-in-doom-3-s-lost-mission/D32-620x.jpg[/IMG] What's so [I]horrible[/I] about this? I just don't see it.

in my opinion it looks terrible. everything looks like it's made literally out of plastic. which is precisely what i said in my original post.

[QUOTE=mookie;45154951]I think the main problems with Doom 3 were the following: 1) Not enough enemies (and they're polite enough to spawn in 1-2 at a time, instead of mobbing you by the dozens) 2) Not gory enough (Bloodstains fade, no dismemberment, demons burn out/bodies disintegrate after shooting it with a pistol, wtf?) 3) Overall the guns lacked that "oomph" and sense of impact. Bullpup felt/sounded like it was shooting metal BB pellets that tickled your enemies, shotgun looked impressive but had surprisingly low damage making automatic weapons a better overall choice. Old plasma gun sounded beefier, the new one sounded like those toy rifles you pick up at Toys-R-Us. Rocket launcher's splash radius/ explosion sound effects were surprisingly tame for a gun that's supposed to blow shit up. And grenades, i can't be the only one who's never used them. And the minigun's surprisingly a bad choice for close quarters combat given it's horrible ROF, spinup and 60 round mag. Really? A minigun with 60 round magazines? BFG.......no complaints there :) I hope Doom 4's a remake of Doom 1/2 with tons of enemies, less key hunting and the occasional A.I allies to help out. Like Brutal Doom with nicer graphics.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://doom3.filefront.com/file/Abandon_All_Hope_In_Hell;91012"]http://doom3.filefront.com/file/Abandon_All_Hope_In_Hell;91012 [/URL][quote]What's so [I]horrible[/I] about this? I just don't see it. [/quote] It's his opinion, there's zero point in attempting to correct an opinion because you can't. I liked DooM ]I[ enough to mod the shit out of it (see above) and I play it once a year or so, but it has huge flaws and the fact the that not everyone was on board with making it shows in spades, especially in the schizophrenic enemy and weapon design, and the really generic use of some shaders that can have been put to much better use with a little more research. Saying you can't criticize the game implies it's perfect. Not even close. There's plenty of criticism to go around even in a series this venerated.

I actually really like the look of Doom 3, and for it's time it's only really rivaled by Escape From Butcher Bay, which still looks great today.

I like Doom 3 a lot, but I only either play it in Coop or with sikkmod. I like the guns with Trent Reznor's sounds. It's odd because when I first played D3 when I was younger I was pretty scared of it but I absolutely hated it for years. Then I finally went back and played it again and I wasn't really sure why I spent all that time hating it. [QUOTE=Talvy;45157712]Just like you said, the game [I]IS[/I] 10 years old - if it looks plastic to you, then you can blame the texture technology on that. But to say it looked fucking [B]HORRIBLE[/B] is just uncalled for. I dunno what's your big point with "too many rounded edges"... [U]what?[/U] But just look at this, what's [I]so[/I] [B]horrible[/B] about this? I don't mean to be aggressive, I just don't see it. [IMG]http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/535/535070/doom-3-20040801033640905_640w.jpg[/IMG] What's so [I]horrible[/I] about this? I just don't see it.[/QUOTE] I agree with you except for that screenshot. Doom 3's outdoor areas even for the time were absolutely god awful.

[QUOTE=27X;45158455]It's his opinion, there's zero point in attempting to correct an opinion because you can't. Saying you can't criticize the game implies it's perfect. Not even close. There's plenty of criticism to go around even in a series this venerated.[/QUOTE] Nah, that's not what I meant - I'm just trying to understand why would anyone bash the visuals (considering their age), because they're definitely DooM 3's best aspect that everyone praised.

Well for one thing DooM has never been about graphics. Graphic impact and graphic fidelity are two different things. DooM I/II had impact because of the engine's impact but as time has passed, it's now very apparent that they also had fidelity in both mood and presentation. Doom ]I[ does not have this. The monsters went through three passes, minimum and the only ones they attempted to keep a motif on were the Hellknight and Imp. Everything else went through a Giger-phase (which worked) and then a "tech hybrid phase" (which frankly didn't, in a lot of cases) and a final phase were something working had to come out of the other end of the pipeline. They also dropped the lighting model Carmack originally went with for a simpler "cinematic" model, that frankly hasn't aged well at all. And the decision not to go with Cook-Torrance light modeling for materials also made everything appear more uniform than it should, in fact simply changing that aspect of the shader code makes the game look completely fucking different. Look at the pic you posted; look at the medkit and the door, they look like they're made out of the exact same material, when they aren't supposed to be. This extends to people, which it definitely shouldn't. Doom ]I[ is a lot like AvP2, one you take the fan goggles off and take an objective poke around, you'll realize there's a lot of clashing stuff that doesn't really follow any kind of visual narration or even common sense, in most cases. It was made with "rule of cool" very much in mind, and once the oooh pretty sheen wears off, a lot of flaws become pretty plainly apparent.