• DOOM - Campaign Trailer
    311 replies, posted
Coming from someone who [b]actually played Doom 1 and 2[/b]: This looks fucking sick.
The only deal breaker now for me is how long the game is, because the game looks pretty fucking sick. I don't want to pay 80-90$ (CAD) for a really short experience, level editor included or not.
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49680204]Nothing, I just hate how people obsess over it sometimes. Like holy shit, it's a bunch of meat chunks. Who the fuck gives a shit, give me some actual fucking gameplay. [editline]5th February 2016[/editline] Like I keep saying, I don't hate gore. I'm fine with it. I simply dislike the fact that people seem to focus on it for no fucking reason.[/QUOTE] People like gore because it makes your actions more impactful. If you shoot a dude in the chest with a shotgun from 2 feet away, it is much more satisfying to see—instead of the guy falling lifeless to the ground like many games—the guy's chest burst open, blood spewing everywhere, his bones and organs flopping out of him, his head rolling around after popping off, and his bloodied legs collapsing to the floor. Having an effective gore system keeps you interested and makes your actions meaningful. This works out to turn it into what most gamers would call "fun." Games like Killing Floor, Left 4 Dead, and Warhammer 40k: Space Marine would not be [I]bad[/I] games if they didn't have their gore, but they would be [I]inferior[/I] games.
Gore is good you shitty fucking pussy cunts
Left 4 Dead 2 had the best non-intrusive gore system. The technical aspect was surprisingly complex (I believe they put up a document explaining it all a few years ago) but the result is clean and simple. You shoot something, chunks of it get blown off based on gib models for various parts of the body. And you didn't have to go through glory kills to see it. You shoot a zombie in the chest with a shotgun and his entire ribcage explodes.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49681372]And you didn't have to go through glory kills to see it. You shoot a zombie in the chest with a shotgun and his entire ribcage explodes.[/QUOTE] Except there's a moment in this Doom trailer where that happens. Point-blank shotgun blast explodes the entire upper body of one of the zombie enemies like a bloody water balloon.
[QUOTE=RikohZX;49681394]Except there's a moment in this Doom trailer where that happens. Point-blank shotgun blast explodes the entire upper body of one of the zombie enemies like a bloody water balloon.[/QUOTE] You see another thing that's good about L4D2's gore system is that it uses dedicated generic damage models that replace parts of the existing model, allowing for small, localized damage on the exact places you shoot. As paradoxal as this may sound, small, local, handcrafted damage feels more impactful than a generic shower of gibs.
I'm curious to know if there's other actual humans alive and fighting this time around, I mean you hear all the radio chatter going on in 3with all the epic battles going on and yet you never actually see any of it, just a bunch of dudes killed to fuck when you get there. I don't mean have them follow you around or lead you anywhere, just be around and doing their own thing and you can run into some every so often.
Doom was never about [BLANK] It was actually all about [BLANK] You would know if you were actually a real fan sweetie :)
[QUOTE=Stinky;49681022]People like gore because it makes your actions more impactful. If you shoot a dude in the chest with a shotgun from 2 feet away, it is much more satisfying to see, instead of the guy falling lifeless to the ground like many games, the guy's chest burst open, blood spewing everywhere, his bones and organs flopping out of him, his head rolling around after popping off, and his bloodied legs collapsing to the floor. Having an effective gore system keeps you interested and makes your actions meaningful. This works out to turn it into what most gamers would call "fun." Games like Killing Floor, Left 4 Dead, and Warhammer 40k: Space Marine would not be [I]bad[/I] games if they didn't have their gore, but they would be [I]inferior[/I] games.[/QUOTE] Yeah I realize that, but there's a point I feel where it just becomes too unrealistic and extreme. I'm wondering why anyone would want past that, because at that point it might as well be softcore gore porn. There are better ways to add more responsiveness then just to shove an excess amount of blood and guts on the screen. Doom right now certainly has enough gore even without the glory kills, I don't think it needs anymore as the guy was suggesting, especially since he wanted to make it a core feature.
I can't wait for this but the question remains, will they add more into multiplayer? I mean what happens when you have done everything in campaign? There's multiplayer. I hope they add more into it over time like more game modes, maps, and such over time so that it doesn't get stale.
i'm really enjoying the monster (re)designs, they've got more Doom 1/2 demons and less Doom 3 whatevertheyweresupposedtobe to them
[QUOTE=Joazzz;49681568]i'm really enjoying the monster (re)designs, they've got more Doom 1/2 demons and less Doom 3 whatevertheyweresupposedtobe to them[/QUOTE] I especially like the new designs for the Demons and the Hell Knights/Barons of Hell.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49678193]And between Doom 3 and Rage came Quake 4, a game partly outsourced to raven software that absolutely everyone forgot because of how dull it was.[/QUOTE] I seem to be the only person that loved Quake 4 :( I still have a copy laying around.
doom 1 levels of gore is casual as fuck tbh and so is this not enough gore if you ask me casuals
[QUOTE=Vilusia;49681734]I seem to be the only person that loved Quake 4 :( I still have a copy laying around.[/QUOTE] It has a pretty decent MP component, I enjoyed that
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49681530]Yeah I realize that, but there's a point I feel where it just becomes too unrealistic and extreme. I'm wondering why anyone would want past that, because at that point it might as well be softcore gore porn. There are better ways to add more responsiveness then just to shove an excess amount of blood and guts on the screen. Doom right now certainly has enough gore even without the glory kills, I don't think it needs anymore as the guy was suggesting, especially since he wanted to make it a core feature.[/QUOTE] oh my god go away people like you are ruining proper gore in the media leave your conservative prudeness is pissing me off
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49681530]Yeah I realize that, but there's a point I feel where it just becomes too unrealistic and extreme. I'm wondering why anyone would want past that, because at that point it might as well be softcore gore porn. There are better ways to add more responsiveness then just to shove an excess amount of blood and guts on the screen. Doom right now certainly has enough gore even without the glory kills, I don't think it needs anymore as the guy was suggesting, especially since he wanted to make it a core feature.[/QUOTE] are you actually seriously talking about 'realism' in a game about slaying armies of mutant hell monsters You can't take the game to the extreme by having hell beasts and massive weapons that shoot rockets and hundreds of bullets in a single second, and then tone the gore down to "Realistic" proportions, that makes no sense. The very core of classic shooters was built around unrealistic extremes. Games like Unreal Tournament or Doom have gore in the way that they do because it would be even MORE unrealistic not to. You have guns that literally shoot god damn [B]LASER BEAMS[/B] across valley's, and rocket launchers that can fire 8 missiles at once, and they are so powerful that you need an energy field just to prevent your body from being torn apart. The extremism of weapons and gore goes hand in hand with the extremism of the violence that happens. The only people that'll survive against hell monsters are ones that can literally rip and tear them apart.
[QUOTE=J!NX;49681800]are you actually seriously talking about 'realism' in a game about slaying armies of mutant hell monsters You can't take the game to the extreme by having hell beasts and massive weapons that shoot rockets and hundreds of bullets in a single second, and then tone the gore down to "Realistic" proportions, that makes no sense. The very core of classic shooters was built around unrealistic extremes. Games like Unreal Tournament or Doom have gore in the way that they do because it would be even MORE unrealistic not to. You have guns that literally shoot god damn [B]LASER BEAMS[/B] across valley's, and rocket launchers that can fire 8 missiles at once, and they are so powerful that you need an energy field just to prevent your body from being torn apart. The extremism of weapons and gore goes hand in hand with the extremism of the violence that happens. The only people that'll survive against hell monsters are ones that can literally rip and tear them apart.[/QUOTE] Like I've fucking said time and time again, [I]I do not have a problem with gore in Doom[/I]. I'm fine with gore, but now when [U]a[/U] game uses excess amounts of it. I probably could have used a better fucking adjective for other then , but I didn't. This topic is seriously starting to bore me, it's just me repeating the same points over and over again.
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49682046]Like I've fucking said time and time again, [I]I do not have a problem with gore in Doom[/I]. I'm fine with gore, but now when [U]a[/U] game uses excess amounts of it. I probably could have used a better fucking adjective for other then , but I didn't. This topic is seriously starting to bore me, it's just me repeating the same points over and over again.[/QUOTE] I'm not talking about gore itself, but the context and nature of it you have a problem with the 'realism' of the gore my argument is that unrealistic amounts of gore are a part of the unrealistic amounts of violence. The gore being as extreme as it is, is an anomaly of the weapons and monsters being as extreme as they are. They go hand in hand. Making it "Realistic" wouldn't cut it graphically. You have weapons that are powerful enough to kill an opponent in 1, maybe 2 hits, it's probably going to rip their head off or slice them in 2. I'm sorry that my post was too 'boring' to read though. I guess I'll just make it more exciting next time, with unrealistic levels of gore. [video=youtube;lk2QmeoLwH8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk2QmeoLwH8[/video]
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49682046] This topic is seriously starting to bore me, it's just me repeating the same points over and over again.[/QUOTE] just fucking leave jesus christ you know what just for you I'm going to make every single movie/game/animated short or feature I make from now on super fucking gory fuck you not that I needed a reason and not that I wasn't going to do that anyway [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - rilez))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;49672304]Ahem [IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/95/Wolfenstein_The_New_Order_cover.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Wolfenstein was better than the garbage CoD churns out every year but it still isn't very innovative or really that good. It still was mostly a corridor/cover shooter and only had 2-3 bosses that boiled down to "shoot the weak spot"
[QUOTE=xalener;49682177]just fucking leave jesus christ you know what just for you I'm going to make every single movie/game/animated short or feature I make from now on super fucking gory fuck you not that I needed a reason and not that I wasn't going to do that anyway[/QUOTE] hey now, lets now be caustic about it don't be a spoil sport broskeets [QUOTE=ashxu;49682179]Wolfenstein was better than the garbage CoD churns out every year but it still isn't very innovative or really that good. It still was mostly a corridor/cover shooter and only had 2-3 bosses that boiled down to "shoot the weak spot"[/QUOTE] It's hard for a shooter to be innovative. As a shooter it's REALLY good. It's solid all in all. But innovation in shooters is something that stopped being a thing a while ago. There is still a lot to be innovated, but there has already been a LOT of good 'game' changing shit out there. Hell, I'd go so far as to saying unless you're doing VR, it's almost impossible to make an innovative shooter. But that isn't to say we'll never see another industry changer out there, far from it. it's just to say that you better have a really solid idea if. To add to that too, you can make a game, movie, whatever, that's just a mimic of its own genre, and still be really excellent fun. Wolfenstein does this but also has its own unique twists. Just look at the force unleashed. It's basically a modern episode 4, but an extremely solid film of its own.
innovation =/=good Innovative but bad = Tresspasser, Shrek: The game (first deferred renderer in games, the standard now) Not innovative but good = Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher bay, The Darkness, Wolfenstein TNO (all by the same people pretty much) [QUOTE=J!NX;49682183]hey now, lets now be caustic about it don't be a spoil sport broskeets[/QUOTE] I'm done apologizing for being pissed off about all these garbage backseat developers the internet has birthed.
[QUOTE=J!NX;49682183]It's hard for a shooter to be innovative. As a shooter it's REALLY good. It's solid all in all. But innovation in shooters is something that stopped being a thing a while ago. There is still a lot to be innovated, but there has already been a LOT of good 'game' changing shit out there. Hell, I'd go so far as to saying unless you're doing VR, it's almost impossible to make an innovative shooter. But that isn't to say we'll never see another industry changer out there, far from it. it's just to say that you better have a really solid idea if. To add to that too, you can make a game, movie, whatever, that's just a mimic of its own genre, and still be really excellent fun. Wolfenstein does this but also has its own unique twists. Just look at the force unleashed. It's basically a modern episode 4, but an extremely solid film of its own.[/QUOTE] It doesn't need to totally change the genre but it was a blatantly obvious corridor shooter. In my opinion the first level in the castle was probably the best level because it wasn't as linear. A re-imaging of Doom/Wolfenstein gameplay would of been fine, but instead we get shooting down corridors against hitscan enemies that plays far too similarly to CoD. It doesn't need to have totally maze like levels and yeah sure they had an alternate route to most places on the stages but the enemies sucked.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49680919]Coming from someone who [b]actually played Doom 1 and 2[/b]: This looks fucking sick.[/QUOTE] yes none of us have played doom 1 and 2 before, you're right
[QUOTE=ashxu;49682232]It doesn't need to totally change the genre but it was a blatantly obvious corridor shooter. In my opinion the first level in the castle was probably the best level because it wasn't as linear. A re-imaging of Doom/Wolfenstein gameplay would of been fine, but instead we get shooting down corridors against hitscan enemies that plays far too similarly to CoD. It doesn't need to have totally maze like levels and yeah sure they had an alternate route to most places on the stages but the enemies sucked.[/QUOTE] well, it DID have a cover system, so there is that. That doesn't really help make it differ much from current games. But the original wolfenstein was all about using cover tactics, so modern games don't really differ from the first shooter ever made either. Alternative routes are 100% the way to go. It makes the game worth replaying, and modern engines have the power to make it happen.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;49682234]yes none of us have played doom 1 and 2 before, you're right[/QUOTE] Have you.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;49682279]Have you.[/QUOTE] it was ok
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49682046]Like I've fucking said time and time again, [I]I do not have a problem with gore in Doom[/I]. I'm fine with gore, but now when [U]a[/U] game uses excess amounts of it. I probably could have used a better fucking adjective for other then , but I didn't. This topic is seriously starting to bore me, it's just me repeating the same points over and over again.[/QUOTE] Ah the rusty100 defense: Post a deliberately shitposty "opinion" about a facet of a game's [B]basic core presentation[/B] and then feign indifference and boredom as you're deluged under a biblical tirade of boxes. "Hey guys you know what I don't like about Mass Effect? Aliens. The alien races in this game were so unnecessary, like the game would have been so much better without them". -_-
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.