Doom Reboot Info - Many Demons, No Regenerating Health

[KoudelkaMorgan]

Yeah as soon as I read that bit about the fps and resolution, I knew not to take any of it seriously.

I hated doom 3. I sadly have never played Doom 2. I did play the crap out of Ultimate Doom, Final Doom, and Doom 64. Doom 64 being my favorite, but I've seen Brutal Doom LPs enough to know I eventually want to get around to setting that up.

Which would make it sadly the only mod I've ever installed for Doom other than one that turned the Pinkys into Barney the dinosaur, which I promptly uninstalled as it wasn't that great.

 

[andago]

1) I did not hear "PC" anywhere.
2)

"Doom is an origin game, about fast, FAST paced combat. It's about amazing guns and blood and gore and gibs,"

Ohmygawd, it was sooo hard to get, what made Doom popular back in 1993. They needed 10 years to figure out why Doom 3 failed.

Are you sure Doom 3 failed, or you are really so arrogant as to think your personal opinion bends reality to your perspective? Because last time I checked, Doom 3 was one of the largest commercial successes for id, and was loved by many new generation gamers, including some of us that were around for the original Doom games when they first came out.

I will digress in that I am glad to hear they are bringing back fast-paced combat.

So, you measure game's quality by its commercial success? I think we have nothing to discuss then. I do not see any correlation between these two parameters. Doom 1 defined the whole genre as it looks today. Doom 3 ripped System Shock off. Doom 1 had unique visuals and setting (for its time) - in Doom 3 even Hell is stereotypically boring. Doom 3 is repetative, Doom 1 - never. I don't see any redeeming qualities of Doom 3, especially when there actually is System Shock 2 around.

In this case, you saying a game "failed" normally implies that it failed financially and commercially, not that it was of low quality. If you meant to say it was a disappointment or a generic sequel, you should probably say something like "failed to innovate" or "failed to impress", instead of just outright failing. Normally the "success" of a game, and its importance in gaming and to gamers, are two seperate issues. Just a gap in understanding.

 

[kasperbbs]

If it's anything like the new Wolfenstein then count me in, i had more fun with it than with any recent shooter. Although i would rather be killing strogg or nazi's with some crazy tech, i'll settle with some demons, hopefully they wont be teleporting this time around.

 

[Janaschi]

1) I did not hear "PC" anywhere.
2)

"Doom is an origin game, about fast, FAST paced combat. It's about amazing guns and blood and gore and gibs,"

Ohmygawd, it was sooo hard to get, what made Doom popular back in 1993. They needed 10 years to figure out why Doom 3 failed.

Are you sure Doom 3 failed, or you are really so arrogant as to think your personal opinion bends reality to your perspective? Because last time I checked, Doom 3 was one of the largest commercial successes for id, and was loved by many new generation gamers, including some of us that were around for the original Doom games when they first came out.

I will digress in that I am glad to hear they are bringing back fast-paced combat.

So, you measure game's quality by its commercial success? I think we have nothing to discuss then. I do not see any correlation between these two parameters. Doom 1 defined the whole genre as it looks today. Doom 3 ripped System Shock off. Doom 1 had unique visuals and setting (for its time) - in Doom 3 even Hell is stereotypically boring. Doom 3 is repetative, Doom 1 - never. I don't see any redeeming qualities of Doom 3, especially when there actually is System Shock 2 around.

I measure the game's quality by the fact that even today, Doom 3 sales are high, and so are the hours recorded played. When Bethesda brought Doom 3 to Steam, it quickly became one of the highest selling games, and still, to this day, makes high sales during discount periods. If the game was of poor quality, then I am interested in hearing your argument as to why, 10 years later, Doom 3 is still such a popular game, even amongst those of us that were old school Doom fans.

Is the game innovative? I would personally say no - but innovation alone does not determine a game's success. Is Doom 3 a rip-off? Yes, but that also does not determine game quality, as very few games can claim complete originality. Next, you will tell me that Bioshock was not a success in quality, simply because it incorporated elements from System Shock II.

In conclusion, all I am seeing is you lording your personal opinion over the well established facts that Doom 3 was both one of id's greatest successes, and is still, 10 years later, a very popularly played game.

 

[Some_weirdGuy]

When I hear some of the criticism leveled at Doom 3(not all, but some of the main ones) I have to wonder if peoples perceptions of doom 1 and 2 have been warped by their own over-familiarity(/speedruns) of it or the mods they've installed. Others probably played it with gamma on max(for competitive reason or because, you know, despite peoples claims to the latter it does infact get pretty dark) or when they were young with the the cheatcodes active[I myself was fond of noclip-godmode-fists'only when I first started ], further contributing to this misconception about the pacing/playstyle/gamestyle of Doom.

Doom one had lots of dark areas[for real, each level tended to have atleast one 'dark section' as they showed off the cutting edge lighting/rendering engine... for it's time], and a HEAP of jumpscares, even if you've grown numb to them. Its general play wasn't as fast-paced action-in-your-face as people make out either, not unless you're well familiar with where you were going and so were running around everywhere dishing out crack-shots to enemies as they appeared.


as it is... I find brutal doom to be... well, just kinda stupid and am a little disappointed to hear that's the direction they're going XD

 

[Ratty]

Yeah as soon as I read that bit about the fps and resolution, I knew not to take any of it seriously.

I hated doom 3. I sadly have never played Doom 2. I did play the crap out of Ultimate Doom, Final Doom, and Doom 64. Doom 64 being my favorite, but I've seen Brutal Doom LPs enough to know I eventually want to get around to setting that up.

Which would make it sadly the only mod I've ever installed for Doom other than one that turned the Pinkys into Barney the dinosaur, which I promptly uninstalled as it wasn't that great.

I'm pretty sure Doom 2/the other Doom games are heavily discounted right now for the annual steam QuakeCon sale. It's never been easier to play the original Doom engine games. Just download them on steam, install a source port like Zandronum (the multiplayer focused version of Zdoom http://zandronum.com/ ) and you're all set to play the game with any keybindings and any resolution you desire.

My personal favorite mod is "Samsara". Which lets you play as lots of different classic FPS characters in any Doom WAD. I did a co-op run through of all of Doom 2 as the Heretic protagonist while other people played Duke Nukem and the ChexQuest guy once with that mod.
It's worth getting Doom 2 just to have access to all the thousands of free fan made levels and mods that are available. http://www.doomworld.com/cacowards/

 

[themilo504]

Until I hear something about sprawling open level design, I am not interested. That is what made Doom great, and most of the shooters of old.

I too would actually like some maze like level design, it?s a part of old school shooters that?s often ignored even in games that try to be retro like serious sam and painkiller, however adding a map is probably for the best.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

Until I hear something about sprawling open level design, I am not interested. That is what made Doom great, and most of the shooters of old.

I too would actually like some maze like level design, it?s a part of old school shooters that?s often ignored even in games that try to be retro like serious sam and painkiller, however adding a map is probably for the best.

The level design of those old shooters is what makes them for me. The actual action packed combat isn't the end all be all in my opinion. I've played Serious Sam and Painkiller and the whole arena style of walk into a room and fight waves of enemies, rinse and repeat just didn't do it for me at all. I never liked the idea of enemies just spawning in from areas I can't reach or from no where. Sure, Doom did it but not constantly. There were many monsters present from the very start of the level. I am a big fan of this.
Of course, I also love monster in-fighting so I hope that is a thing also.

 

[StriderShinryu]

It's sort of strange to see Doom described like that because my memories of Doom aren't really of it as a super fast, enemy filled gib fest. I mean, I wasn't very good at it and never played on the highest difficulty settings so I know my experience maybe isn't the one everyone had, but I remember Doom as more of a slow burn. The big maze like levels (which were sometimes too big and maze like for any sense of pacing) were punctuated with tense well placed combat encounters but weren't constant run and gun. Above all else, I remember the visuals and design elements, especially when you progressed through the game and started seeing the really weird biomechanical textures and more hellish elements. Given that, while I'm actually fairly excited for a Doom reboot, it doesn't really sound like it's my Doom that they're remaking.

 

[Rastrelly]

1) I did not hear "PC" anywhere.
2)

"Doom is an origin game, about fast, FAST paced combat. It's about amazing guns and blood and gore and gibs,"

Ohmygawd, it was sooo hard to get, what made Doom popular back in 1993. They needed 10 years to figure out why Doom 3 failed.

Are you sure Doom 3 failed, or you are really so arrogant as to think your personal opinion bends reality to your perspective? Because last time I checked, Doom 3 was one of the largest commercial successes for id, and was loved by many new generation gamers, including some of us that were around for the original Doom games when they first came out.

I will digress in that I am glad to hear they are bringing back fast-paced combat.

So, you measure game's quality by its commercial success? I think we have nothing to discuss then. I do not see any correlation between these two parameters. Doom 1 defined the whole genre as it looks today. Doom 3 ripped System Shock off. Doom 1 had unique visuals and setting (for its time) - in Doom 3 even Hell is stereotypically boring. Doom 3 is repetative, Doom 1 - never. I don't see any redeeming qualities of Doom 3, especially when there actually is System Shock 2 around.

I measure the game's quality by the fact that even today, Doom 3 sales are high, and so are the hours recorded played.

Didn't read the rest of post. You do measure game's quality by its financial success. I don't agree with this position and consider it poinless. Commercially successfull things are not necessary good because they are commercially successful, and vice versa. I won't even bother pointing at examples.

 

[Janaschi]

1) I did not hear "PC" anywhere.
2)

"Doom is an origin game, about fast, FAST paced combat. It's about amazing guns and blood and gore and gibs,"

Ohmygawd, it was sooo hard to get, what made Doom popular back in 1993. They needed 10 years to figure out why Doom 3 failed.

Are you sure Doom 3 failed, or you are really so arrogant as to think your personal opinion bends reality to your perspective? Because last time I checked, Doom 3 was one of the largest commercial successes for id, and was loved by many new generation gamers, including some of us that were around for the original Doom games when they first came out.

I will digress in that I am glad to hear they are bringing back fast-paced combat.

So, you measure game's quality by its commercial success? I think we have nothing to discuss then. I do not see any correlation between these two parameters. Doom 1 defined the whole genre as it looks today. Doom 3 ripped System Shock off. Doom 1 had unique visuals and setting (for its time) - in Doom 3 even Hell is stereotypically boring. Doom 3 is repetative, Doom 1 - never. I don't see any redeeming qualities of Doom 3, especially when there actually is System Shock 2 around.

I measure the game's quality by the fact that even today, Doom 3 sales are high, and so are the hours recorded played.

Didn't read the rest of post. You do measure game's quality by its financial success. I don't agree with this position and consider it poinless. Commercially successfull things are not necessary good because they are commercially successful, and vice versa. I won't even bother pointing at examples.

Great, a narcissist that does not bother reading my comments, and then has the audacity to take my words out of context. At least I know not to bother talking to you anymore.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

Yeah as soon as I read that bit about the fps and resolution, I knew not to take any of it seriously.

I hated doom 3. I sadly have never played Doom 2. I did play the crap out of Ultimate Doom, Final Doom, and Doom 64. Doom 64 being my favorite, but I've seen Brutal Doom LPs enough to know I eventually want to get around to setting that up.

Which would make it sadly the only mod I've ever installed for Doom other than one that turned the Pinkys into Barney the dinosaur, which I promptly uninstalled as it wasn't that great.

I'm pretty sure Doom 2/the other Doom games are heavily discounted right now for the annual steam QuakeCon sale. It's never been easier to play the original Doom engine games. Just download them on steam, install a source port like Zandronum (the multiplayer focused version of Zdoom http://zandronum.com/ ) and you're all set to play the game with any keybindings and any resolution you desire.

My personal favorite mod is "Samsara". Which lets you play as lots of different classic FPS characters in any Doom WAD. I did a co-op run through of all of Doom 2 as the Heretic protagonist while other people played Duke Nukem and the ChexQuest guy once with that mod.
It's worth getting Doom 2 just to have access to all the thousands of free fan made levels and mods that are available. http://www.doomworld.com/cacowards/

Sounds good. I was also a fan of Heretic and Hexen. I never got around to playing either of their sequels...even though Hexen is already a sequel.

 

[Stabinbac]

60 fps is perfectly reasonable considering how Rage ran. The engine scales itself down to maintain a constant fps. Even on my aging system Rage was locked at 60.

The big issue is that they were targeting 30fps! Another sign of the massive shift behind the scenes.

 

[Ratty]

Sounds good. I was also a fan of Heretic and Hexen. I never got around to playing either of their sequels...even though Hexen is already a sequel.

Yeah I never got around to playing Heretic 2 or Hexen 2 either. If you've still got your old copies of Heretic or Hexen (or Ultimate/Final Doom) there's no need to rebuy them, just look on the disc for their .wad files (like Heretic.wad for example) save them to your computer and run them through whichever source port you want to use. Everything in the Doom engine games is saved in the .wad (short for "Where's all the data?") files. This was done by a forward-thinking John Carmack to make creating and playing fan levels and mods that much easier.

PS- One of the original developers of ChexQuest 1 and 2 (a Doom mod that was given away free with Chex cereal) created a 3rd installment and packaged all of the games together into one wad. So you can get that for free on his website.

 

[lordloss217]

If it has modding tools available then I can imagine Sgt. Mk4 having a look at it and then turn it in to a god-like game, just to clarifying here but Sgt. Mk4 was the creator of brutal doom so YOU KNOW he will turn this in to one kick-ass game after release.

 

[Evonisia]

Well I was hoping for another try at Doom 3's attempt at replicating System Shock 2, but oh well. Since we haven't got another BioShock coming any time soon it would have been nice.

I hope id realises that Wolfenstein: The New Order worked because it took elements of older shooters; it wasn't just an older shooter.