Poll: DOOM made new again.

[Smooth Operator]

Rampage shooters can be great fun, and with some upgrades it would get even sweeter (no not the casual bullshit Bulletstorm pulled), do something like UTt with adrenaline or Painkiller with rage, I'm sure there is someone with great ideas for this out there.

But if they make another Doom 3 I'm not going near it, turn on the f*ing lights!
Blindness is not a gameplay mechanic I enjoy, I'm surprised so many people do...

 

[xDarc]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

So trying to dodge incoming fire and multiple imp orbs while simultaneously assessing and cutting down threats isn't challenging?

And hiding behind chest high walls to duck out and take pot shots is?

I just don't get you youngins. Must be the xbawks syndrome. Never got a chance to be proper PC gamers.

 

[Tharwen]

I'd be fine with a version of the old Doom that worked on Windows 7 64-bit, kthnxbai.

The version off Steam works perfectly on my PC using DOSbox.

Hm! Interesting
Last time I played it with that though, I got the weird "safemode-style colours" :/ and no sound.... but worth looking into.

After all.
Doom was the first game I ever played.
Aged 5.
Explains a lot.

Well it has to switch to 16-bit colours, but everything else is fine. It automatically goes through several DOS windows to start up so maybe they fix the problems...

 

[Sixcess]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

Played on the higher settings - Ultraviolence or (god forbid) Nightmare - the original DOOM and DOOM 2 are extremely challenging. They play much faster than most modern FPSs, throw ludicrous numbers of enemies at you all at once, and although you can carry 7 or 8 guns you have to cycle through them constantly to ensure you're using the right weapon for each target.

Oh, and if you do take a few hits, hiding around a corner for 10 seconds will not magically refill your health bar.

 

[Trivun]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

So trying to dodge incoming fire and multiple imp orbs while simultaneously assessing and cutting down threats isn't challenging?

And hiding behind chest high walls to duck out and take pot shots is?

I just don't get you youngins. Must be the xbawks syndrome. Never got a chance to be proper PC gamers.

You're right in guessing I have an Xbox 360. However, I started out with PC shooters. My very earliest shooting games, including how I first got into Halo, were PC games, and I'm still an avid PC gamer to this day. And yet my point, I feel, still stands...

Also, why have I got Greek symbols in my captcha? How am I meant to type 'lowercase psi' on an English keyboard?

 

[Trivun]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

Played on the higher settings - Ultraviolence or (god forbid) Nightmare - the original DOOM and DOOM 2 are extremely challenging. They play much faster than most modern FPSs, throw ludicrous numbers of enemies at you all at once, and although you can carry 7 or 8 guns you have to cycle through them constantly to ensure you're using the right weapon for each target.

Oh, and if you do take a few hits, hiding around a corner for 10 seconds will not magically refill your health bar.

Okay, I'll grant you that. But once you can cycle through said weapons at will (which believe me, doesn't take much effort to learn as a skill, having played games like that myself), much of that challenge goes away and the difficulty is only in the number of enemies. I'm not saying older shooters are bad, far from it. There are some really good ones out there, including the aforementioned DOOM. However, later shooters, such as Halo, Gears, even ones like Lost Planet, whether 3rd or 1st person, have improved greatly, and the difficulty is much more pronounced through things like level design, enemy AI, the variety of weapons both you and the enemy have, etc, proving to be a much more satisfying, in my opinion, gameplay experience. That's really the point I'm trying to make, at the end of the day...

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

Oh good! I actually enjoyed DOOM 3. I never actually finished DOOM 1, I think I beat DOOM 2 though.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

I hope it goes back to the original DooM style of gameplay; when DooM 3 forgot its heritage and began channelling System Shock, it set a precedent for the FPS genre as a whole.

Anyone else gone back and replayed the original DooMs multiple times while DooM 3 and the expansion sits looking sad and lonely on the shelf-of-no-return?

For me it has, i still play DOOM 2, but DOOM 1 one got wiped from xbox live for some reason.

 

[Katana314]

Having no interest in games like Painkiller and Serious Sam, I don't think I'd be interested in this resurgence.

 

[SovietSecrets]

We have a rampage shooter coming out soon. Its called Duke Nukem Forever. As for DOOM, it would be nice to see DOOM go back to how it was before DOOM 3, but I really didn't mind DOOM 3 either. Whatever 4 turns out to be, I shall be pleased. I just want to see the damn game already. Was so pumped to see it last year and then....nothing.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

Played on the higher settings - Ultraviolence or (god forbid) Nightmare - the original DOOM and DOOM 2 are extremely challenging. They play much faster than most modern FPSs, throw ludicrous numbers of enemies at you all at once, and although you can carry 7 or 8 guns you have to cycle through them constantly to ensure you're using the right weapon for each target.

Oh, and if you do take a few hits, hiding around a corner for 10 seconds will not magically refill your health bar.

Okay, I'll grant you that. But once you can cycle through said weapons at will (which believe me, doesn't take much effort to learn as a skill, having played games like that myself), much of that challenge goes away and the difficulty is only in the number of enemies. I'm not saying older shooters are bad, far from it. There are some really good ones out there, including the aforementioned DOOM. However, later shooters, such as Halo, Gears, even ones like Lost Planet, whether 3rd or 1st person, have improved greatly, and the difficulty is much more pronounced through things like level design, enemy AI, the variety of weapons both you and the enemy have, etc, proving to be a much more satisfying, in my opinion, gameplay experience. That's really the point I'm trying to make, at the end of the day...

It's a different set of skills. Modern shooters are all about timing, and mobility plays a very small part in the skill set. The older "rampage shooters" as everyone seems to be calling them here, use movement and shooting skills instead. If you can hold a good aim while you're jumping up and down while changing directions and alternating between standing and crouching, you have some serious skills -- skills, I might add, that are going to be harder to get than CoD style "I know there's someone around the corner, and he doesn't know I am. If I see him first, he dies." In the older shooters, this wasn't guaranteed; it was entirely possible for someone to completely get the drop on you, but you still win the fight, because you have a better grasp of aiming and advanced movement.

OT: If Doom 4 goes back to the roots of the series, I would be a very happy camper. About the only thing the first two Doom games were missing by the standards of games that came after them was a jump button; if you add that, you get something that makes Serious Sam look like Halo. I would love a game that made Serious Sam look like Halo.

 

[Netrigan]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

If you don't find Doom or Serious Sam challenging... you're probably not playing at a high enough difficulty. Although circle strafing did make the boss fights in Doom a whole lot less challenging. They both utilize swarm AI, but if fighting the Flood counts as tactical, then the much more interesting and diverse enemies on display in those "simple" shooters would count as well.

Going into a room filled with a few dozen baddies with different powers and behaviors requires a good amount of strategy. Try as I might, I was never able to get through E4L2 in Doom without using some sort of cheat code. Virtually the entire level is shooting at you at the start and you not only don't have more than a couple of low-powered weapons, but you're desperately short on ammo... and no hiding behind a wall until you feel better. Speed, the ability to prioritize on the fly, and figuring out the right weapon for the job are all crucial to survival.

Yeah, it's not flanking a semi-retarded AI and memorizing where all the insta-kill spots are on a map... but as long as they give you a bit of room to maneuver, it's a hell of a lot more than a test of reflexes. And it's not exactly unusual for veterans of these "non-tactical" games to find modern games on the easy side.

 

[Netrigan]

I've personally never found shooters where you just run around shootiung stuff randomly to be any good at all. I like a challenge, I like games where you have to use tactics and skill to play. That's why I like Halo and Gears of War, because in those games run'and'gun only works on the lowest difficulty levels and if you want to play the game on a decent difficulty setting, you need to think, and you need to actually have some skill at the game to actually win. That's my thoughts, anyway, and I'd be happy to argue to point with anyone who disagrees.

So trying to dodge incoming fire and multiple imp orbs while simultaneously assessing and cutting down threats isn't challenging?

And hiding behind chest high walls to duck out and take pot shots is?

I just don't get you youngins. Must be the xbawks syndrome. Never got a chance to be proper PC gamers.

The last time the U.S. Army experienced serious battlefield casualties was against the Chinese in the Korean War. A military that utilized the strategy of "send every one you got directly at the enemy" Doom style.

They almost pushed off of the peninsula and units were often slaughtered down to the last man.

Military history is filled with all sorts of examples of combat. Small fast-moving armored units against large slow-moving unarmored units utilizing idiotic tactics isn't exactly unheard of... and it takes skill & tactics to overcome much greater numbers. English Army got their asses handed to them a few times in such situations in their various Colonial Wars.

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

We have a rampage shooter coming out soon. Its called Duke Nukem Forever. As for DOOM, it would be nice to see DOOM go back to how it was before DOOM 3, but I really didn't mind DOOM 3 either. Whatever 4 turns out to be, I shall be pleased. I just want to see the damn game already. Was so pumped to see it last year and then....nothing.

The wait is gonna be pretty long, with rage is still in development it will probably hit in late 2012.