|
MrSlam posted:Oh man. Playing Doom 1 a bit ago, and playing olden games makes me realize how blessed we are these days where nearly every game controls near enough to one another that it's not a big deal. I haven't had to play a game where the arrow keys move and CTRL fires in so long. I'll have to develop the twitch for it (if that makes sense to anyone but me). I also have to get used to not having to aim in the third dimension and jumping. There's a reason everyone uses source ports that allow you to easily fiddle with the controls, so you can WASD and use mouse controls like a civilized person should
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
ghostter posted:its for all the casual console n00bs using gamepads and the wrong ram
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 02:15
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:yeah it's easy to put 80 demons made of 8 frames of JPEGS on a single screen than it is to put the same number of enemies but each with hundreds of thousands of polygons/texturemaps/rigs/lighting/rendering/ambientocclusion/normal-bumpmapping/animation and AI in the same area, no decent computer would be able to handle that much, and as it is it still seems like your being attacked relentlessly so I dont mind the numbers about right now. Serious Sam HD did it and that's the best Doom killer out there. Better than Doom, even.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
Cream-of-Plenty posted:Serious Sam HD did it and that's the best Doom killer out there. Yeah but I bet you a Serious Sam HD enemy probably equals like a quarter of a Doom 4 enemy at best in terms of computer resources used, probably more like a tenth in fact
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
I imagine the low monster count is mostly for balancing reasons, the original game seems like it was balanced for what id expected to be an average, less mobile keyboard player and consequently had slow, less mobile enemies, hence you start kicking rear end once you break that balance by zipping around with mouselook and run on half the time. They might've seen the standard for the average player rise following Doom 1, so for 2 they upped the monster count as a half-assed way to rebalance and added monsters that spammed their weapons far more than the original cast, hoping projectile/bullet spam and homing missiles filling the air would make supermobility less game breaking. Doom 4's built from the ground up assuming high mobility so it has some highly mobile monsters, which kind of precludes swarms of monsters since it would be exhausting to play with imps up in your face from all directions all the time, I mean that sounds like fun and I guess it might be for a while but it'd get old real fast. And paradoxically this would be less like Doom 2 since your high mobility gave you breathing space to work out some semblance of a tactic for a particular group of monsters and start picking them off, rather than the fight being about running around holding down fire and left arrow, pirouetting around the room like the world's ugliest ballerina while mowing demons down. Swarms work in Doom 2 because most of the enemies are slow as balls and the spaces in which you encounter large groups are very large, and there isn't much of a chance of them actually swarming you should you chose so (and we all know that if a Doom 2 swarm has you even slightly crowded in, you are in for some pain). But in Doom 4 it definitely looks like you are in tighter quarters and the AI will not allow you to disengage as easily and/or can ambush you, so too many monsters will just result in an unfun mess where the only thing on your screen half the time will be a cloud of blood splatters. Obviously they could have just made the monsters less mobile and added more and made maps bigger, but that would mean simpler monsters with less variety in movement, less verticality and utilization of a true 3d space, and basically just fairly primitive gameplay. Massacring 50 barons of hell that are inching toward you lobbing snot balls is pretty cool but not as cool as killing one baron of hell that is able to outrun you and jump up and down levels and leap across the room at you. Plus those 50 barons will end up averaging out to half deciding on chilling out on an upper level and half on a lower, making it pretty drat pointless what your vertical position is, whereas with a smaller number you can more easily gain some kind of advantage by moving vertically. I think updating Doom to keep up with the times not just graphically but gameplay wise is a good thing, for all the nostalgic bitching we do I don't think anyone really wants straight up 90's gameplay, and asking for 90's gameplay but with some modernness and also making it work and be fun is kind of a tall order even though it may seem simple. I feel like the core is 'kill demons in a fun and energetic way' and they seem to have got that down, I don't think there's much reason to get hung up on what are ultimately minor details like monster count when that is not an really an indicator of anything, 3 leaping, wall-bouncing imps can make you feel as swarmed as two dozen of them out for a leisurely stroll.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
That's a good post and a good point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 06:18
|
|
|
PrincessWuffles posted:We don't know what difficulty settings they're using in every video (unless I'm mistaken). If they're playing on a lower difficulty, it would make sense, given that these are live streams that wouldn't exactly benefit from the player repeatedly dying and starting over. The twitch and gamespot streams were played on the default Hurt Me Plenty difficulty, for exactly the reason you mentioned. And he still died once on the twitch stream because he threw a grenade at his feet  . HMP is the second easiest difficulty. Above it are Ultra Violence and Nightmare, and Ultra Nightmare above that which is the ironman mode. Also, for all the people comparing tho to hordes of monsters in Doom2, it's worth. Lying this is not a reboot of Doom2, it's a reboot of Doom. There was a fairly large tonal difference between the two games in terms of how they played. Having said that there were a couple of fights where I counted at least 10 guys in the same space, with more spawning as he killed them off. I think it's gonna be fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 06:22
|
|
|
AirRaid posted:Also, for all the people comparing tho to hordes of monsters in Doom2, it's worth. Lying this is not a reboot of Doom2, it's a reboot of Doom. There was a fairly large tonal difference between the two games in terms of how they played. Uh, then why are there mancubi and revenants in this game, smart guy? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 07:33
|
|
|
PrincessWuffles posted:That's a good post and a good point. That'll get ignored by more thread-strafing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
I think this looks pretty fun The map got boring pretty fast though, it could have used some cooler setpieces or SOMETHING to break it up a bit. IT was pretty nice when the rock started up properly too Zzulu fucked around with this message at 08:44 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Stuntman posted:Oh yes, the backpack that was placed everywhere as the only method of getting ammo and that was treated as a regular pickup instead of an endgame powerup. Forgot about that part of Retard 1/2, sorry. Uh, the first one is in a closet off the first room of E1M2. Like, 20 seconds into the game if you beeline for it. Mung Dynasty posted:Straight out of Wolfenstein: TNO, there's secret areas with retro graphics. Haha, he's right, you can see 25 years of video game history right there... we spent 25 years forgetting about 'contrast' and 'color theory'. Seriously though, the single player looks enjoyable. Not day 1 amazing, but steam sale fun. Zaphod42 posted:And doom 1/2 didn't have any feedback? I do NOT want a loving "bloody screen, so real" in my doom game, thank you very much It does have feedback. You can see a blood spray along the bottom of your screen if it's from the front, and doomguy has a hurt-sound so you can hear when you get hit. Keiya fucked around with this message at 08:43 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
drrockso20 posted:Yeah but I bet you a Serious Sam HD enemy probably equals like a quarter of a Doom 4 enemy at best in terms of computer resources used, probably more like a tenth in fact Yeah, but who actually wants graphical fidelity to dictate gameplay? If Doom 4's demons are so complex that you can only have ten of them on screen without consoles chugging, make them less complex. Also Serious Sam was really bad because half of it was wide open arenas that sent waves of a hundred enemies at you which got really repetitive and tedious. I haven't thought to look for mods for that series but I bet if you applied actual level design and maybe put some more thought into enemy behavior you could make a pretty good Doom game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
extra stout posted:Yeah that was terrible when we got Doom 3: The last good Doom game, the one with PC multiplayer with rocket jumping rather than 'pay to unlock another rocket, pay twice to jump with it'' customized for the ultimate Xbox One Couch Experience. Doom 3 was poo poo. Not just a poo poo Doom game, but just poo poo in general
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
Plan Z posted:That'll get ignored by more thread-strafing. By guys who already preordered the game, no less. This thread is basically just another boycott modern warfare 2 group.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:By guys who already preordered the game, no less. This thread is basically just another boycott modern warfare 2 group. lol if you think i'm spending any money on this boring looking shitpile or care enough to "boycott" it
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:32
|
|
|
I'll watch videos but that's it for now....
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:46
|
|
|
im gonna pirate it and not install it
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 09:55
|
|
|
Pomp posted:lol if you think i'm spending any money on this boring looking shitpile or care enough to "boycott" it You care enough to post constantly in this thread
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
the jump pads in hell with their green smoke arrows look so out of place in every possible way gently caress this game
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:Yeah, but who actually wants graphical fidelity to dictate gameplay? The last twenty years of FPS design would imply 'almost everyone'. Seriously, from the point enemies went from sprites to full 3D models the numbers that could be onscreen at one time fell like a rock. Go play early full 3D shooters like Quake, Unreal and Half-Life and compare them to Doom 2, you'll never see more than like 7 or 8 enemies on screen in those games while 2.5D stuff could potentially throw up to a hundred at you all at once (ie, Go 2 it in Plutonia). And its not really improved much since, when I play Call of Duty, or Far Cry, or Uncharted or whatever it never seems like the amount of foes you'll fight will go above a maximum of around 10 or 15 at any one time. Developers have decided to use the greater resources they have available to make enemy models ever more graphically sophisticated which means that the numbers the games can handle at once have mostly remained static. It looks like Doom is just going along with business as usual, for better or for worse. khwarezm fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Quake 2 with Quake2XP is still a better FPS than most any Call of Duty after 4 Graphics count but they are not always gameplay
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
ZoDiAC_ posted:Quake 2 with Quake2XP is still a better FPS than most any Call of Duty after 4 It probably is, but the point remains that the Quake games didn't have you fighting many enemies at once compared to Doom because it was full 3D. Graphics dictated the gameplay quite a bit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
ZoDiAC_ posted:Quake 2 with Quake2XP is still a better FPS than most any Call of Duty after 4 I remember World At War and Black Ops 1 having pretty good single player campaigns(but then again I'm a sucker for a well done WW2 or Vietnam War game)
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
dangerdoom volvo posted:im gonna pirate it and not install it No you're not, it's an idtech
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
PaletteSwappedNinja posted:No you're not, it's an idtech Which is one of the reasons I'm glad I'm buying a physical copy, means I'll probably only have to download 2 to 10 gigs instead of 20 to 50 if I had gone digital, especially since the internet in my house is kinda spotty, especially for my PS4(seriously it's built in wifi is terrible, probably going to get some of those powerline wireless connector things when I next get money and hopefully that'll fix things)
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:The last twenty years of FPS design would imply 'almost everyone'. Yeah, that was more of a rhetorical question yelled at a cloud on my part. I hate how rare games are that take advantage of the ridiculously powerful tech we have now to increase the scope of games rather than just making something that could've been developed a decade ago, but pretty. If you don't mind me derailing the thread (lol) do you guys have some examples of cool things games have done recently that they couldn't have just done at a lower fidelity back in the early 2000s? The only things that come to mind are like, tremendous maps in GalCiv 3 and big dynamic crowds of NPCs in open world games, but there has to be some obvious stuff I'm missing, otherwise it's kind of depressing. HMS Boromir fucked around with this message at 12:03 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 11:51
|
|
|
Was part of Supreme Commander's shtick being able to render massive amounts of units on huge maps? I also think the new Hitman is pretty good with having massive crowds of people in large, seemless maps. I just hope that we're soon reaching the point where people will stop caring about each individual nostril hair being realistically rendered and that today's graphical capabilities are ploughed into stuff like map size, physics or crowd dynamics. It was really bad last generation, you had stuff like the Thief reboot which looked pretty nice but was a huge step down in terms of map complexity compared to the first two games in the late 90s with each level being really pokey and clearly broken up with lots of loading screens and sawtooths. E; also console game didn't really put any stock in getting framerates above 30, which was pretty dumb. khwarezm fucked around with this message at 12:31 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Honestly I'm a little worried VR is going to drag us even further into graphical fidelity hell if developers start targeting 2560x1080@90Hz since that takes nearly twice the GPU muscle to render compared to the standard 1920x1080@60Hz (which console games aren't even hitting right now). Currently VR is a Wii-like ghetto of novelty shovelware but if it ever becomes expected for actual worthwhile games to have VR versions then we'll spend a year or two just catching up to current levels of fidelity again. RTSes seem like an obvious place to use tech for good instead of pretty but that Ashes of the Singularity game I keep hearing about as the new graphics card ruiner doesn't look like it's doing anything with scale that Supreme Commander didn't already do. Retard 4 wouldn't even need anything fancy or groundbreaking though, just... a few more dudes. I bet if you halved the polycount, texture size and shader detail on all its gribblies you'd barely notice. It's just not what they're going for. HMS Boromir fucked around with this message at 12:36 on Apr 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
Xy Hapu posted:I think updating Doom to keep up with the times not just graphically but gameplay wise is a good thing, for all the nostalgic bitching we do I don't think anyone really wants straight up 90's gameplay,
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Imagine saying that about Mario.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Keith Stack posted:Considering the fact that there are communities of people who still regular play Doom 1/2, and play and make mods to this day, combined with successful ports on XBLA/PSN/etc., I don't think that's true. I mean, the people who want straight up 90s gameplay may be in the extreme minority, but they totally exist. Seriously, Doom is way more accessible and novel these days than a lot of people might think, despite its age. I only first started playing it a few years ago, I did not grow up with it or anything so I have no nostalgic connection and rose tinted glasses, and it was a loving revelation. When you're used to fairly slow shooters, with 'realistic' (re: boring) movement, weapons and enemies in the vein of COD or Uncharted the pure speed and intensity of Doom is something to behold, you're running around at lightspeed dodging projectiles left and right from crazy demons, blasting them with big loving guns in maps filled with tons of secrets and powerups. Playing Doom can make it hard to stomach how placid most modern shooters despite being two decades old with all the graphical and sound improvements in the intervening time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:yeah it's easy to put 80 demons made of 8 frames of JPEGS on a single screen than it is to put the same number of enemies but each with hundreds of thousands of polygons/texturemaps/rigs/lighting/rendering/ambientocclusion/normal-bumpmapping/animation and AI in the same area, no decent computer would be able to handle that much, and as it is it still seems like your being attacked relentlessly so I dont mind the numbers about right now. Eh, they're right that the enemy counts in the videos we've seen are a bit low. And yeah, they have an overall budget on graphics, but they should have planned that from the start. "Okay, a level should have X enemies in it, meaning each enemy is limited to Y/X polygons" is pretty easy to figure. They do things like that already, if there was only a single enemy on screen he could look way more detailed than the current models. So its just a matter of picking how many and budgeting for it, and it seems they kinda picked a smaller number of enemies. Cream-of-Plenty posted:Serious Sam HD did it and that's the best Doom killer out there. Serious Sam shows exactly why just making GBS threads enemies on the screen doesn't make it Doom. Serious Sam plays NOTHING like Doom, and I'm sick of people calling it doom like just because its another arena shooter and there aren't many of those around anymore. The fastest Doom enemy moves like 1/4th the speed of the slowest Serious Sam enemy. Its an entirely different balance and gameplay style.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
duke nukem was better than doom
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:duke nukem was better than doom lol Duke Nukem, the game that came out only 4 months before Quake did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
I ain't afraid of no quake! That's one doomed space marine!
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:lol Duke Nukem, the game that came out only 4 months before Quake did. Duke Nukem still looked better. It took quite a while before 3D engines got anything even looking half decent compared to well done sprites. Quake may of been great to play but it sure as hell looked like a ugly brown mess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
dr_rat posted:Duke Nukem still looked better. It took quite a while before 3D engines got anything even looking half decent compared to well done sprites. Quake may of been great to play but it sure as hell looked like a ugly brown mess. Duke's sprites are pretty ugly IMO, but it did a pretty good job at making its locals look like real places compared to Doom, though the weirdly abstract qualities of the first Doom's maps were pretty cool (Doom 2 was downright ugly in comparison).
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Duke's sprites are pretty ugly IMO, but it did a pretty good job at making its locals look like real places compared to Doom, though the weirdly abstract qualities of the first Doom's maps were pretty cool (Doom 2 was downright ugly in comparison). maybe it's because doom 1 & 2 came out in 1993-94 when people mostly had VGA graphics while Duke Nukem came out in 1996 when 3D actually started gaining traction?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:Duke's sprites are pretty ugly IMO, but it did a pretty good job at making its locals look like real places compared to Doom, though the weirdly abstract qualities of the first Doom's maps were pretty cool (Doom 2 was downright ugly in comparison). Dukes spirtes weren't great but they weren't what ever the hell quakes enemies were (mostly oddly angular brownish blobs). And yeah doom worked really well with abstract environments that didn't really make much real world sense but just worked well to convey a certain atmosphere. Doom 2 trying to actually emulate cities to some degree was just a massive failure. A lot of the maps were still pretty good to play which is what matters most but aesthetically the original was pretty clearly better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
I played the poo poo out of Doom 2 as a kid when it was new, and it was only a couple years ago that I realized that those levels were supposed to be on earth. The subtitle never clicked with me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2016 20:56
|
|
