Well, the new Doom game is kinda lame.

Recommended Videos

KoudelkaMorgan

New member
Jul 31, 2009
1,365
0
0
I really liked the new game. I found the weapons to have weight and impact, well the ones that should anyways. If you haven't fired the Gauss Rifle in siege mode, or the rocket launcher in airburst mode then I guess you have different ideas of impact than I do.

Also the grenade launcher, the super shotgun, the plasma rifle's heat blast, the chansaw in particular, scoped assault rifle, and even the default pistol when fully charged pack a punch. I liked the glory kills, but I didn't like that they were pretty much mandatory. Even if you didn't need any health failing to do them on harder enemies meant wasting way more ammo TRYING to kill them even though they are supposedly near death, and essentially gave them a full heal when they recovered after those few moments. The berserk powerup is so much better than in the original.

The regular shotgun, the micro missiles, default rockets, chaingun, and all thrown items pretty much suck though. The BFG is great but kind of annoying that in the final fight its pretty much required to get direct hits multiple times or end up doing tiny damage with anything else.

The final fight is actually one of the things I really didn't like about it, mainly the whole floor is death part with the pillars being turned into spikes/destroyed under my feet whenever I fire at the boss because why not? The other thing I didn't like was how 90% of the enemies both on Mars and in Hell just teleport into the room instead of already being there.

Its never a situation of you running into a room, going hell no, and backing out. Or luring a few out, or rushing in and blasting all of them. Its mostly you get locked in an area, and then mobs spawn in. In the old days when you killed a room full of monsters, the walls dropped out and you were surrounded by even more monsters like in EVEN SIMPLER. Now its basically all WATCH YOUR STEP but you don't get chased by a cyberdemon at the end.

Seriously I loved Doom 64's maps.

The snapmap system is really impressive though. I haven't played any multiplayer because it doesn't interest me.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
I just want to point out that, for people that only played the demo, it is not a decent representation of the game, at all. Yes, the gameplay and the mechanics are there, but it is only the first stage, filled with only 3 enemy classes, and it is not representative of the pace and variety of the combat. I too wasn't impressed by it, but then I got the full game (through a steam sale) and realized the demo is one of the most boring parts of the it.

I would say the game ramps up after
you get to hell
. At that moment, it turns from a fairly decent FPS to the justification many people are praising it.
 

Bombiz

New member
Apr 12, 2010
577
0
0
stroopwafel said:
Fallout 4 had excellent, genuinely satisfying shooting mechanics in my opinion so next time maybe Id and Machine Games need to consult with some in-house Beth devs. :p
ok so I need you to explain this to me cause I don't think i've played the same Fallout 4 as you. In my experience the shooting was passable.
 

ultrabiome

New member
Sep 14, 2011
460
0
0
I very much enjoyed Doom 4. I liked the pace of combat and ever increasing difficulty of the encounters. Unlike Doom 3, the setting gets to Hell fairly quick and then there is some variety after that too. Played on Hurt Me Plenty I think. It got hard enough that the Glory Kills were nice breaks of pace in the crazy action. If you upgrade it right, then you can even make it into a short teleport.

Playing on Ultra-Nightmare is a trip.

I also very much liked Doom 3 and it's expansion.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Zhukov said:
'Kay. Thanks for letting us know, I guess. Shame you wasted your money on it then.

Not sure why this needed an entire thread, though. Seems it could have gone into a comment for the Review thread or some other related thread, but okay. Were you bored?

Regardless. To each her/his own, I say.

Hawki said:
Everyone debating old Doom vs. new Doom, and I'm sitting here remembering that my favorite Doom game is Doom 3.

...I'll see myself out. ;p
Watch your step and keep your finger on that F key. It's dark in there.

erttheking said:
*Gasps dramatically*
Ert, you should know better. A simple 'gasp' is not NEARLY angry or vitriolic enough of a response for someone having an opinion.

For shame. You gotta step up your 'net-rage game, son!
 

wings012

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 7, 2011
856
307
68
Country
Malaysia
I had fun, but my computer is totally not cut out for running it so the experience is less than optimal. Don't really feel like playing it again though. And I can't seem to find a single multiplayer match. So at 40% off, it still felt overpriced. Would've waited if I wasn't so hung out and dry from the lack of games. I'll probably give it another spin when I get a new rig.

I did enjoy running laps while juggling my weapons to respond to different threats as opposed to sucking my thumb behind a chest high wall and hoping I don't get grenades lobbed at me and then just spraying yet another assault rifle at things.
 

Zombie Proof

New member
Nov 28, 2015
359
0
0
Bombiz said:
stroopwafel said:
Fallout 4 had excellent, genuinely satisfying shooting mechanics in my opinion so next time maybe Id and Machine Games need to consult with some in-house Beth devs. :p
ok so I need you to explain this to me cause I don't think i've played the same Fallout 4 as you. In my experience the shooting was passable.
You need to take into account V.A.T.S. and the perk systems when talking about fallout 4's shooting mechanics. Given the universe of improvement from fallout's 3 to 4, its obvious that Bethesda could have made the shooting mechanics even tighter but room has to be left for the use of V.A.T.S.' nuance and the tweaking of your gameplay style using the various perks and legendary effects and the multitudes of ways they gel together to form their own unique gameplay vernacular. If the shooting mechanics on their own were as tight as something like Fear or Doom, V.A.T.S., perks, and legendarys would be superfluous and would hence ruin the overall gameplay balance.

Looking at the shooting mechanics with that full context, you have to admit that what's there is pretty impressive.
 

Ambient_Malice

New member
Sep 22, 2014
836
0
0
hermes said:
I just want to point out that, for people that only played the demo, it is not a decent representation of the game, at all. Yes, the gameplay and the mechanics are there, but it is only the first stage, filled with only 3 enemy classes, and it is not representative of the pace and variety of the combat. I too wasn't impressed by it, but then I got the full game (through a steam sale) and realized the demo is one of the most boring parts of the it.

I would say the game ramps up after
you get to hell
. At that moment, it turns from a fairly decent FPS to the justification many people are praising it.
After you get to hell, the game becomes even MORE repetitive and even MORE of a thinly disguised arena shooter that has more in common with Quake III than Doom.

I admire Doom 4's tech and design polish greatly, but it's a fundamentally wrongheaded game, IMO. IMO, the key to a good FPS game is keeping things fresh and interesting. Doom 4 is the same thing over and over and over. I know that appeals to some people, but I personally think Doom 4 is going to face a Shadow of Mordor-style backlash in a year or two when the honeymoon period wears off and the cracks in the facade are apparent.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
Ambient_Malice said:
hermes said:
I just want to point out that, for people that only played the demo, it is not a decent representation of the game, at all. Yes, the gameplay and the mechanics are there, but it is only the first stage, filled with only 3 enemy classes, and it is not representative of the pace and variety of the combat. I too wasn't impressed by it, but then I got the full game (through a steam sale) and realized the demo is one of the most boring parts of
it.

I would say the game ramps up after
you get to hell
. At that moment, it turns from a fairly decent FPS to the justification many people are praising it.
After you get to hell, the game becomes even MORE repetitive and even MORE of a thinly disguised arena shooter that has more in common with Quake III than Doom.
So, you went to DOOM expecting something different than rooms filled with demons, with some backtracking and first person platforming? Or are you saying the original DOOM was not, for the most part, room after room of enemies trying to kill you, with the ocasional colored door to force some backtrack?

If you wanted some RPG or puzzle elements, there are plenty of options. But it is unfair to criticize a game whose entire propose is to be a fairly entertainment reboot of a classic game that consisted mainly of shooting demons in the face one room/hallway at the time, for not being more than a game about shooting demons in the face one room/hallway at the time. I am just saying that after that point the enemies and weapons variety became enough to make the encounters more entertaining, and that judging it for what is available in the demo is a disservice.
 

Ambient_Malice

New member
Sep 22, 2014
836
0
0
hermes said:
So, you went to DOOM expecting something different than rooms filled with demons, with some backtracking and first person platforming?
I expect game design that isn't one cookie cutter "and then doors lock and the enemies spawn repeatedly until you make them dead" encounter after another.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
Vigormortis said:
Zhukov said:
'Kay. Thanks for letting us know, I guess. Shame you wasted your money on it then.

Not sure why this needed an entire thread, though. Seems it could have gone into a comment for the Review thread or some other related thread, but okay. Were you bored?
If I did that my incredibly important and insightful opinion might have gone overlooked.

That would be especially tragic in this case since I have a somewhat contrarian opinion of a well known game.

The world must know!
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Zhukov said:
If I did that my incredibly important and insightful opinion might have gone overlooked.

That would be especially tragic in this case since I have a somewhat contrarian opinion of a well known game.

The world must know!
Well then, we must make haste! We must request...nay, demand...that the mods sticky this thread at once!
 

Poetic Nova

Pulvis Et Umbra Sumus
Jan 24, 2012
1,974
0
0
Eh. Took me 15 hours to even remotely like the new Doom. Started over, 100 percented it. Completely forgot about it and now wondering why I payed 40 euro's for it.

Machine Games did a better job with Wolfenstein than ID did with Doom.
 

JohnnyDelRay

New member
Jul 29, 2010
1,322
0
0
Hawki said:
Everyone debating old Doom vs. new Doom, and I'm sitting here remembering that my favorite Doom game is Doom 3.

...I'll see myself out. ;p
Hey, not so fast! I came to the same conclusion after playing about 3-4 hours of new Doom. Not that new Doom is *bad*, I had a hell of a (unintended, sorry) time with it. I just found Doom 3 to be more gripping and interesting in level design. The gameplay to me was tighter, I liked timing my dodges with little movements and good tactics rather than just strafing the entire arena unloading bullets and going in for glory kills as soon as a demon takes a knee or staggers. It felt a lot less predictable, some don't like the monster closets but I like the fact that there are arenas, spawns, closets, and the whole mix.

They're quite different, but Doom 3 was not a bad game by no means. Especially the Resurrection expansion, and the patches which fix things like the weaker weapon sounds, unofficial textures / post-processing, and strapping on a god-danged flashlight.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,179
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
JohnnyDelRay said:
Hey, not so fast! I came to the same conclusion after playing about 3-4 hours of new Doom. Not that new Doom is *bad*, I had a hell of a (unintended, sorry) time with it. I just found Doom 3 to be more gripping and interesting in level design. The gameplay to me was tighter, I liked timing my dodges with little movements and good tactics rather than just strafing the entire arena unloading bullets and going in for glory kills as soon as a demon takes a knee or staggers. It felt a lot less predictable, some don't like the monster closets but I like the fact that there are arenas, spawns, closets, and the whole mix.

They're quite different, but Doom 3 was not a bad game by no means. Especially the Resurrection expansion, and the patches which fix things like the weaker weapon sounds, unofficial textures / post-processing, and strapping on a god-danged flashlight.
Played Doom 3 on console, so I can't comment on patches so much, but I do agree with the gameplay elements. It's a much slower game than the previous Doom games, but it does allow strafing of some enemies. Personally, I like it - it's a good mix of tactical, slow-paced gameplay, while factoring in reflexes/manauverability. That said, I did play the BFG Edition, which kind of hinders things - I can tell from certain sections in the game that it wasn't originally intended to be able to use the flashlight in conduction with a weapon.

What I also like about Doom 3 more is not so much its story per se, but kind of its worldbuilding. Playing Doom 3, I love the feeling that this is a base that could concivably exist on Mars in the 22nd century - bare bones, everything's breaking down, still quite isolated from Earth, etc. It makes the moment when Hell starts 'spilling over' into the base all the more impactful, how we've got bare bones human architecture that has to deal with a hostile Martian environment being spliced over with a dimension that makes no sense on any level (in a good way). And while the story in of itself isn't that spectacular, I still took the time to read/listen to every log. While it's a Prometheus-type story, it's still a well done one IMO, how the history of Mars, Hell, and Mars City is slowly revealed.

So, yeah. I can understand why fans of the previous games don't like Doom 3, but for me, it's a good mix of good, tense gameplay, with a story that kept my interest throughout the ride.
 

MeatMachine

Dr. Stan Gray
May 31, 2011
597
0
0
New Doom was unfortunately a 1-trick pony.

It was a wicked sweet trick mind you, but a single serving of amazement does not make for an excellent successor to one of the best games of all time. It came so close to being the ultra-modern Brutal Doom I wanted it to be, but it didn't quite manage to get all the way there.

Hawki said:
Everyone debating old Doom vs. new Doom, and I'm sitting here remembering that my favorite Doom game is Doom 3.

...I'll see myself out. ;p
This opinion is unacceptable.