40oz
diRTbAg
Posts: 5,536
|
Post by 40oz on Apr 5, 2023 11:10:15 GMT -5
A lot of gameplay in Doom is naturally good because doom is a well-designed game, but having played an absurd amount of Doom content over the years, a lot of the recurring frustration I have with doom gameplay that expects me to 'git gud' is that it can often be distilled to the problem of having to kill me before I've had time to receive the information that's been delivered on my screen.
- loose archviles/cyberdemons running free in a room/arena I haven't seen yet - a door closes behind me and a monster closet opens with way too many monsters in it, no space to move - symmetrical trap designs where enemies are approaching from two opposite entry points. Can't target one without my back facing the other - monsters teleporting in behind me in places I already cleared for seemingly no reason - maps with almost no health items so even when I know a trap is incoming, I have to confront it with 15% health. Oh great it has shotgunners in it.
Traps are the bread and butter of Doom. Doom wouldn't be fun if mappers couldn't manipulate the map with moving parts. Honestly, trap closets can be just as fun with 1-3 monsters in it as they are with 10+, mappers don't need to be using so many monsters for people to feel engaged with their map. However, anything that is supposed to be hard needs to be telegraphed or signposted with a load of ammo, a special item pickup or even just showing the monsters behind invisible walls or something. That information is key to the experience. But I can't have this information until after the trap is activated and often kills me. This doesn't test my skills, it's just a waste of my time to replay shit over and over because I haven't saved in a while (or at all)
|
|
|
Post by MegaPancakeStrategist on Apr 5, 2023 11:21:26 GMT -5
can confirm that if there was only vanilla Doom I would have never bothered at all
|
|
CittyKat112
Doomer
Kitty cat one hundred and twelve
Posts: 640
|
Post by CittyKat112 on Apr 5, 2023 11:43:50 GMT -5
A lot of gameplay in Doom is naturally good because doom is a well-designed game, but having played an absurd amount of Doom content over the years, a lot of the recurring frustration I have with doom gameplay that expects me to 'git gud' is that it can often be distilled to the problem of having to kill me before I've had time to receive the information that's been delivered on my screen. - loose archviles/cyberdemons running free in a room/arena I haven't seen yet - a door closes behind me and a monster closet opens with way too many monsters in it, no space to move - symmetrical trap designs where enemies are approaching from two opposite entry points. Can't target one without my back facing the other - monsters teleporting in behind me in places I already cleared for seemingly no reason - maps with almost no health items so even when I know a trap is incoming, I have to confront it with 15% health. Oh great it has shotgunners in it. Traps are the bread and butter of Doom. Doom wouldn't be fun if mappers couldn't manipulate the map with moving parts. Honestly, trap closets can be just as fun with 1-3 monsters in it as they are with 10+, mappers don't need to be using so many monsters for people to feel engaged with their map. However, anything that is supposed to be hard needs to be telegraphed or signposted with a load of ammo, a special item pickup or even just showing the monsters behind invisible walls or something. That information is key to the experience. But I can't have this information until after the trap is activated and often kills me. This doesn't test my skills, it's just a waste of my time to replay shit over and over because I haven't saved in a while (or at all) DSDA Doom has a rewind feature so you can save yourself the trouble of replaying the map until you get to the point where you died. I don't use it while playing normally cause I feel like I'm using cheats when I use it, but still it's a really useful feature. Also it seems like most of your critique is directed towards challenge / slaughter maps and all I can say is... You probably shouldn't be playing them lol. I personally think hard maps are fun (though I gotta admit I almost never play without using saves) and I really like the combat puzzle/ammo starvation type of maps.
|
|
SilverMiner
You're trying to say you like DOS better than me, right?
The code isn't free if one can't close it
Posts: 1,040
|
Post by SilverMiner on Apr 5, 2023 12:55:38 GMT -5
Real G's know that Boom with vanilla limits is the way to go. Yesterday I compiled boom202s just for lulz, but now I know what to implement
|
|
Gokuma
You're trying to say you like DOS better than me, right?
R.I.P. Aaron Bushnell and over 34,000 genocided Gazans.
Posts: 1,017
|
Post by Gokuma on Apr 9, 2023 20:08:46 GMT -5
Wow, these Vanilla vs Boom arguments are harder core purist than the old 90's, early 2000's Doom Home Owner's Assocation Purist arguments.
The old school purists were for Boom considering it to be vanilla + more editing features, against Doom Legacy and ZDoom with their freelook and jumping.
Personally, I really like to see and experience well implemented Boom, Hexen, ZDoom, or other editing features, Legacy, dosDoom/Edge, etc.
An example of how not to do Boom effects is much of the deathmatch megawad TNT Reclamation. It just feels like you're on rails, forced around, and constricted so much of the time. Then when you come across the one map I remember having ice, it was just one little rounded rectangle in the center of the map. The wad looks great, but effects were used to the point of detriment to its gameplay.
Also, the Neo-Stalinist pedocrats are enjoying kids in wrong ways way too much these days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2023 6:43:18 GMT -5
anything that is supposed to be hard needs to be telegraphed or signposted I sort of take issue with that, to be honest - to me, it's a limited (and limiting) way of conceptualizing 'challenge'. Being able to react on the fly and salvage seemingly unsalvageable situations is a skill per se, that can and should be put to the test. Telegraphing every difficult part neuters any chance of testing that skill and, in my opinion, takes away a lot from the high of overcoming. I generally find today's mappers to be way too heavyhanded with the signposting (one of my peeves is the 'invisible wall that lowers with a switch' scenario, overdone to death and definitely scheduled for some shelving), it's probably a me thing but, assuming I'm not an alien, other are likely looking for a less streamlined experience. About blind playing and punishing for not saving, one could argue, and I often do, that patience and perseverance are a skill just as much as finger nimbleness or preplanning. See for example Sunder, where each fight on its own is laughably easy, and the difficulty comes from not crashing under the weight of having to perform 50X times per map. You chose not to save? your choice and, like every choice, it has consequences you'll have to deal with. Finally, I find the concept of 'fairness' rather opaque in general. As long as there is a modicum of health (I usually go for a 2x complete refill, powerups and medikits combined) and enough ammo to reduce the enemies hitpoints to zero (or a little less to allow for infighting) a map is mathematically fair, and any room for failure boils down to skill issue. 'Fair' in abstract has as much measuring value as 'good' - aka, zero. All of this will come across as gatekeepy, I'm sure, and honestly I could care less. I hold the very unpopular opinion that not everything needs to be necessarily for everybody, and that it's perfectly acceptable for a map to be out of reach of the average player. As long as I accept that it won't make me popular, whatever. We all make our own choices.
|
|
|
Post by chocolatedoomer on Jun 5, 2023 17:18:22 GMT -5
How the h*ck do you even respond to this phrase? It drives me absolutely bonkers whenever I hear it, but I can't even begin to articulate why, let alone think of a comeback. Why does it annoy me so much? Really, why can't we all just let people enjoy things? Even if those things are retarded, and the people are retarded as well? There's got to be a good reason as to why we even care what other people are doing. I mean seriously. If I met a guy who enjoys eating his own excrement, I'd yell at him and call him a retard, or a fagot, or even a Doomworld moderator. But why? Why can't I just let him consume his own shit in peace? Why do I even care? I'm not the one eating shit. He'll probably get hepatitis, as you generally do from eating excrement, but that's not my problem either. Well, technically I am paying for his hospital trip with my taxes, but I'm paying for lots of shit with my taxes. My country's president has his own illegal weed farms. I wish that was a joke or an exaggeration. I doubt he's funding that shit from his pocket. So the shit-eater from my story has my preference with regards to spending my tax money. To be absolutely technical, I'm not paying any taxes at all yet, but let's pretend for the sake of the argument that I'm a functional adult, and not a Doomer Boards member of six years. I really think that the phrase's validity depends on what's being enjoyed. It's one thing to call someone names for, I dunno, being a fan of Bluey as an adult, it's another thing entirely to call someone a degenerate for doing something like eating feces. The former makes you look like a dick, the latter is just your genuine reaction to someone telling you that they eat feces.
|
|