The marauder better not return.

[Hellektronic]

Its not so much that I'm debating just the enemy here, it's... stealing gameplay ideas in general. I don't like that.

 

And if you're going to steal some ideas, you might as well steal others too like dueling marauders with the crucible, and having sword-fighting mechanics, ya know? Or better yet, let's just have it go into a 2D fighting game mode where you have to fight a marauder like Street Fighter, lol.

 

That's what it makes me think of. Like you didn't just take inspiration for an idea, but you stole the whole idea, so that it doesn't even fit into the game fluidly... because the rest of the game in no way resembles fighting a marauder. And they made no grand attempt to mask that either, that's what bothers me. It's like if you just slapped RTS or stealth game elements into Doom or something, like... why? Let's add some survival horror elements too, and maybe some survival aspects too. You have to eat food in order to regain stamina, hah. And there's this one boss you can't fight so you have to run away and hide from it, or it'll kill you instantly.

 

Maybe I'm exaggerating a bit, but you have to admit it's a pretty grotesque precedent for a company like id Software that totally pioneered a game genre, to now be reduced to pilfering crappy ideas from other games and companies just to stay popular and appeal to the masses.

 

Like sure, they took inspiration from Dungeons and Dragons to come up with the idea of demons being the main enemy. They took inspiration from HP Lovecraft lore to come up with the monsters of Quake. But really, did they ever really steal anything? The worst I'd say was Quake 3 Arena trying to compete with Unreal Tournament, but ya know, id Software came up with that style in Quake... so they had every right to defend their throne. They "stole" music for Doom too, but eh... not like they were trying to sell a music album here.

Edited August 21, 2020 by Hellektronic

[D4NUK1]

I'm trink im having a break of the topic, im not replying something that was NOT the point of the thread. 

Edited August 21, 2020 by jamondemarnatural
text

[lwks]

Wait, was the Marauder stolen from another games? Which ones? I'm curious.

 

As far as its implementation goes it doesn't matter if he's easy or hard, the mere fact he's in a Doom game is nonsensical, he behaves so weirdly from the other mobs that it makes me wonder why the hell did they think it would be a great addition to the monster pool. Thank god he's exploitable like that, imagine you had to play the game "passively" as he demands of you...very annoying.

[Buckshot]

On 8/20/2020 at 1:10 PM, RonnieJamesDiner said:

The only thing wrong with the Marauder was that you never got to fight two at one time. Fingers crossed with these future Master Levels!

Well guess wut.....




 

Edited August 22, 2020 by Buckshot

[lwks]

I hope someone makes a mod that takes the Marauders out of the game or at least gets rid of their shields.

[snapshot]

19 hours ago, lwks said:

Wait, was the Marauder stolen from another games? Which ones? I'm curious.

Inspired by would be a more fitting word, we know they said DMC and Bayonetta were some sources for inspiration. 1st thing that came to mind when I saw him, 2nd except obviously the Marauder doesn't give as many chances to shoot if you fight him the intended way.

19 hours ago, Buckshot said:

Well guess wut.....

OOF here goes

Edited August 22, 2020 by sluggard

[Hellektronic]

18 hours ago, jamondemarnatural said:

I'm trink im having a break of the topic, im not replying something that was NOT the point of the thread. 

 

Who asked you to argue with my point? I was stating a personal, generalized opinion... you didn't have to quote me and make a debate out of it, lol. Your point is arguing something I've heard a million times and I'm tired of people crawling on the floor trying to defend id Software for something so obviously out of place.

 

16 hours ago, lwks said:

Wait, was the Marauder stolen from another games? Which ones? I'm curious.

 

As far as its implementation goes it doesn't matter if he's easy or hard, the mere fact he's in a Doom game is nonsensical, he behaves so weirdly from the other mobs that it makes me wonder why the hell did they think it would be a great addition to the monster pool. Thank god he's exploitable like that, imagine you had to play the game "passively" as he demands of you...very annoying.

 

I completely agree, it just... doesn't speak the language of Doom. From what I've heard it's taken elements from Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice and games like Devil May Cry. Which begs the question: why? We're talking an FPS game, ya know? Brawler, swordplay-type mechanics are just crazy to throw into the mix so randomly.

 

7 hours ago, sluggard said:

Inspired by would be a more fitting word.

 

Everyone who's ever stolen an idea claims "inspiration". I don't agree with any of it. Stealing a generalized idea like secrets and teleports is one thing, being inspired by fighting games to create deathmatch is one thing, but practically like... copy and pasting elements from a totally different game genre? I think somebody needs slapped on the wrist before it happens again and again and again, because you know it will.

 

I look forward to the new DLC as much as the next guy, I'm sitting here patiently insane with boredom, waiting for more content in Eternal. BUT, I still feel the need to express my personal discontent with their "inspiration" for marauders. I don't expect anyone to agree, but I'm still going to say it. The whole rest of the game appeals to me like a fish to water, but the moment a marauder shows up it's like... forget everything I said, lol. You tried to hybridize Doom with some kind of sword-play, combo-based gameplay like Devil May Cry?

 

What the hell were you thinking, guys.

 

[Jayextee]

I don't see how an enemy being able block player attacks is somehow not very FPS when we had 'em as far back as 1995.

[NoXion]

I can't say that I understand the argument that the Marauder doesn't fit in. He's not supposed to be your bog-standard mook, he's obviously intended to stand out in mechanical terms from the rest of his demonic kind. But a sufficiently skilled player can still make an absolute chump out of the Marauder in seconds.

I've never played any of the fighting/brawling games from which the Marauder's mechanics are said to be taken/inspired from, so my perspective on the relevant gameplay is purely that of an FPS player. Personally I look forward to the day when I can reach the finale of Arc Complex, watch the Marauder give his little speech, and then pulverise the salty twat in under a minute.

Edited August 22, 2020 by NoXion

[Hellektronic]

4 hours ago, Jayextee said:

I don't see how an enemy being able block player attacks is somehow not very FPS when we had 'em as far back as 1995.

 

Hexen isn't really what I'd call an FPS, no offense. Heretic was, but Hexen was almost more like puzzle-based RPG or something. I was never a fan of Hexen... I'm not sure what to say about it, but I wouldn't quite call it an FPS.

 

2 hours ago, NoXion said:

I can't say that I understand the argument that the Marauder doesn't fit in.

 

He doesn't, it's pretty obvious when you've played like Devil May Cry or one of these games it came from. I like Devil May Cry, I like games like that, don't get me wrong- I just don't think anybody should be hybridizing Doom of all things with other genres. Doom pretty much pioneered FPS games, we all know that. But to see this "new-age" Bethesda-owned id Software trying to implement elements of bizarre other genres? I don't see that as innovative.

 

I've read reviews of Eternal that describe it as "tripping over it's own attempts at innovation", and I'm inclined to agree. I'm not saying Eternal is a crap game, I have a freakin' steelbook from the collector's edition and run an Xbox Live club mostly dedicated to 2016 and Eternal. I just... I dunno... it tries too hard to be "different". I don't really like the whole "weak point" system either, like shooting grenades into cacodemon mouths, or even collecting extra lives. It's gimmicky, it's strange, it's... not like Doom.

Edited August 22, 2020 by Hellektronic

[NoXion]

11 minutes ago, Hellektronic said:

He doesn't, it's pretty obvious when you've played like Devil May Cry or one of these games it came from. I like Devil May Cry, I like games like that, don't get me wrong- I just don't think anybody should be hybridizing Doom of all things with other genres. Doom pretty much pioneered FPS games, we all know that. But to see this "new-age" Bethesda-owned id Software trying to implement elements of bizarre other genres? I don't see that as innovative.

 

I've read reviews of Eternal that describe it as "tripping over it's own attempts at innovation", and I'm inclined to agree. I'm not saying Eternal is a crap game, I have a freakin' steelbook from the collector's edition and run an Xbox Live club mostly dedicated to 2016 and Eternal. I just... I dunno... it tries too hard to be "different". I don't really like the whole "weak point" system either, like shooting grenades into cacodemon mouths, or even collecting extra lives. It's gimmicky, it's strange, it's... not like Doom.

Implementing specific elements from other genres is not the same thing as hybridizing with them, in my opinion. The Marauder's atypical behaviour is what makes him unique. Not familiar with DMC or similar games, but it does seem that the Marauder's behaviour is the only thing they took from that genre; I've not seen anything else in Doom Eternal described in that way, unless I'm mistaken. I'm very confident that any special new demons in the upcoming DLCs or any sequel are going to behave entirely differently from the Marauder.

Aren't headshots, now a staple of the FPS genre, mechanically similar to weak points? You could also shoot weapons out of enemy hands in Perfect Dark, and later on in Soldier of Fortune. Being able to shoot off an Arachnotron's gun doesn't seem to be that radically different. Also I fucking love that metallic snapping sound that happens when you do it. I wonder if id hired some Skinnerian psychologist to give them some insights into stimulating the most basic layers of the human brain, because goddamn that's satisfying.

Maybe I just really like it when games try to be different. It doesn't always work, but I appreciate it nonetheless. I don't think you and others who feel as you do are necessarily wrong or unreasonable. I guess it's a matter of taste, and a matter of how one personally defines the boundaries of Doom and the wider FPS genre. Actually come to think of it, what struck me as the most "strange" new gameplay element when I first played Doom 2016 was what looked to me like an RPG-lite upgrade system for the player and their arsenal. I took it in my stride, but it strictly speaking it wasn't "necessary", the developers could have just started the player with abilities already maxed out. The Doom Slayer has been killing demonkind for centuries, but still needs to do some leveling up? But it adds elements of progression to the game which is fun so I don't mind.

[Pseudonaut]

I really don't see a problem with going in more of a DMC/Ninja Gaiden/Bayonetta direction. Those games are awesome, the new Doom games were never going to be like the old games anyway, and there's a limitless supply of content for those old Doom games. For all I know, having never played Eternal before, those gameplay elements could have been implemented poorly. But that isn't the impression I'm getting from this thread or elsewhere.

[D4NUK1]

1 hour ago, Hellektronic said:

 

Hexen isn't really what I'd call an FPS, no offense. Heretic was, but Hexen was almost more like puzzle-based RPG or something. I was never a fan of Hexen... I'm not sure what to say about it, but I wouldn't quite call it an FPS.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexen:_Beyond_Heretic

 

Quote

Hexen: Beyond Heretic is a dark fantasy first-person shooter video game developed by Raven Software and published by id Software through GT Interactive Software on October 30, 1995. It is the sequel to 1994's Heretic, and the second game in Raven Software's "Serpent Riders" trilogy, which culminated with Hexen II.

I respect your personal opinion, but...
 

Feeling =//= Reallity.

It's a FPS, maybe not a fast one but you can't shape the game of your own intepretation. If that so, i can call Postal 2 a Walking simulator and be rigth.

Edited August 23, 2020 by jamondemarnatural
Context.

[Chezza]

Enemy boss fights that require set timing or have unique weaknesses to bypass their invulnerability is such as long term universally used mechanic, I'm surprised people are even entertaining the idea Doom "stolen" or "inspired" by other games.

 

Why not have a go at the Pinky? Big strong charging enemy that you dodge, it stuns or dazes itself, you then hit its weak points. I recall such mechanics used back in Spyro the Dragon.

 

The Marauder is unique to Doom and not stolen from anything. I think some people are far reaching for excuses to condemn him without admitting "I struggle to fight him, and it ruins my experience :(".

Edited August 23, 2020 by Chezza

[snapshot]

2 hours ago, Hellektronic said:

it's strange.

I don't see that as a bad thing honestly.

42 minutes ago, NoXion said:

but still needs to do some leveling up?

A lot of other games do that as well with skill trees and progression systems, although they aren't considered RPGs per se, see the new TR trilogy or Control for a more recent example.

Edited August 23, 2020 by sluggard

[NoXion]

10 minutes ago, sluggard said:

A lot of other games do that as well with skill trees and progression systems, although they aren't considered RPGs per se, see the new TR trilogy or Control for a more recent example.

True enough, but it was definitely something that hadn't really been done in a big-ticket Doom game before, a series which had previously been known for being a more straightforward FPS. I'm good with it, but could definitely understand why someone else might have reservations, especially given that the player character already starts out as a badass.

Edited August 23, 2020 by NoXion

[seed]

7 hours ago, NoXion said:

True enough, but it was definitely something that hadn't really been done in a big-ticket Doom game before, a series which had previously been known for being a more straightforward FPS. I'm good with it, but could definitely understand why someone else might have reservations, especially given that the player character already starts out as a badass.

 

To me all this sounds like they are simply stuck in the past and refuse to adapt to change, if they had it their way, Doom would've ended up like its peers and never seen another sequel, after all, why ruin something perfect smh. Something they'd be absolutely fine with.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the new Doom games are not for them, they should stick to classic Doom, like they've done for the last 25 years, since they will never be pleased regardless of the direction they took. Long time running series can't move on unless they leave these people behind.

Edited August 23, 2020 by seed

[Jayextee]

11 hours ago, Hellektronic said:

Hexen isn't really what I'd call an FPS, no offense.

None taken.

[snapshot]

As much as I like Doom Eternal, I have to say that "stuck in the past" is a pretty shallow and inconsiderate way to look at it. If I prefer Arkham Asylum over Knight because it doesn't have the open world fluff and vehicle stuff that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past, If I prefer Rise over Shadow of the Tomb Raider because it has the more engaging escape sections that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past, If I prefer Chaos Theory over Conviction because I prefer the more open ended level design and less focus on narrative that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past, If I prefer 2016 over Eternal because I like the more grounded overall look and less exaggerated gameplay loop that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past.

 

I'm fine with the games changing things up and trying different things but just because I prefer earlier titles over the new ones it doesn't mean I can't enjoy them or play them. of course I'm not going to lose sleep over game changing thing but I can understand why someone might want more of the same, no I don't expect them to keep doing the same thing all the time because it would just get stale and might not be the best course of action from a marketting standpoint, but I can see where these people might be coming from.

 

To stay on topic: He can be a weird change of pace and makes you think differently of how you approach the situation so I can see how that would be off putting to some people, although I've seen more complaints about him coming from people playing on a controller. I don't mind him and don't really have problems facing him but I can't say I'm thrilled to face him every time he shows up after the first encounter in the ARC Complex, but at the same he doesn't appear so frequently (like 7 times or so if we don't count the slayer gates) so at least he offers some variety.

Edited August 23, 2020 by sluggard

[seed]

4 hours ago, sluggard said:

As much as I like Doom Eternal, I have to say that "stuck in the past" is a pretty shallow and inconsiderate way to look at it. If I prefer Arkham Asylum over Knight because it doesn't have the open world fluff and vehicle stuff that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past, If I prefer Rise over Shadow of the Tomb Raider because it has the more engaging escape sections that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past, If I prefer Chaos Theory over Conviction because I prefer the more open ended level design and less focus on narrative that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past, If I prefer 2016 over Eternal because I like the more grounded overall look and less exaggerated gameplay loop that doesn't mean I'm stuck in the past.

 

I'm fine with the games changing things up and trying different things but just because I prefer earlier titles over the new ones it doesn't mean I can't enjoy them or play them. of course I'm not going to lose sleep over game changing thing but I can understand why someone might want more of the same, no I don't expect them to keep doing the same thing all the time because it would just get stale and might not be the best course of action from a marketting standpoint, but I can see where these people might be coming from.

 

Now of course my intention there was not to be entirely dismissive of legit concerns and the fact that Doom has seen so many takes that will appear to different people that it's only natural everyone will want something else, often exactly what other don't. Classic Doom was a mixture of serious and comical, Doom 64 leaned harder on the serious side but had its goofy elements, Doom 3 was almost full blown survival horror and slow paced, and 2016/Eternal are almost full blown, relentless action with lots of cheese. All these takes will appeal to entirely different people.

 

No, what I keep saying is targeted first and foremost at the people who simply cannot accept them for what they are, much less accept them as Doom games, and think that they can somehow dictate what direction the series should take, or what makes Doom Doom, otherwise it's "betrayal". These people would be perfectly content if the series stopped at Doom 2, the classics are perfect for them and no matter where the series would go, they will always stick to it, which is fine by me, I prefer classic Doom more if only for its replayabilty, but I would never expect the series to stay the same while trying to move forward, it simply doesn't work that way. There is no point in making something new if it's missing the actually *new* element, I would never expect from a new entry to be classic Doom 2.0 in HD, nor should anyone do, everything changes with time. Look at SW, apart from the Asian aesthetic and over-the-top humor they're all very far removed from the 1997 classic, and they shouldn't aim to be a clone of the original either, it will never work, it's a product of its time and many things that worked fine back then just wouldn't anymore, gameplay or otherwise.

 

Speaking of the Arkham games, I prefer the newer ones because they expanded so much on the gameplay of the original, but the original is also still perfectly capable for what it set out to do, although I find it quite hard to return to it, at least on PC, because a) the controls were clearly just a straightforward port from consoles, much of the combos and gadgets are clunky with PC controls, and b) City ridiculously improved the combat over it, making Asylum look dated in this department in comparison, particularly when it comes to handling Titans. The combat challenges are so much fun in the sequels, but the Predator side of things was also expanded and doesn't lag behind either.

Edited August 23, 2020 by seed

[Hellektronic]

Don't everyone leap in here quoting first, asking questions later on my account, children.

 

I think in a lot of ways what you like or don't like comes from past experiences... and I'm just not buying what id is trying to sell with the marauder. I grew up in the golden age of the FPS genre, I've played a godless amount of shooters in my time, and I've never once seen something quite as cheesy and trans-genre as a marauder. I don't like cheesy. After 2016, Eternal has gotten to that point where their attempts to innovate Doom are becoming kind of... how you say... cocky. Just slapping things onto the formula for the sake of slapping things on. "It's new, it's different!" Well I think it's stupid, stop it, lol. They might think they're goddamn rockstars after 2016 succeeded as much as it did, but this kinda bullshit bothers me. I'm hoping it ends here, but they seem pretty determined to upstage 2016 with zany nuances nobody asked for.

 

And don't mistake that for the stereotypical "oh marauders are hard, I can't beat them" opinion. I can beat them, I've beaten the living shit out of them, even on ultra-nightmare. But the point I'm arguing is that it's losing sight of what Doom is, and what it should be. Say tomorrow they decide Doom is going to be a "universe" with spinoffs and all kind of bullshit like that? Zany money-making schemes fueled by Bethesda egging them on? I'd probably lose my shit a little. They've already shown an uncomfortable amount of that behavior, and I'm getting kind of squirrely about things the more I see out of them. You guys probably see no evil in that, but you're not me. The original Doom was an everyman's game, designed with shareware and modding in mind, the ability to do whatever you want with it. To see Bethesda driving them down this dark road of insidious exploitation and commercialization, I'm getting a bit sick to my stomach. The very second I see like... a commercial Bethesda Doom sidescroller or something, I'm checking out for good. Call me a hipster or whatever, but I don't play ball with that kind of bullshit.

 

I've got my fingers crossed this trend doesn't lead to me forsaking the new id Software, but we can only wait and see.

 

As for the whole... "new vs old" topic, I think you guys need to realize for some people it's kind of like dating somebody who tries to change you, you're going to get defensive and probably pretty damn pissy about it. And as a Doom fan, by definition, doesn't that kind of suggest you're obligated to be a fan of the new games? It's like a grandfather clause, lol, you have no choice. When you say "Doom", the majority of people nowadays are going to think Doom 2016 or Eternal. I think it's perfectly reasonable for people to be a bit touchy about the subject, I don't blame them for it.

 

As for Hexen? Eh, I think people just gave it the FPS moniker because it was intended to be a sequel to Heretic, which was an FPS. But ya know, I generally expect an "FPS" game to involve shooting things. From what I've played of Hexen, there isn't a whole lot of, well... shooting anything with most of the classes. It almost kinda mimics those old 90's RPG games that were first person, ever seen those? Just kinda how Hexen feels to me... like they tried to do away with the Doom-clone weapons and make a purely medieval style game.

 

Anyway, at the end of the day I think you guys can all see where I'm coming from, and that's enough. Whether you agree or not is more or less irrelevant, I'm just trying to present a case for the future of Doom here. I'm really nervous about how id Software wields the past like their grandfather's handgun, lol.

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by Hellektronic

[NoXion]

I would certainly be upset if Id/Bethesda decided to use Doom to engage in the more pernicious monetization schemes that have proven popular of late. So far it seems they have avoided such temptations. *crosses fingers and touches oak*

Edited August 23, 2020 by NoXion

[seed]

11 hours ago, NoXion said:

I would certainly be upset if Id/Bethesda decided to use Doom to engage in the more pernicious monetization schemes that have proven popular of late. So far it seems they have avoided such temptations. *crosses fingers and touches oak*

 

Bethesda is more concerned with ruining their own name rather than the studios they acquired.

Edited August 24, 2020 by seed

[Chezza]

@Hellektronic Obviously this is all our opinions on this topic.

 

However I still can't see your points, not even a little and I'm trying to be open minded.

 

I definitely disagree about the firing whoever included the Marauder statement you originally made. If you feel that strongly about their direction it's more practical you stop purchasing and playing their games.

 

I also think you don't appreciate the time and effort id has invested into getting Doom Eternal mechanics and encounters right. By design it's a very complicated game and it would have been much easier to actually go the "use other games and genre mechanics" route. Make it more horror and slow paced, add stealth, keep the maps more flat rather than vertical, most enemies are humanoid etc.

Edited August 24, 2020 by Chezza

[D4NUK1]

Also, taking a deep trinking, The Marauder is not the only demon that forces you to play a certain way. Others demon of Doom Eternal had they place and how they do the figthing.

The Wishplash it's fast and force you to move around if you don't attack him when he still, he gonna whip ya and run away, if you go away for him, he will get close with a range attack that it's extremly fast and can get you away so much HP. Forces you to stay focus of him and make the most damage possible.

The Carcass like to play defensive, he will not let you kill some enemies or go trougth a section with their shields, and he hp pool is somewhat big to live some rockets shoots.

It's notorious that thoses 2 are not that hard as the marauder, but i personally say they makes the sames rules on how figth them



 

[Hellektronic]

15 hours ago, Chezza said:

However I still can't see your points, not even a little and I'm trying to be open minded.

 

Look, I'm not speaking Russian here- my points are extremely simple when you shave off the fluff. Agreeing with them is unlikely, empathizing with them is even less realistic... and maybe that's where you're running into trouble.

 

What I'm saying is that several of the ideas they felt the need to slap into Eternal rub me the wrong way. They come across as trying too hard to innovate something that didn't need it, occasionally even coming across as confrontational, like they're trying to piss somebody off on purpose... and I think they are. I don't like that. The original Doom pissed people off kind of indirectly in a lot of ways- people who were offended by violence, people who were offended by Satanic imagery, stuff like that. These themes weren't what I'd call "in your face", they just... were what they were. It didn't push these themes on you outlandishly in my opinion. It was, at heart, mostly just a shooting game with demons in it. People got pissed off at the content of the game on their own.

 

But Doom Eternal? "In your face" is a great way to describe everything about it. They're trying too hard to innovate, to wow the critics with something different, and it's getting kind of sloppy and disconnected at this point... like they just take whatever random idea that skims across their head and run to mars with it. I don't agree with that. 2016 was a great game, pretty straightforward really, added some RPG elements but all in all it didn't really try to shove anything zany and nuanced down your throat.

 

The marauder though... is like the epitome of that idea. You can't ignore it, it's DIRECTLY in your face. And if you don't like it, well fuck you. I don't recall anything in 2016 being like that, do you?

 

Not just that, but it was like... some mutant idea from a totally different game genre, so I think they deliberately wanted people to hate it. And they succeeded, because I do. Not in a like... a "I hate that enemy" kind of way, but in a "I hate the person who thought up this enemy" kind of way. It's almost like playing a shitty Doom wad, you can't hate the game, you can only hate the asshole who turned it into something stupid. That's how the marauder comes across to me. Overall Eternal is a good game, perhaps even great, but that idea was just... gimmicky, stupid, and unwanted. Not unlike battlemode, lol.

 

That's what it strikes me as. It strikes me as something that shouldn't have been there, but like a single whiny person demanded it be put in. And not just put in, but made like... the poster-child of Doom Eternal. Nobody could say otherwise, they had to oblige this person. Which is what makes me think it was some dumbass higher in the hierarchy, demanding things their own way. This person needs a leash put on them, before they... how you say... fuck shit up any more. Like battlemode, lol. What were they thinking with that? I'll tell you what they were thinking: they wanted to try to innovate competitive FPS multiplayer to be something different, something it's not and never was. And I hope people take note of that. It says a lot about how something in their ideology changed drastically between 2016 and Eternal, and I don't agree with it. Hugo, Marty, that other guy who gets no credit, I don't give a shit who it was, but it was somebody who demanded the product be this way.

 

Now I'm not saying I hate Eternal, I don't. But as for stupid ideas? Well, I'm calling it like it is. Their ideas are getting progressively more stupid and headstrong, as shown by the change between 2016 and Eternal, and it makes me fear for the future. That's all.

Edited August 24, 2020 by Hellektronic

[Chezza]

I think I can see where you're going.

 

I'll tell you my take on this. I believe when the developers were contemplating how to step up the entertainment from Doom 2016, they concluded the challenge had to increase, and to do so fluidly (without artificially increasing enemy health and damage) they done so via enemy encounters resulting in the need to use the specific tools they provided to win.

 

The risk of it, is alienating the player base who doesn't want to be forced to play the "super fast game of chess" as one developer described it. In fact the only criticism I have for Doom Eternal's single player is the learning curve. There's so much mechanics to learn and tools to manage in a rather short amount of time it's a bit too much, even for people who won the Doom 2016 campaign several times over. The Pacing seems off and I've seen a bunch of new players introduced to the modern Dooms via Eternal get absolutely slaughtered and ultimately didn't have the greatest of times.

 

Personally I enjoyed Doom Eternal a lot more in my second and third play-through, because I finally mastered the basics and really started to experience the intended gameplay at its peak. When you get to that point, it's one of the best gaming experiences ever.

 

So perhaps this relates to what you're referring to. They're forcing players to play in certain ways giving less freedom to progress and play how you like. In a sense, the Marauder is the avatar of such game design - forcing you to focus and play its way less you die and can't proceed.

Edited August 25, 2020 by Chezza

[jazzmaster9]

 

15 hours ago, Hellektronic said:

Their ideas are getting progressively more stupid and headstrong, as shown by the change between 2016 and Eternal, and it makes me fear for the future. That's all.

I hope the next Doom is even more wacky and silly than Eternal so we can get more content from you.

also DLC is gonna have 2 Marauder's According to Hugo, OMG please rant about that I like reading them.

 

Please don't change I had such a laugh reading these.

Spoiler

I'm glad you don't work for id software or Eternal would have been a boring game.

Edited August 25, 2020 by jazzmaster9

[Hellektronic]

9 hours ago, jazzmaster9 said:

 

I hope the next Doom is even more wacky and silly than Eternal so we can get more content from you.

also DLC is gonna have 2 Marauder's According to Hugo, OMG please rant about that I like reading them.

 

Please don't change I had such a laugh reading these.

  Reveal hidden contents

I'm glad you don't work for id software or Eternal would have been a boring game.

 

The damage has been done already man, it can't get much worse. Put three in, four, five, six, 47 marauders in one encounter. "You thought the marauder was bad, now there's a SUPER MARAUDER," lol. It's just highlighting how desperate they are to rub it in people's faces like... malformed redheaded stepchildren of the id that once was. "WE DO IT EVEN BETTER THAN SERIOUS SAM AND BRUTAL DOOM!" Lol.

 

I know how to handle a series I had high hopes for going to total shit at this point, lol... god knows it's 2020 and the gaming industry is rapidly gaining downhill speed as it plummets towards a fiery death like the rest of human civilization, lol. Let's turn Quake into a hero-shooter next... oh wait, they already did! Haha. So I can see it now: Doom battle royale mode, the most innovative step yet, lol... just fuck it all up, burn everything to the ground, I wont even blink these days. It's almost to be expected out of the gaming industry anymore.

[Hellektronic]

18 hours ago, Chezza said:

So perhaps this relates to what you're referring to. They're forcing players to play in certain ways giving less freedom to progress and play how you like. In a sense, the Marauder is the avatar of such game design - forcing you to focus and play its way less you die and can't proceed.

 

You're not wrong... I'm definitely the kind of person who believes in giving more freedom of gameplay, never less. The ticket is to manage difficulty and freedom more of less equally, great freedom with great challenge. But id just aint speaking my language anymore as of Eternal. I thought 2016 did a pretty good job on that front actually.