Anyone else really hate how the game markets itself

[Scrabbs]

The whole "rip and tear" marketing really honest to god gets on my nerves. Like I get it id, you referenced a one off cheesy comic book that became a meme because how funny the panel looked. It was cute the first few hundred times, but it's just annoying to be honest. And how the Doomguy is characterized always kinda irked me in the new games. I always found the roided up grunt doomguy in the original games much more interesting than the mystical badass super hero warrior of time doomguy. Anyone else feel like this? I usually just skip the cutscenes anyway and just watch the cutscenes online if I need context for a discussion.

Edited November 7, 2020 by Scrabbs

[Serum]

Meh, I don't see that "catch-phrase" too often around Doomworld, and it's only said a couple of times in-game. Hardly hundreds of times... So, never bugged me.

 

Are you maybe a Redditor? I could totally see them overusing the shit out of a motif like that. Any fandom-based subreddit has that problem. It's a truly cretinous platform to avoid at all costs.

[Scrabbs]

8 hours ago, Serum said:

Are you maybe a Redditor?

God no, it's just any discussion of doom on sites larger than doomworld always brings up "rip and tear" no matter what or the context of the conversation.

[D4NUK1]

It's the inverse for me, i really like how big the "Rip and Tear" it's catching up. And it's somethings that's sells Doom Eternal,  he just's straigth up a killer machine and a living nigthmare for any demons.

As the game say's the only thing they fear...it's YOU....RIP AND TEAR!

Adding for more context, it's helps better for the game distancing bettew the original marine, and the new slayer.

You can't really promote RIP AND TEAR, with just a Marine figthing across Demons, and even then, that's only worked in Doom 1, because in Doom 2, the Doom Marine it's more fueled by rage and anger for the demons, instead of figthing for Deimos/UAC Base.

Even the Lore of Doom 2 it's potrays the Doom Marine as someone that's they only proporse it's kill demons on earth.

Now with the Slayer, it's full aware of this, making the Slayer buffed with they armour, muscules, and brutals way to kill the demons, they embrace the power of the slayer. Making the Rip and Tear Marketing really great in this way.

Also, it's a way to make fans happy!

Edited November 7, 2020 by jamondemarnatural

[P41R47]

1 hour ago, Scrabbs said:

God no, it's just any discussion of doom on sites larger than doomworld always brings up "rip and tear" no matter what or the context of the conversation.

Just let them be, if it gets on your nerves, ignore it.

It is targeted to a certain more insecure, need to feel badass part of of the demographic gaming world.

It means profits for the developers, it is bad?

Certainly not, so stick with what you like and let the consumer ''consume''what they like.

Simply as that.

Edited November 7, 2020 by P41R47

[Super Mighty G]

Not really, no.

[seed]

Nope, there's nothing too special about it.

 

What we're seeing some people doing is quite common with popular titles, and other games benefitted (or suffered) from similar treatment. Though not directly advertised, think of Skyrim's "arrow to the knee" joke. Almost a decade later and you can still see people making that joke and still finding it funny. Or "Stop right there criminal scum" from Oblivion.

 

It'll pass, especially with another game or whatever. Just ignore it.

[whatup876]

It can feel like they're "belittling" the series as having a smaller universe, even when they take elements from outside the games, like adaptions to other media or memes.

It feels like they're trying to make the games "self-aware" to themselves but through some sort of filters, so there's a limit.

In general, a piece of media in a series being "aware" is a hard thing to do (either because the original creators aren't involved or because a series was never meta at the start) but also because the "personality" the series develops may not even feel realistic.

 

Even the comic feels misrepresented because besides there being more to it than "rip and tear", Doomguy literally runs away from a Cyberdemon once he realizes he no longer has Berserk. (which is a characterization that may or may not suit the OG Doomguy better but it's contradicted by the modern DoomSlayer, because there's a more specific source of inspiration that the games don't really admit where it comes from)

 

I feel like some people wouldn't mind if certain inside fanbase jokes like the Skulltag taunt or FIREBLU jokes were used, until they became overused.

It can also be something about the games trying to focus on "the Doom fanbase" but you still get the feeling the idea behind it is "someone that got into Doom recently but is really vocal and hyper enthusiastic about Doom" than "someone that got deep into Doom for so long, they even remember the earliest uses of "Doomguy" or when some source ports were being developed".

Basically, the idea that Doom may have a fanbase with some examplary stuff to learn from but the games have a rather specific focus.

 

Nothing wrong with casual experiences in a series but considering how Doom was sort of "expanded" by fans and the overall public (in both good and bad ways), there's probably a lot more to pull from than what we get.

Specially if it's even someone else getting deeper into the series, whether it's MarphyBlack's weird trivia knowledge or something like MetaDoom that feels like a more realistic example of the series being self-aware and looking at itself. (aside from some odd parts like how the grenade launcher uses Duke 64 sprites for some reason)

And by exploring a series or its history further, you'd only make it more interesting.

Edited November 7, 2020 by whatup876

[Vic Vos]

Wasn't there a thread already?
 

 

[id.dav]

On 11/7/2020 at 8:41 AM, Scrabbs said:

 Anyone else feel like this? 

Yes I do, as game is a hostage of it's director now, who for some absolutely irrational reasons believe that Doom is a "power fantasy" - that's the core of the problem.

Edited November 8, 2020 by id.dav

[seed]

19 hours ago, id.dav said:

Yes I do, as game is a hostage of it's director now, who for some absolutely irrational reasons believe that Doom is a "power fantasy" - that's the core of the problem.

 

So basically change is bad, then?

 

I'd like to see people stop being so defensive of what they think Doom is or isn't. We've had numerous topics on this subject and they all clearly indicated that people hold very different views on what Doom is or isn't.

Edited November 9, 2020 by seed

[Sunnyfruit]

Before the Doom Slayer there was Brutal Doom. And games with the Doom Slayer feature way more enjoyable gameplay than games with Brutal Doom.

No fanbase is enjoyable. You can make the official version of Doom the way you wish and the fanbase will make you sick of it in less than a week.

The Internet favors noise and hide constructive discussion but the Internet is still nothing but a library based on constructive initiative. These memes work and prosper because there is actual substantial quality in the source medium.

 

So, no. Just ignore the fanbase, ignore the marketing appealing to the fanbase, and enjoy and take inspiration from the quality product.

[Taurus Daggerknight]

For what it is, the whole RIP AND TEAR as a battle cry is kind of charming, and brings a very "Bruce Campbell Vs. Army of Darkness" vibe to the whole affair. Which, I assume, was the point. Or just, in general, other Bruce Campbell films (one of which I recall he got the title "The Great Exterminator"...for slaying evil overlord bug people). 

 

Which all goes back to the tone discussion that's been had so many times over by now. 

 

OG Doom had a confusing tone at best; serious one moment, hilarious another, and downright stupid at some points.

Doom 64 was serious in visual and audio, but its overall writing could also veer into pretty odd places.

 

Doom 3 was the most serious (despite having its own list of B-movie tropes). Also arguably the most divisive in the entire series, from a game play perspective. And let's be honest; the game's tone wouldn't have gone through if you were moving like a race car in that anyhow, so the slow pace was fair... 

 

2016 and Eternal are full on Comic Book/ aforementioned Campbell movies. 

 

So in that context... it kind of fits. You really can't be coming to these titles looking for 64 or Doom 3, or even OG Doom, because like 64 and 3, it is very much doing its own thing. 

 

Down the road? I wouldn't mind a more serious reboot, or at the very least a refinement of the storytelling now (which yes, has gotten overblown as of Ancient Gods), but for what it is, it's hardly the worst thing in the world that the Sentinels shout RIP AND TEAR in the Slayers honor.  

[igg]

A few days ago I watched the Netflix documentary on classic Doom. John Romero said they wanted to make a dark and scary game. The new Doom games are neither of them. 

 

John Carmack once said Doom ment different things to different people. But it's interesting his vision of Doom (which can be found in Doom 3) is also dark and scary.

 

I think the Doom 2016 trilogy focus on the power fantasy. Maybe, in 9 years, id Software will try a new Doom trilogy again, featuring a more serious approach. This doesn't have to be Call of Doom or a Doom 3ish approach. Maybe we'll see dark sci-fi areas, with an Alien vibe (which was a big inspiration for the original Doom) but also with fast and gory gameplay. The Doom 2016 artworks looked much more scary and serious than the game.

 

Don't get me wrong: I like the new Doom games and play them much more than Doom 3. But I'd love to see a modern classic Doom.

[Taurus Daggerknight]

2 hours ago, igg said:

A few days ago I watched the Netflix documentary on classic Doom. John Romero said they wanted to make a dark and scary game. The new Doom games are neither of them. 

 

John Carmack once said Doom ment different things to different people. But it's interesting his vision of Doom (which can be found in Doom 3) is also dark and scary.

 

I think the Doom 2016 trilogy focus on the power fantasy. Maybe, in 9 years, id Software will try a new Doom trilogy again, featuring a more serious approach. This doesn't have to be Call of Doom or a Doom 3ish approach. Maybe we'll see dark sci-fi areas, with an Alien vibe (which was a big inspiration for the original Doom) but also with fast and gory gameplay. The Doom 2016 artworks looked much more scary and serious than the game.

 

Don't get me wrong: I like the new Doom games and play them much more than Doom 3. But I'd love to see a modern classic Doom.

 

Well again... there's a lot of conflicting stuff about the intended result The atmosphere of some of the levels is tense, but then some of them have really upbeat music (which sometimes isn't even aggressive), oddball text prompts for weapon pickups, the intermission screen texts in general... a lot of things that simply do not, and never have, connected to the intention of "scary". That's all not even going into the whole "Tom Hall's plot stuff being cast aside in favor of a blitz-action game". 

[igg]

2 hours ago, Taurus Daggerknight said:

 

Well again... there's a lot of conflicting stuff about the intended result The atmosphere of some of the levels is tense, but then some of them have really upbeat music (which sometimes isn't even aggressive), oddball text prompts for weapon pickups, the intermission screen texts in general... a lot of things that simply do not, and never have, connected to the intention of "scary". 

If you judge the classic Doom games from today you might be right. But back then I remember Doom 1+2 being an intense experience. In both games Doomguy starts in a level with very dark areas, monsters you didn't notice because they were hiding in dark areas throw fireballs at you. 

 

The only "funny" enemies were the pinkies and strawberries.

 

The overall tonality was action and not horror - maybe they are best described as action games in horror settings. 

 

In Wolfenstein you fought nazis in bright levels with constant brightness. In Doom you fought bloody demons of hell, you saw stabbed people, screaming faces in walls and so on. That was not funny, I knew many people who refused playing Doom because of its gory and intense design.

[Taurus Daggerknight]

8 hours ago, igg said:

If you judge the classic Doom games from today you might be right. But back then I remember Doom 1+2 being an intense experience. In both games Doomguy starts in a level with very dark areas, monsters you didn't notice because they were hiding in dark areas throw fireballs at you. 

 

The only "funny" enemies were the pinkies and strawberries.

 

The overall tonality was action and not horror - maybe they are best described as action games in horror settings. 

 

In Wolfenstein you fought nazis in bright levels with constant brightness. In Doom you fought bloody demons of hell, you saw stabbed people, screaming faces in walls and so on. That was not funny, I knew many people who refused playing Doom because of its gory and intense design.

 

As intense as some of the zones and monsters were, again, I don't quite feel like it was all that myself. The darkness and design itself also doesn't quite overrule the oddities. Again, I point to Army of Darkness as a prime example; pretty directly straightforward visual themes and the like, but....also full of campy and funky stuff. 

 

Mind that I'm not arguing that OG Doom wasn't serious in a lot of parts and intents. Just that I don't feel like it was entirely that, even in the context of back then.

 

Edit/ elaboration: 

Most of Doom 1 took itself seriously, until you hit the intermission screens, which were almost all comic book stuff. Then in Doom 2, you get some, uh... interesting set pieces that are entirely set for giggles and silliness. "Gotcha!" and "Barrels 'O Fun" spring to mind, as in fact does the last level of Knee Deep in the Dead from Doom 1, which has a similarly convenient barrel setup around the pinky's if memory serves. 

With that said; I do also recall some dire stuff in Doom 1. Unholy Cathedral I t think it was (been a while), where you're in this stone hall and just see these view slits into these horrible torture chambers. Great stuff that, and absolutely one of the many parts that sold the dire tone.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Taurus Daggerknight

[hfc2x]

13 hours ago, igg said:

A few days ago I watched the Netflix documentary on classic Doom. John Romero said they wanted to make a dark and scary game.

Romero talking in retrospect, though. Originally, he and Carmack insisted that gameplay was king when Tom Hall wanted the game to be scary and have a plot, which caused the latter to eventually leave id Software. Carmack wanted nothing to be in the way of showing off his engine, and Romero at the time wanted the gameplay to be fast-paced and bombastic, because he had his mind on deathmatch (which they were creating alongside Doom).

 

13 hours ago, igg said:

John Carmack once said Doom ment different things to different people. But it's interesting his vision of Doom (which can be found in Doom 3) is also dark and scary.

This is true, but at the same thing, Doom 3 as "the game" wasn't John Carmack's vision. The engine, absolutely. But Carmack's never been involved in story or gameplay, and in fact, he's famous for the "story in a game is like the story in a porn movie" quote, because he's completely detached from gameplay design.

 

18 hours ago, id.dav said:

Yes I do, as game is a hostage of it's director now, who for some absolutely irrational reasons believe that Doom is a "power fantasy" - that's the core of the problem.

But it is lol. It's only decades later that Romero sort of changed his mind about the games, but back in the 90s, they were very much his own power fantasy:

 

 

And you're doing Hugo Martin a huge disservice there, considering his favorite Doom game is Doom 64. You know, a slower-pace, more atmospheric game compared to Doom 1 and 2. If anything, you're the only one sounding irrational here because other people have different appreciations than you do.

[Super Mighty G]

31 minutes ago, hfc2x said:

he's famous for the "story in a game is like the story in a porn movie" quote

He's gone on record saying he doesn't think this anymore.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Super Mighty G

[hfc2x]

Yes, everyone changes their opinions over time. That was back then, and it also applies to Romero seeing Doom as a power fantasy. Neither of them stand by those opinions nowadays.

[seed]

30 minutes ago, Super Mighty G said:

He's gone on record saying he doesn't think this anymore.

 

Correction: He most likely never did in the first place and it's the fans who have been missing his point for years.

 

But the times and context was different back then, and it took many people treating that quote as the gospel of Doom until he eventually clarified what he actually meant - and that was the fact that the story in a shooter/game similar to Doom should never take over the actual gameplay, and not "story in video games is meaningless and they'd all be better off without any of it". It may have also been a reaction against Tom Hall's vision, which was going to be the other way around.

 

Romero likely no longer stands by everything he may have said either, or at least, not in the same way.

Edited November 9, 2020 by seed

[whatup876]

I feel like any fanbase of a series fears that a series they like ends up boiling down to some memes and recurring jokes, because it obscures the better qualities.

Might be why some people worry about new fans or secondaries, specially if it officially impacts a series or how its marketed.

In some way, Doom may have had some sort of "cultural osmosis" fate most people expect with other franchises and it can be weird for the fact that it never really had a noticeable deal with "secondaries" due to how many ways anyone experienced the games.

On 11/8/2020 at 5:59 PM, igg said:

I think the Doom 2016 trilogy focus on the power fantasy. Maybe, in 9 years, id Software will try a new Doom trilogy again, featuring a more serious approach. This doesn't have to be Call of Doom or a Doom 3ish approach. Maybe we'll see dark sci-fi areas, with an Alien vibe (which was a big inspiration for the original Doom) but also with fast and gory gameplay. The Doom 2016 artworks looked much more scary and serious than the game.

 

Don't get me wrong: I like the new Doom games and play them much more than Doom 3. But I'd love to see a modern classic Doom.

I feel like if id wanted to do something more with classic games, they'd probably have to consult a portion of the fanbase.

And i mean this because the fanbase is so attached to the series that a lot of stuff that could have happened with the series exists in the form of fan material: remastered music, sound effects, "HD" material, new elements to fit the gameplay or art style, "sequels" etc.

Even weirder and deeper knowledge on obscure trivia or some fanservice that wouldn't work in official products.

Or just more access and options for the games and stuff.

For a similar reason why the official 64 port even exists, because fans always kept working on those fan ports.

In general, Doom modding and other corners of the fanbase are like an alt timeline of the franchise.

 

I always imagined that an official Doom game trying to be more old school could be like an indie retro game with a simple art style that could faithfull translate the classic designs in 3D.

Could also feel like a "deeper" take on both the official games and even other portions of the fanbase.

[hfc2x]

2 hours ago, whatup876 said:

For a similar reason why the official 64 port even exists, because fans always kept working on those fan ports.

I'm not meaning to say you didn't know about this, but this reminded me that a lot of people miss the fact that Doom 64 EX and the official 2020 rerelease were both made by Kaiser. I've seen the "Bethesda felt threatened by fans working on a better port" take way too often, and people claiming that "the devs of EX can do a better job than Bethesda", completely ignoring the fact that it's the same devs lol.

 

I think the reason behind the rerelease can possibly have a bit of that of course, but in my opinion, and what I think may be the biggest reason, is that DOOM 2016 brought a lot of new fans to the series who still think it's a hard reboot of the series (I've seen way too often people referring to Doom Eternal as "Doom 2"), when it has a lot of really obvious nods to the older games that long time fans would immediately notice. I think probably the biggest contributing factor they decided to have a rerelease was so the game could get exposure, so these people could see the obvious connection between 64 and 2016. Wouldn't be that far of a stretch, considering Hugo Martin has repeatedly mentioned how Doom 64 has always been his favorite, and 2016 picks up pretty obviously after Doomguy has spent time staying in hell. A thing that sadly, goes over the heads of many still to this day.

 

2 hours ago, whatup876 said:

Even weirder and deeper knowledge on obscure trivia or some fanservice that wouldn't work in official products.

I think this sums up the "problem" with the marketing mentioned by OP. It's not that it's a problem necessarily, since longtime fans would acknowledge those things as in-jokes or references to different aspects of the series. But the issue really lays is in the fact that a lot of the new fans (or casuals) to the series won't care about checking out anything Doom other than the new games, and therefore taking the marketing stuff way too seriously or at face value, not actually caring about what it's referencing and missing the point entirely.

 

Hate to make this comparison, but I guess OP is saying the marketing lends itself to a "Pickle Rick" situation.

[seed]

11 hours ago, hfc2x said:

But the issue really lays is in the fact that a lot of the new fans (or casuals) to the series won't care about checking out anything Doom other than the new games

 

Fun fact, the reverse is also true, I've seen posts around here from people who have no desire to check other Doom games apart from classic Doom.

[GraphicBleeder]

I agree with you. Doom Eternal is a great game in my opinion, but I absolutely hate how they made Doomguy from this super buffed space marine to this mystical ancient time warrior. That's why I always keep the classic skin on when I actually play. Also, the cutscene where he actually speaks is some of the cringiest shit I have ever heard or seen in something Doom related.

 

 

[seed]

2 hours ago, GraphicBleeder said:

Also, the cutscene where he actually speaks is some of the cringiest shit I have ever heard or seen in something Doom related.

 

How many of them are there?

 

I don't own the game, only watched a let's play of the base game. I know he speaks in one where his past is revealed, but is there something else?

[GraphicBleeder]

5 minutes ago, seed said:

 

How many of them are there?

 

I don't own the game, only watched a let's play of the base game. I know he speaks in one where his past is revealed, but is there something else?

Only one. The one where they show his flashback.

[snapshot]

3 hours ago, GraphicBleeder said:

the cutscene where he actually speaks is some of the cringiest shit I have ever heard or seen in something Doom related.

I have the sneaking suspicion they put that scene there just to fuck with people who don't like the whole Rip and Tear thing lol

Edited November 11, 2020 by sluggard

[whatup876]

Doomguy saying "rip and tear" in some way is kinda like if Sega decided that Sanic should be a central Sonic character.

Or Nintendo hiring some CD-I voice actors just to bring back those voices and lines for Mario and Link.

 

I think the overuse of "rip and tear" can also be compared to how modern Fallout handles Vault Boy.

 

Something i noticed about them trying to connect the new games to the classic is that they probably only use the games themselves but not the manuals that actually had a bit of "lore", which is how we got Daisy and the ending of 64 being acknowledged but not descriptions of cybernetic demons being made by Hell itself or a reference to Doomguy's boss.

So, there's some stuff being skipped, even though there's not really much of it.

 

I think the new backgrounds of most demons reminds me of something like "what makes fish people scary is not what they look like, but why they look like this or what made them this way" and it says about the difference between "Hell just created cyborg minotaurs for fun" and "it was a UAC invention".

That one fake 4chan leak during August/September said the Tyrants had human DNA just to not have the chittin look and even though that turned out to be false, it doesn't seem far off from the way how the lore is written.

 

It could also be because tech is an aspect of Doom's Hell, specially in some textures, that made it kinda unique, which may also add some irony to how technology is used as one of the unique aspects of the new Doom Heaven, Urdak".

 

I also think Doom ever being low-tech is something that could make the setting "relatable" or why it's easy for fans to "expand", which is not like how Marathon has deeper lore and is very alien and specific, so i don't think it's easy to create custom weapons or enemies for that one.

Speaking of the chittin demons look, the Cacodemons looked more like strawberries originally because of the "bubbly" texture in their skin and the "hair" tendrils is replaced by what appears to be failed growing limbs.

Edited November 12, 2020 by whatup876

[hfc2x]

1 hour ago, whatup876 said:

Doomguy saying "rip and tear" in some way is kinda like if Sega decided that Sanic should be a central Sonic character.

Or Nintendo hiring some CD-I voice actors just to bring back those voices and lines for Mario and Link.

Not really, since Sanic was created by fans as a mockery of the series, while the Nintendo CDi games came from a publishing deal that Nintendo themselves are extremely ashamed of. You could say that the CDi games are the most similar to this, because they're awful as games (like the Doom comic is awful as a comic), while being popular with fans because of how stupid they are. But the biggest difference here is that Mario and Zelda don't have a tone compatible with those, unlike how Doom (contrary to what many would like to believe) actually does.

 

1 hour ago, whatup876 said:

Something i noticed about them trying to connect the new games to the classic is that they probably only use the games themselves but not the manuals that actually had a bit of "lore", which is how we got Daisy and the ending of 64 being acknowledged but not descriptions of cybernetic demons being made by Hell itself or a reference to Doomguy's boss.

 

The only manual that references techno demons being made by Hell is the Final Doom one, and it should be clear by now that Final Doom is not "necessarily" canon, since all three TNT, Plutonia and Doom 64 are all direct sequels to Doom 2 separately. So it's more a matter of Final Doom (like Doom 3) happening in an alternate timeline as far as the newer games are concerned.

 

And I wouldn't say they don't take the manuals as reference, since the opening section of all the manuals comes directly from the Shareware v0.99 version's "OBJECT OF THE GAME" section of the Readme file, and very much informs the tone of the series:

 

Quote

Welcome to DOOM, a lightning-fast virtual adventure where you're the toughest space trooper ever to suck vacuum. Your mission is to shoot your way through a monster-infested holocaust. Living to tell the tale if possible.

The gameplay for DOOM is quite simple. This is not a cumbersome adventure game, but an action-oriented slugathon. You don't need the reflexes of a hyperactive eight-year-old to win, either—using your wits is IMPORTANT. To escape DOOM, you need both brains and the killer instinct.

 

Regarding Daisy, I think it's got more to do with recognition by fans. She's got fanart, has appeared in mods, and was also a skin in Skulltag. I believe it was to be expected she'd have to appear somehow in the new games. But Doomguy's superior? No one has ever seemed to care, and it's also a reason current-day id Software doesn't seem to either. I don't think it's because they ignore the manuals at all.

Edited November 12, 2020 by hfc2x
this was kinda ambiguous