Would you say Doom (1993) is much more advanced game than Wolf 3D (1992)?

[Technicolor]

I would say Doom (1993) is much more advanced than Wolf 3D (1992).

 

Everywhere looks like the same in Wolf 3D in close envirement. There is no such thing as height. Weapons look simple, they all have same ammos, etc.

Edited March 8, 2022 by Technicolor

[BGreener]

Sure, I’d say so.

 

I’ll give Wolf3D credit for providing enemies frames of animation for being idle, Doom enemies get down and boogie while they wait. It’s perfectly fine considering how rarely you encounter an idle enemy.

 

That, and if I was a demon sent towards an inevitable death by Doomdude, I’d probably get jiggy with it with while I wait as well.

[TheFocus]

without question, yes.

[roadworx]

yeah? without a doubt, it's advanced in pretty much every way imaginable. movement, enemies, level design, the list goes on

[Naarok0fkor]

Are Wolfenstein3D & Doom's candelabras the same?

[Dark Pulse]

I mean... lighting, walls at any angle, varying floor/ceiling heights... and that's without getting into stuff like the AI, weapons, items, etc.

 

It's not even a contest.

[PsychEyeball]

I feel like asking this is the same as saying "Is Super Mario Bros 3 more advanced and complex than Super Mario Bros 1"? Of course the followup game from the same studio will be more advanced.

 

For instance, there's no way that the developers of Final Fantasy 7 would look at their work and say: "Our next game should play exactly like Final Fantasy 1 and go back to flat 2D sprites, barely feature any storytelling or have functionnal menus that explain how things work". Of course game developers will want to aim higher and be more ambitious with each game they make. 

[Murdoch]

Sorry I am not trying to be a dick but... what is the point of this thread?  Only bit that you could fairly call vaguely comparable would be the sound code. Doom is very clearly leagues ahead in virtually every single department.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Murdoch

[Nikku4211]

Considering Doom requires a 32-bit processor, unlike Wolfenstein 3D, and struggles to run on a 386, while Wolf 3D could run on a 286, yes, I would say Doom '93 is more advanced than Wolfenstein 3D. In fact, it's the one that deserves to be called 3D(but still limited), not Wolf.

[DeathWalkerGT]

Surely more advanced for this reason only:

11 minutes ago, Nikku4211 said:

Considering Doom requires a 32-bit processor, unlike Wolfenstein 3D, and struggles to run on a 386, while Wolf 3D could run on a 286

Long story short Doom I was consindered a technical masterpiece for its time from how the levels were build to even 2D monsters in a 3D world.

[Doom-X-Machina]

I think it goes without saying...

[The BMFG]

this is like asking if the ps5 has more powerful hardware than the ps2. the answer should be dead obvious

Edited March 9, 2022 by The BMFG

[HellGhost]

Yes, In practically every sense. Doom is certainly a shit-ton more advanced, with graphics, coding, everything.

But, you gotta hand it to id games, Wolf 3D was the first 3D game of all time (Or at least from what I remember of the old days of the 90s), so It's still incredibly impressive. 

[gwain]

no if you look in doom map editing doom's textures are way smaller than the wolf3d just add a zzwolf to a wall and boom you will see where it looks like the doom guy is an ant where as wolf3d your head touches the ceiling and the walls are the same size its pretty much a complete downgrade if you ask me

 

 

Spoiler

Spoiler

the joke is obvius but I do wonder why its like this

Edited March 9, 2022 by gwain

[Megalyth]

There have been few technologies made obsolete as quickly as Wolfenstein 3D was. It pales in comparison to even vanilla Doom.

[GraphicBleeder]

Absolutely. No contest.

[Ralphis]

Nah, Wolf3D is a much more advanced and complete game. Doom was just a money grab.

[gwain]

3 minutes ago, Ralphis said:

Nah, Wolf3D is a much more advanced and complete game. Doom was just a money grab.

exactly almost all of the tracks in the game are just stolen songs the only thing driving doom was the wow factor of demons and blood without that it would be nothing wolf3d could run on earlier hardware and had a better plot doom is an optimized mess of a game

[fraggle]

Nah. Just more monsters and levels. What a load.

[Biodegradable]

id Software clearly peaked after Wolf3D and just replaced the Nazis with Demons. Bunch of hacks!

[Mayomancer]

Doom is so much more advanced than Wolf3d it's actually surprising they did it without some intermediate gen game in-between, and just one year apart from each other. Seeing ID releasing a wolf engine + game like Rise of the Triad in between them would have made sense, but the tech advanced really fast.

 

Wolf3d is not a bad game by any means, and in it's context it was really ground breaking, but for me in this day and age it just doesn't have enough to be interesting after the novelty/nostalgia wears off.

[mankubus]

Its a lot more advanced. Compare Doom 2 with Duke 3d. I think Duke 3d is awesome, sprites look better, maps are bigger, more variety, destructible environments etc. But still, I think Doom was a bigger leap than Duke 3d compared to Wolf considering it was only one year difference.

[Doomkid]

Does Doom have distance-based hitscan damage calculations?! That’s what I thought. Wolf3D is like a supercomputer and Doom is more like a Fisher Price brand calculator.

[PasokonDeacon]

Clearly nothing that's most famous for running on electronic pregnancy tests could possibly be more advanced than Wolf 3D! /s

[Redneckerz]

Redundant question.  Would you say Quake (1996) is much more advanced than Doom (1993)?

 

Same thing.

 

4 hours ago, Murdoch said:

Sorry I am not trying to be a dick but... what is the point of this thread?  

If only more people thought this before they actually made the thread.

[Kinsie]

5 hours ago, Murdoch said:

Sorry I am not trying to be a dick but... what is the point of this thread?  Only bit that you could fairly call vaguely comparable would be the sound code. Doom is very clearly leagues ahead in virtually every single department.

Couldn't you say this about a lot of new threads around here?

[Zaxxon]

14 minutes ago, Kinsie said:

Couldn't you say this about a lot of new threads around here?

 

In a lot of other forums, newly registered users are not allowed to start topics until they reach a certain amount of posts, exactly for that same reason, to avoid meaningless and unnecessary topics being posted. I think 100 post is a good threshold for that. It allows the new user to familiarize himself with the forum climate and the type of content that's tolerable. Allowing new members with 0 posts to start their own topics, can only bring you... well, this here. It does no good for the forum, and it only waters down the good content with needless filler threads that no one wants to see.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Zaxxon

[Rykzeon]

Well, I do like Wolf3D and Doom in their own gameplay.
Enemies in Wolf3D only have hitscan attack that can pass-through other enemies so they won't start an infighting while Doom has both hitscan attack that can pass-through other objects and hitscan that doesn't pass-through other objects;
Wolf3D has Mutant as its silent enemy while Doom has Lost Soul as its silent enemy;
Both boss battles in Wolf3D and Doom are quite engaging;
Wolf3D hitscan damage depends on the distance between you and the attacker while Doom doesn't;
Wolf3D has vines to make enemies harder to see while Doom has darkness and middle-texture to make enemies harder to see;
Wolf3D builds its atmosphere by cartoonish-style about killing nazi propaganda while Doom builds its atmosphere by quite realistic-graphic-style normal christian gaming.

[Stupid Bunny]

Here’s a slightly more interesting question: what can Wolf3D do that vanilla Doom can’t (or, at least, didn’t?)

 

Off the top of my head:

• Side-sliding doors—even if they’re not true doors and there’s primitive commented-out Doom code for this
• Eating dead stuff off the ground
• Sliding blocks
• Idle animations, patrols
• A score system
• A rather pointless lives system
• Knife that doesn’t wake everything, unlike Doomguy’s extremely loud fist
• Getting one-shot killed instantly by a trooper at point-blank range

 

A comparison between Doom and RoTT would also have been a more interesting question, since RoTT derives from an earlier and more primitive engine yet came later and does a ton of crazy shit that Doom doesn’t.

 

As it is, OP’s question is…

 

Ok wait what is more primitive, Castle Wolfenstein (1981) or Doom Eternal?

Edited March 9, 2022 by Stupid Bunny

[Technicolor]

21 hours ago, PsychEyeball said:

I feel like asking this is the same as saying "Is Super Mario Bros 3 more advanced and complex than Super Mario Bros 1"? Of course the followup game from the same studio will be more advanced.

 

For instance, there's no way that the developers of Final Fantasy 7 would look at their work and say: "Our next game should play exactly like Final Fantasy 1 and go back to flat 2D sprites, barely feature any storytelling or have functionnal menus that explain how things work". Of course game developers will want to aim higher and be more ambitious with each game they make. 

 

Doom 2 is same as Doom 1. It is not any more advanceded than Doom 1.

 

Extre enemies, item, weapon is added to the game. That is it.

 

 

14 hours ago, Stupid Bunny said:

Here’s a slightly more interesting question: what can Wolf3D do that vanilla Doom can’t (or, at least, didn’t?)

 

Off the top of my head:

• Side-sliding doors—even if they’re not true doors and there’s primitive commented-out Doom code for this
• Eating dead stuff off the ground
• Sliding blocks
• Idle animations, patrols
• A score system
• A rather pointless lives system
• Knife that doesn’t wake everything, unlike Doomguy’s extremely loud fist
• Getting one-shot killed instantly by a trooper at point-blank range

 

A comparison between Doom and RoTT would also have been a more interesting question, since RoTT derives from an earlier and more primitive engine yet came later and does a ton of crazy shit that Doom doesn’t.

 

As it is, OP’s question is…

 

Ok wait what is more primitive, Castle Wolfenstein (1981) or Doom Eternal?

 

There is one year between Wolf 3D and Doom.

 

Doom 2 is just the same as Doom despite being from the next year. Only with added enemies, item, weapon. It is not any more advanced.

 

Even Strife from the year 1996 uses the same engine as Doom, let alone Heretic and Hexen. Why would you compare 1981 with 2019?

 

21 hours ago, PsychEyeball said:

I feel like asking this is the same as saying "Is Super Mario Bros 3 more advanced and complex than Super Mario Bros 1"? Of course the followup game from the same studio will be more advanced.

 

For instance, there's no way that the developers of Final Fantasy 7 would look at their work and say: "Our next game should play exactly like Final Fantasy 1 and go back to flat 2D sprites, barely feature any storytelling or have functionnal menus that explain how things work". Of course game developers will want to aim higher and be more ambitious with each game they make. 

But Doom 2 is the same as Doom with added enemies, item, weapon.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Technicolor