What is unfun in 2023, but will be fun in the future?

[NewPointless]

This is a topic I've seen floating around. And with the sun setting on 2023 and the dawn rising on 2024, I think it might be fun to discuss.

"What do you think is considered unfun, bad, or bullshit today, but in the future, it will be considered fun?"

 

It could be many years from now.

 

If you know me, you probably know that I've been making Super Mario World hacks for some years now. Back in the day, people used to savescum every challenging hack. Since everyone was savescumming, creators would introduce obscure glitches, cryptic puzzles, and extreme precision to get any kind of challenge out of it. RNG, blind, or unfair obstacles were all on the table. If you could just reload on your emulator, creators had to go to the ends of the earth to make players experience something new, something challenging.

 

One day a brave speedrunner decided to play an all-time classic that was considered impossible to beat saveless, but he did it on his console, without saves. Now this hack is considered quite easy in comparison to many new challenge hacks that are released.

 

Now maybe this won't happen in Doom, because saving is built into the game. It's not an added feature that you find in some source ports. But objectively there is a major change in the design meta when saving becomes assumed: there's no pressure to execute because there's nothing to lose if you can just rewind or quickload.

 

I think people get so obsessed with difficulty that no one is engaging with the map in the same way. In this situation, the amount of skill a player puts into beating a wad on a certain difficulty level means less and less.

 

And this is not something that players just need to kick themselves over. Mappers and players would need to march hand in hand to design around this: a seamless play experience that's the same level of challenge for all players. Particularly map length would have to be reined in, but if BLIND and saveless play is expected, then maps would have to unfold over time with signposting and telegraphing. You couldn't begin a fight with an eye for how it ends.

 

I guess the answer to my own question isn't clear. I think that in the future, playing Doom wads blind and saveless will be considered the standard.

 

Maybe I'm just saying this because I made a wad that's meant to be played blind and saveless, because I prefer that. So flame away I guess.

 

But what are your hot takes for the new year?

[Cynical]

Are you completely unfamiliar with both demo-running and the FDA scene?  Seamless play has been the "standard" in many circles for most of Doom's life, and blind + saveless play is quite common in some quarters.

[NewPointless]

Yeah I know of demos. Maybe my point is that blind + saveless seems relatively rare to me. That you haven't experienced a wad until you play it saveless. That experiencing it for the first time should be a seamless experience.

 

And if there is a large number of people that play blind + saveless, then I'll admit I'm not familiar with them.

[Cynical]

If you've been hanging around threads such as the Doomworld Megawad Club, you've probably seen people referencing it, but you might not be familiar with the terminology the Doom scene uses.  "FDA" stands for "first demo attempt", but that's a bit misleading; it's not the first time you try to record a demo on a map, but rather, it's recording a demo (which, by definition, means playing without saves) the first time you ever play a map.

[NewPointless]

maybe I'll check out the megawad club. What's your spicy take for the new year?

[Xaser]

It is absolutely 100% not a requirement to make a map blind/saveless friendly, now or in the future. There's been a lot of community pushback on this recently, for good reason, though IMO the problem is a bit overstated (i.e. it's really just a vocal minority from outside the community who think it needs to be that way). Just carry on making cool stuff, and it'll all pass.

[roadworx]

i think you need to spend a bit more time in the community, heh. playing blind runs without saves is pretty common; certainly not standard, but that's only natural when there's a variety of skill levels and ways of enjoying the game.

Edited December 31, 2023 by roadworx

[Decay]

Reading bad posts has been unfun in 2023 because the bad posts don't know they are bad. May 2024 grant us bad posts that are at least self-aware and delivered in a comedic way.

[Fonze]

As cynical stated, blind play is fairly normal and is what is intended by the term FDA, though I would also note that recording demos doesn't necessarily negate the use of saves. Some map formats allow for saving during demo recording, though it's a bit more of a hassle to do so and maybe not what is typically seen in a generic fda. But all to the power of players to enjoy what they're doing.

 

To the point of the thread, I can see how mario levels and doom levels have quite a few differences: notably in the time it can take to complete them, as well as the actual penalty for failure. In mario, you respawn at the last checkpoint or level start, most room transitions are checkpoints, and not much stands to be lost. I suppose for this we'd have to cherry pick examples, but if we were to compare a megawad of tiny maps to a mario rom hack, you'd prolly find a similar distribution between the two, simply given all the checkpoints and the smaller time between them. That comparison goes a bit out the window with larger maps though, since time between checkpoints and available checkpoints diminishes. It'd be like committing to a deathless, full rom hack run... but people have done just that, in both communities, especially with how ingrained speedrunning is to both. We've had 20+ years to get better at playing our games and what was once difficult is considered fairly tame these days. Likely something that can be noted for any game with long-term modding communities. So after talking myself in a circle, I'm not sure if we would note too many major differences. But I'm sure that as a mario mapper, you can relate to the statement that as you improved at playing the game, the difficulty of your blind, saveless maps has likely gone up.

 

If I had to wager a guess as to what isn't popular now but will be popular in the future, hmmm... I'm gonna go with pain elementals and rockets. Every map in the unforeseen future will have a difficulty mode solely dedicated to facerocketing fun times 🚀💥🫠 where the only countable enemies will be pain elementals, and all weapon pickups replaced with rocket launchers. Leave a few ammo pickups the same just to make people question how much of a commit to a horrible idea this map is.

[DuckReconMajor]

I am down for challenges in video games, but I have to really love the game/level first. I play without saves on maps I really want to feel and connect with more.

 

If I am told a map is intended to play without saves, I will 100% honor that. But there's always the chance I'll lose a bunch of progress and move on to something else. And that's fine! It's a high risk/reward proposition, and it won't hit for everyone, that's just the nature of it.

 

Only thing I'd have to point out though is that in this saveless case, 'blind' experience is very hard to throw in there as well.

In the aforementioned scenario, where I die and take a break from the WAD, I am not going to put effort into avoiding spoilers. With experiences that are meant to be enjoyed over a long period of time, it's a simple reality that you are probably going to see parts of it secondhand somewhere on the internet.

 

to answer OP question: I think in the future fewer people will try to "final destination, no items, fox only" their way out of RNG in the game. Trying to turn Doom into Guitar Hero is exhausting and i think it burns people out. worm\V/wood is a huge embrace of that and I want to see more

[NewPointless]

15 minutes ago, DuckReconMajor said:

"final destination, no items, fox only"

 

What does this mean?

[DuckReconMajor]

From Smash Bros, where competitive players turn off all the items and play on the most boring stages to remove RNG and see who is the most skilled

[NewPointless]

That sounds like a cool idea. How does Worm\W/ood go about that? (or NOT doing that, I should say)

Edited December 31, 2023 by NewPointless

[DuckReconMajor]

Probably don't need spoiler but just in case. You should definitely give wormwood5 a try!

Spoiler

wormwood5 uses cl9 trickery to randomize things like item locations and even which path through the map you have to take. It's written about here https://rbkz.blogspot.com/2023/11/cl9-randomizer-mechanisms.html

 

[NewPointless]

That's really cool I've been wondering if something like that is possible.

 

Maybe I misread the Doom community and what people really want is more freedom, non-linearity, dynamic challenges. Mario is also going through a similar renaissance, whereas the end of savestate play was more like 7-8 years ago.

[slugger]

There's not much love for the 30-second or 5-minute doors, because they tend to create unmarked unwinnable situations. People forget those tags exist, so it's even less likely for them to figure out what happened. But if you warn people, it spoils the surprise! I imagine someone will eventually figure out how to walk the line and make a wad themed around using those doors inventively, so players are AWARE it will happen but aren't quite sure how. You could create some unique but fair challenges.

[fruity lerlups]

saveless play has always been the standard for DSDA for years now.

[Trov]

5 hours ago, slugger said:

There's not much love for the 30-second or 5-minute doors, because they tend to create unmarked unwinnable situations. People forget those tags exist, so it's even less likely for them to figure out what happened. But if you warn people, it spoils the surprise! I imagine someone will eventually figure out how to walk the line and make a wad themed around using those doors inventively, so players are AWARE it will happen but aren't quite sure how. You could create some unique but fair challenges.

Sigil II features one such secret in (almost?) every level.

I think that's probably one of the best ways to use it.

 

Quote

One day a brave speedrunner decided to play an all-time classic that was considered impossible to beat saveless, but he did it on his console, without saves. Now this hack is considered quite easy in comparison to many new challenge hacks that are released.

I think one of the big distinctions is SMW at least gives you several lives. You have some chances to screw up. in Doom if you don't save you have none, unless it's short levels.

If you die on a 30min+ Doom level and had no saves, it just sucks! Especially if you've aced every fight up to the one you lost.

Edited January 1, 2024 by Trov

[Cynical]

2 hours ago, Trov said:

If you die on a 30min+ Doom level and had no saves, it just sucks! Especially if you've aced every fight up to the one you lost.

Doom gives you a generous lifebar, so one mistake won't game over you in nearly every case.  People beat Capcom arcade beat-em-ups on one credit, and some of those are over an hour long.

[Trov]

Sure, but in those, levels are still very short, and you can put in a coin and continue from the same level if you run out of lives. And you can bet people who 1cc arcade games before emulators and savestates did that a great many times. Maybe they lost their 1cc challenge but they can continue playing without having lost significant progress.

The only thing analogous to that in Doom on long levels is of course: a save.

 

Also, 1ccing an arcade game is a self imposed challenge and not something an average player is expected to do, and the latter is what the OP is singling out with blind saveless runs to be "the standard".

 

I also don't think having generous health is analogous to multiple lives. Often when you die in Doom it's because you got yourself boxed in somewhere and you die regardless of how much health you have because you have no opportunity to escape. It's often necessary to have to start over a fight that went bad. Meanwhile if you lose a life in a kaizo hack you get to start the room over and give yourself better positioning.

 

I really think that having very short levels is the only way to make starting over a level enjoyable for a casual player on their first playthroughs, if you really don't want the player to be using saves.

 

If it were to be the standard for the average player, my envisioning is it would have to be something like N / N++, where the player is presented a huge selection of very short levels (some minutes at most) that they don't have to tackle in a specific order. A port could hypothetically present levels that way, but it would take a whole new degree of in-game WAD and level selection that no ports have yet done.

Edited January 4, 2024 by Trov

[Faceman2000]

On 12/31/2023 at 4:13 PM, NewPointless said:

"What do you think is considered unfun, bad, or bullshit today, but in the future, it will be considered fun?"

My maps.

[DNSKILL5]

Many WADs people say suck now will suddenly be loved when the nostalgia pills kick in.  Suddenly the design flaws and whatnot people wrote entire essays on will be replaced with these same people saying all of those things are what makes it work and blah blah blah. It just shows people’s tastes and opinions change with time more often than one would admit. 

[NoWits]

Arguing over saveless demo runs was not fun in 2023, but appreciating a thread derailing itself before even the first reply sure is fun in 2024.

[Aaron Blain]

I think the IWADs other than DOOM2 will continue to mature and be appreciated on their own terms.

[Uncle 80]

I have been playing saveless for many years because I enjoy the challenge of it, and how it gets me a little more "pumped" to survive tricky situations. But when I started playing the BTSX3 demo this autumn I started using saves again like after the first half of a map, or similar milestones. These modern maps are just too big to be played in one sitting for me, and replaying the first half of such big maps and dying in the same tricky fight at the second half over and over again gets old pretty fast. (but map01 and map05 were both excellent for saveless, I must say)

 

Edit: I almost forgot why I started doing saveless initially - the reason was of course how all the "good" wads broke the savegame buffer in the original .exe - and trying to save your progress in e.g. Requiem only to have the game insta-crash was how saveless began for me - and many others, I'm sure.

Edited January 4, 2024 by Uncle 80

[Ravendesk]

platforming

[Cynical]

20 hours ago, Trov said:

And you can bet people who 1cc arcade games before emulators and savestates did that a great many times.

Depends on where they were.  In Japan, the culture has always been "one credit, if you game over, you don't continue."  Most "experienced" arcade-goers in the west did the same thing, since it lets you get a lot more playtime/credit; continue-heavy play has generally been the domain of kids and casuals.

Also, 1ccing an arcade game is a self imposed challenge and not something an average player is expected to do, and the latter is what the OP is singling out with blind saveless runs to be "the standard".

Again, simply not true -- tons of classic arcade games only show you the ending if you do it on one credit.  Even ones that are derided as "quarter munchers" frequently are this way; for instance, people say the Capcom brawlers were quarter-munchers, but Final Fight only shows its "true" ending if 1cc'd, and you can only see the final stage in Shadow Over Mystara or Battle Circuit if you've 1cc'd to that point (and Battle Circuit has some more criteria on top of that which you have to succeed at).  One-credit play was always the expected "norm" for Japanese arcade developers.

I also don't think having generous health is analogous to multiple lives. Often when you die in Doom it's because you got yourself boxed in somewhere and you die regardless of how much health you have because you have no opportunity to escape.

There are arcade games that have generous health and only one life (the Capcom D&D brawlers both come to mind), but there are also plenty of games where dying once will typically end your credit, even if you have multiple lives.  For instance, if you die in a bad spot in Final Fight, you're frequently going to just get killed immediately on your respawn, and in a lot of classic shmups, the power-loss from one death means that recovery is essentially impossible.

[Trov]

5 hours ago, Cynical said:

continue-heavy play has generally been the domain of kids and casuals.

Well, there is exactly my point.

Most players, including of Doom, are gonna be those.

Hence, saveless will never be the "standard" method of play as long as there are long levels.

 

Maybe the standard for speedrunners and people who post FDAs on doomworld, but those are without doubt nowhere near the majority.

 

Quote

One-credit play was always the expected "norm" for Japanese arcade developers.

I don't think the existence of 1cc-only true endings necessarily implies this. If anything I think developers believed most players would NOT be able to 1cc the game.

 

Is becoming a Grand Master "the norm" for playing TGM 3?

Edited January 5, 2024 by Trov

[Shepardus]

The norm for arcades, Japanese or otherwise, was that most people never saw the majority of the game. Unless you want the same for your WAD, I don't think there's any point in enforcing a "1CC" style of play. People already have plenty of options for playing that way and engaging with like-minded individuals, as evidenced by DSDA.

Edited January 5, 2024 by Shepardus

[Captain POLAND]

Playing Okuplok on Nightmare