New Doom Engine Info

[kristus]

I totally agree with your point though: I see people take 3 direct rocket hits in Quake3, and I think, wtf?

Well if you consider that the rockets in Q3 is very small fire alot faster etc. It's not that strange.

BTW I've taken 2 direct hits with the RL in Doom. What's with that?

[Guest BLAZE]

Did that serve any purpose other than to irritate those of us that are actually enjoying this thread?

nope. sorry. Probably should have edited that post first. It's been a bad day.

Actually, you may aswell know that I'm a huge fan of Doom and FPS in general.
It's not that I intend to upset people all the time I just like to see these threads used constructively and I rarely see it.
I've been coming to doomworld for ages and every time there's a new topic of conversation we get the same old shite.
So I'm sorry it was time to offer an opinion.

Come on, you guys are probably reasonably intelligent. Offer us a little more than where we first did a rocket jump or which is the best game out of the id catalogue.
We've seen it all before. Talk content, talk design, be enthusiastic.. thanks to Jim Bentler for at least talking like somebody actually in the business.

for what it's worth I for one would like to see some serious deformation in the new engine. Sick of blasting rockets down a corridor only to find that the walls are completely indestructable. Now that'd be nice. Imagine having nowhere left to turn in a room full of demons and all you've got is a single rocket. Bam, hole in the wall and your off down a different path! A designers nightmare but effective none the less.

[kristus]

I'm not aware of if you know that this actually was music recorded before, 1989.

What is this?! You gonna wear this to the show?. You're gonna wear the shirt of the band you're gonna go see... Don't be that guy.

[kristus]

Yeah I've been thinking of that aswell. Destructable walls that is. The problem with games that have them like Duke3d. is that only some are destructable. Wich makes it even stupider than if there was no walls, that was destructible. (That wall was destuctable w/o problem but the other wall that was exactly the same was not, Ok.) Sure some walls may be hard to penetrate but, the sad thing is that you can't blast your way through house walls and the likes. (Imagine doing like Jean Clause va damme in uni, sols)In hexen 2 there were the nice addition to be able to smash everything that was made out of wood though.

[Guest BLAZE]

the sad thing is that you can't blast your way through house walls and the likes
that's a fair point but reality is out the window here already. As far as the duke3d example goes I agree it was daft that the smash-wall rule didn't apply everywhere. All or nothing you might say.
I guess the way to do it is to take the emphasis off the walls themselves and introduce a weapon that is purely capable of blasting a way through a wall but ammo for it is rare. A kind of ThumpGun.
That way you conserve and wait for that moment when your back's against the wall.
Weakspots are a possibility but they've been well exploited. (Eternal Doom being a fine example.)
I hope that the game's designers allow the environment to play a bigger part in the game experience than weve seen previously.
Hell I don't care if every hole in the wall looks the same I just want to be able to play havoc with the environment.

BTW, before anybody mentions it. I believe that smashable glass was handled completely differently to what I'm suggesting here.

[Jon]

yah quake 2 was an enormous improvement on quake, but halflife blew them both away.

[Guest BLAZE]

Half life was stunning.
I believe that it was a success because the design was tight. By that I mean that a firm gameworld was established from the outset and the characters all had a part to play.
The entire game was designed like a mini movie and despite the wildly fantastic creatures the whole thing was believable.
(Try writing a screenplay with no synopsis or character sheet!)
You got the impression that id was never quite so tight in their design of doom or quake. The gameworlds were fun but largely inconsistent (and let's face it the whole thing was just an engine for a wider agenda -- online competition).
Ok there was an underlying story but that was just out of necessity. The results appeared to bare no resemblance to the original design doc.
I think they will do well to follow the half-life lead and establish the gameworld properly. If only to present us with the cinematic feel that we all want.
Q2 was close but no cigar!

[Law]

I never relised my post at the bottom would spawn such an argument. The play of the Quake games were fine. Quake3 plays great, but for a deathmatch only game there was no imagination what so ever. Same weapons, powerups and fraggin & stuff but nothing new and impressive but the new visual effects. I have to disagree with half-life though. The game ran on rails, just like a movie. Even though those marines were helva funny, there wan't much to hold a persons attetion when they reached the end of SP. Doom2 and Quake I have a lot more imagination in them and gives the player muliple ways though a level. So what if the levels don't
fit together in their visual style. I havn't cryed over it yet. Thats what I really like, where the game is not held back by planning or convention. Where they are just a good lashing of fun.

[fyrestorm]

I HOPE DOOM3 WILL NOT SUCK!

but i already know what does...
YOUR MOM!
ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!
upstairs caco!

[Law]

Grow up people...