Why do so many people dislike Doom II?

[dew]

Doom 2 is superior in every way and many people are just unenlightened plebs. Doom 1 design is overrated and completely falls apart in e3 where they tried to do something different. It only ever worked because of the limited bestiary in the first place, put one mancubus (a magnificent area-controlling beast otherwise) in d1's hallways and you get instant insufferable slog.

Feel free to fite me for your fetid falsehoods!

[AD_79]

Gonna have to side with dew here. Doom 1 gameplay to me is just boring and slow. The Doom II additions are what make it fun for me.

[Pencil of Doom]

Level-wise and music-wise Doom II isn't as good as UDoom, but it still has some good maps and music in it and the new monsters are a really good adition to it, in particular the Revenant(because skeleton lover), the Mancubus is a neat monster too, tough to fight and very deadly and the Arch-Vile, another fav of mine, overall what D2 lacks in levels and music it compensates with its new monsters and of course the beloved SSG which is a effective and devastating weapon.
And also don't forget that Doom 2 is the most modded of all Doom games.

[Graf Zahl]

dew said:

Doom 2 is superior in every way and many people are just unenlightened plebs.

Feel free to fite me for your fetid falsehoods!

With pleasure.

Some people are self-inflated snobs who consider their own opinion an absolute truth. :P


Doom 2 only gets good through custom levels. If there only was the original game I'd have stopped playing it more than 20 years ago.

[vadrig4r]

Graf Zahl said:

What bothered me most about Doom 2 was the inept texture use in the city levels.
Making a city out of some ill-fitting stock textures was just one big fail. They should have invested a bit more effort here.

Sandy Petersen and supposedly realistic locations also didn't work and added to the disappointment. He was fine for some abstract environments that are not supposed to resemble anything that really exists - but none of his Doom 2 levels did the level name much justice.

I think this was my gripe too. I still love Doom II but the overall feel of the mapset seemed to lack to lack the inspiration and coherence of Doom and Thy Flesh Consumed, substituting it with 'just throw greater numbers of tougher monsters at 'em'. I can understand why people would enjoy that more though.

For me these points definitely don't amount to dislike, Doom II is still a great expansion pack to one of the best FPS games of all time. Oh and the SSG is still my favourite weapon from any game so that was a hugely welcome addition.

[nxGangrel]

dew said:

Doom 2 is superior in every way and many people are just unenlightened plebs. Doom 1 design is overrated and completely falls apart in e3 where they tried to do something different. It only ever worked because of the limited bestiary in the first place, put one mancubus (a magnificent area-controlling beast otherwise) in d1's hallways and you get instant insufferable slog.

Feel free to fite me for your fetid falsehoods!

Okay, I will...

Doom 2 falls flat on it's face on execution, and some people have the mental equivalent of an erectile dysfunction. Plus your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elder berries.

Doom 1 had better architecture, more fun and fluent levels, that didn't look like they were under construction. D2's saving grace was it's new monsters, mcgee, and the ssg. Regardless it was a mapset of mostly boring, bland, and uninspired levels and music.

Bringest them oneth

[Lila Feuer]

2013-: The time Doom II became overrated?

I would say two words; Sandy Peterson. But that's only half the problem.

Yes the fact that it's less colorful and the music is far less sinister/creepy/urgent like the original do harm D2's design and atmosphere IMO but among the biggest offenses is the fact the Earth setting is poorly portrayed. We had a better looking city level in LameDuke, which existed the same year as D2. There was also Quarantine which had a fantastic looking dystopian/post-apoc city environment. Also the same year as D2.

The seven new monsters, new weapon and new power-up are D2's highlights and have improved upon the formula in the original. I'd say a major D1 con is that it's too easy because of the lack of D2 monsters. But map-wise many fans have done D2 greater justice since 1995's Memento Mori and onward to this day.

And lastly, while it may be a continuation of the story from the original, Doom II to me just feels like an expansion pack rather than a full-fledged sequel. Look at the sequels for games like Command & Conquer and Warcraft, or Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter, the second entry in these franchises were a significant leap. But I also get the feeling id may of been pressed for time and that's why D2 isn't as feature-heavy or as polished as the original.

[Doomkid]

If Doom2 had slightly better texturing, we wouldn't be having this discussion, as the map designs are far more interesting, the SSG is awesome, the final boss isn't boring as hell and the new monsters add a whole lot more variety to the gameplay.

The only thing I'll ever grant Doom1 over Doom2 is the soundtrack. In all honesty though, I see them as two halves of an awesome whole.

[t3hPoundcake]

You have to keep in mind that the Doom games were pushed out pretty quick, when you think about it. As with most games now days custom maps are what really pushes the limits. For me it's the map design, it's thematic and sometimes comical, it's pretty to look at but they clearly didn't spend as much time as they should have to really perfect the design and utilize all the engine was capable of. I always thought Doom64 is what Doom 2 should have been, but more fast paced since Doom 2 was a PC game. I think that Doom 2 is sort of a "look what we can do" type design aspect instead of being heavily focused on a story line or concept. Most of the maps have become meme and cult icons instead of seriously regarded level design concepts, whereas when you look at Doom 1, in particular Romero's levels, they all have a consistent theme, they follow a logical path of progression, and they still have great level of detail and they utilize space so effectively with monster placement, you have a lot of maps in Doom 2 that just have a big area and they throw some monsters in there with nothing too special. Thats my onion.

[dew]

Graf Zahl said:

Some people are self-inflated snobs who consider their own opinion an absolute truth. :P

After all these years, you finally said something worthy of your custom title.

nxGangrel said:

Doom 1 had better architecture, more fun and fluent levels, that didn't look like they were under construction. D2's saving grace was it's new monsters, mcgee, and the ssg. Regardless it was a mapset of mostly boring, bland, and uninspired levels and music.

I disagree. The vast majority of e2 and e3 of d1 is a convoluted mess. The "random rooms & hallways" is so boring that all of those maps are easily interchangeable and their only distinguishing feature tends to be the garishness of Petersen's texturing - because oh yes, true believers, he did most of d1 as well. A little fact d1 fans like to forget when they bash Sandy's more daring and inventive mapping experiments in d2.

Doom 1 maps look like dungeons from oldschool RPG games. They're a mess of rooms and hallways with very little distinctive features. Doom 2 attempted architecture - and people are disappointed that it's not, uh, architectury enough, I guess. I got more lost in d1 than I ever got in d2, too. The sheer combination of E3M2 + E3M3 should be enough to scare people away from gaming altogether.

[baja blast rd.]

Darklordrobert said:

Doom 2 feels a bit more gimmicky in its level design IMO, with levels like Tricks and Traps, Barrels o'Fun, O of Destruction, The Chasm and more.
I can imagine that some people prefer Ultimate Doom levels which gave more a sense of place over Doom 2's more abstract levels that revolve about certain gimmicks.

I like both games equally, Doom 1 for it's atmosphere and level design and Doom 2 for the action, the new monsters and the Super Shotgun.

Using 'gimmick' as a pejorative to refer to creative level design where the gameplay revolves around a unifying concept is a Doom communityism that makes basically no sense.

[Lila Feuer]

t3hPoundcake said:

I always thought Doom64 is what Doom 2 should have been

When you put it like that it would actually work.

Doom 64 Story said:

"Your fatigue was enormous, the price for encountering pure evil. Hell was a place no mortal was meant to experience. Stupid military doctors: their tests and treatments, were of little help. In the end, what did it matter - it was all classified and sealed. The nightmares continued. Demons, so many Demons; relentless, pouring through.

Far Away...

The planetary policy was clear. An absolute quarantine was guaranteed by apocalyptic levels of radiation. The empty dark corridors stand motionless, abandoned. The installations sealed.

The Present...

A long forgotten relay satellite barely executing, decayed by years of bombarding neutrons, activates and sends its final message to Earth. The satellites message was horrific, from the planetary void there came energy signatures unlike anything sampled before.

The classified archives are opened. The military episodes code named "DOOM" were not actually completed. A single entity with vast rejuvenation powers, masked by the extreme radiation levels, escaped detection. In its crippled state, it systematically altered decaying dead carnage back into corrupted living tissue.

The mutations are devastating. The Demons have returned even stronger and more vicious than before. As the only experienced survivor of the DOOM episode, your commission is re-activated. Your assignment is clear: MERCILESS EXTERMINATION."

Doom II: The Absolution?

[DoomzRules]

If there were recoloured demons with different names and different attributes that would be interesting.

If there were more Gothic-Hellish themed levels that would also have been cool too.

If there were more gameplay features that would have been cool like secondary fire modes, stuff like that.

But there is a couple mods that remedy my pain. Colourful Hell, OMG Weapons and Monsters!, Scythe 2, etc.etc.etc.

Nonetheless though, I would have focused on presenting a clean polished feel for Doom II, I would have divided it up into three episodes (like the original), I would have used some assets from the Doom Bible and incorporated them into the game, I would make it so Lost Souls can reanimate dead corpses, I would incorporate secondary firemodes, I would implement the unused gore assets that John Romero made, and I would probably make the game a bit more gory somehow (maybe detailed gibs like Beautiful Doom.), I would also add in an uncyberified Cyberdemon (Superdemon from Realm667) as well as the Cyber Mastermind. :3

That's what I would have done so yah.

[Fonze]

rdwpa said:

Using 'gimmick' as a pejorative to refer to creative level design where the gameplay revolves around a unifying concept is a Doom communityism that makes basically no sense.

Thank you.

I think for many people it comes down to the disappointing excess of browns and our inability to see maps like Downtown as anything aside from an abstract, flat mess. Also as rdwpa said plus what he replied to, the levels became more concept-based and environmental hazards were used more often; this combined with the tougher, more dynamic enemies forced players to think a bit more about the way in which they approached various situations. Doom 2 also had much longer levels and confused many players due to the combination of length and abstractness's effect on memory, like my older brother. He liked Doom 1; I liked Doom 2. Then I got Final Doom years later and he liked Plutonia while I liked TNT. Kinda funny similarities to be drawn there.

Totally unrelated, but I've been playing through The DOOM Tribute Project recently added to /idgames and levels like Downtown were very nicely done.

[Li'l devil]

I think the main reason of why, imo, Doom 1 maps' design is better than Doom 2 maps' design is texturing. Doom 1 maps are just so colorful and unique looking and Doom 2 maps are really bland in comparison. Atleast to me, abstractness doesn't really matter. Gameplay-wise Doom 2 maps are better, though.

[nxGangrel]

dew said:

I disagree. The vast majority of e2 and e3 of d1 is a convoluted mess. The "random rooms & hallways" is so boring that all of those maps are easily interchangeable and their only distinguishing feature tends to be the garishness of Petersen's texturing - because oh yes, true believers, he did most of d1 as well. A little fact d1 fans like to forget when they bash Sandy's more daring and inventive mapping experiments in d2.

I choose my counter attack argument spell...

"The vast majority of e2 and e3 of d1 is a convoluted mess" you mean like the vast majority of Sandy's Doom 2 maps? Sandy changed the "random rooms & hallways" with "random open areas and textures" that looked like I made them when I was Twelve.
And oh yes "true belieber", I'm aware he made most of Doom 1. And for some one who was hired ten weeks before the game was released and had to make two episodes, he did a decent job. Compared to the almost year's worth of being at Id.

And no, I didn't forget Sandy's "more daring and inventive mapping experiments" was in Doom 2, that doesn't mean they were completely good.

dew said:

Doom 1 maps look like dungeons from oldschool RPG games. They're a mess of rooms and hallways with very little distinctive features. Doom 2 attempted architecture - and people are disappointed that it's not, uh, architectury enough, I guess. I got more lost in d1 than I ever got in d2, too.

Ahem, Romero and Mcgee "attempted architecture". Sandy attempted LSD. lolz

In all seriousness, not all of Doom 2 is "not architectury enough" or whatever, there are a bunch a levels that look nice, there are just a lot of areas that look... bizarre. Or just plain.

And, that's just you. Not every one has the same gameplay experience.

dew said:

The sheer combination of D1 + D2 Levels* should be enough to scare people away from gaming altogether.

You're welcome.


Any way, I don't mean to rip on Sandy like he's the epitome of bad mappers. I just think a lot of the level's he's made wasn't executed well, even though they (most of them) were fun to play. To me it's just more of an eye sore in Doom 2 because of the openness and the texturing some what. I apologize to all the Petersen fans I may have upset.

[Breezeep]

I believe both games are fine, though I still prefer Doom 2 because of it's expanded bestiary and the addition of the super shotgun. Though, I kinda wish that Doom 2 had some of the textures used in D1.

[Doomkid]

ChekaAgent said:

I think the main reason of why, imo, Doom 1 maps' design is better than Doom 2 maps' design is texturing. Doom 1 maps are just so colorful and unique looking and Doom 2 maps are really bland in comparison. Atleast to me, abstractness doesn't really matter. Gameplay-wise Doom 2 maps are better, though.

People often make this mistake, but texturing and level design are two different pieces of the pie. E1 arguably has the best texture usage of any iwad, but that doesn't mean it has the best design.

To essentially echo dew, e2 and e3 are just flat out gross to look at in terms of garish texture usage. Some people will like that of course, but to my eyes, nothing in Doom2 looks as ugly as most of e3. That's all not to mention how much larger and more open ended D2 maps are by comparison.

People who were anticipating D2 back in the 90's may have been disappointed by the lack of realism in the city maps - that's the only complaint that makes sense to me.

[Li'l devil]

Doomkid said:

To essentially echo dew, e2 and e3 are just flat out gross to look at in terms of garish texture usage. Some people will like that of course, but to my eyes, nothing in Doom2 looks as ugly as most of e3. That's all not to mention how much larger and more open ended D2 maps are by comparison.

Well, then, it looks like I'm one of those people who likes texturing in E2 and E3. Especially in E2, where every map looks unique. E2M3 is full of vines, E2M4 is full of large blue halls, E2M2, M6 and M7 greatly mix sci-fi textures with hellish textures and they look really colourful and weird at the same time (and I like weirdness). It also matches the concept of the episode (transition between base and hell). E3 also looks like it's supposed to look: hell, with all it's fire and flesh textures. The exceptions are E3M3 and E3M8: they look out of place. Especially E3M8: what the fuck was Sandy thinking when he was making it?

And now about Doom 2: I think a lot of textures are overused and there is not enough variety of them. In original Doom there was only one level, that relied on wood & marble texturing: E2M5. In Doom 2 I think nearly half of the levels use this theme, resulting in it's overuse, especially towards the end. I also think that most maps don't have enough texture contrast, like in Doom 1.

Ok, tbh, I haven't fully played Doom 2 in a long time, so maybe I'm mistaking.

About level design (architecture): I prefer Doom 1's cramped labirynthish design more than Doom 2's spacious outdoor areas. Well, it's just my preference. My main problem with outdoor maps like Factory is that.. I just don't where to go in the beginning. And it's also easy to get lost.

[Lila Feuer]

I'll say that I think the first two episodes of D1 were the best, and that Sandy did E2 really well, but Inferno was a mixed bag and I never really liked Thy Flesh Consumed for some reason. It claims to be very hard yet only the first two maps or so are actually hard, but for the wrong reasons (lack of health in the first on UV and the second with hopping lava and clinging to narrow walkways while getting pelted from all directions).

[Noiser]

Inferno is a cool episode to me. Even with some flaws, the idea of bring a chaotic rendition of hell is quite interesting.

[CARRiON]

They're both a mixed bag. Neither one is perfect, at least, not anymore now that we have what we have.

Though, when put side by side, I'd say DOOM 2 is on the uglier side of things. Lots of grey, brown, and dark green. The soundtrack gets on my nerves quickly, minus a few tracks like "Opening To Hell", and the levels are just a bit too abstract for my liking. The difference between McGee and Romero's maps from Sandy's is jarring and very apparent. I guess the poor guy didn't have any guidance and did his best, but man have they aged poorly. I enjoy playing McGee's and Romero's, and I like Romero's use of colors.

On the gameplay side of things, DOOM is great and DOOM 2 just expands on that. Not much else to say. It's kinda funny because looking back DOOM 2 feels more like an expansion rather then a full blown sequel.

What makes DOOM great today though, isn't even the original games anymore, but the community surrounding it. Hands down this game has one of the largest and longest going communities, and has sprouted fourth some of the most creative individuals. It's pretty awesome to say the least.

[Lila Feuer]

I forgot to mention, the Icon of Sin is a pretty stupid 'boss', only second to Quake's Shub-Niggurath in terms of sheer lameness. The Spider Mastermind may of been the brains behind the attacks in the original but it definitely lacked brawn, the Cyberdemon came off as the true authority of hell, the general of its armies and it showed via its physical strength and heavy firepower.

In D2 we come upon 'the largest demon you've ever seen' but it ends up being a wall. So disappointing. D64 definitely had the better final boss with the Motherdemon, it was still something you killed traditionally like the Cybie/Spiderdemon but it was unique and certainly served a purpose.

[CARRiON]

Cyanosis said:

The Spider Mastermind may of been the brains behind the attacks in the original but it definitely lacked brawn, the Cyberdemon came off as the true authority of hell, the general of its armies and it showed via its physical strength and heavy firepower.

Keep in mind, these bosses where made during a time when FPS was still new and most people couldn't play them like they do now. Most people couldn't even wrap their head around using a keyboard and a mouse to play at the same time.

The Spider Mastermind is a push over now, but for the first time, completely unaware of what an FPS even is, that shit was scary. The Cyberdemon is easily circle strafed, but back then, you were too busy pissing yourself to even get close to him. Now any DOOM veteran doesn't even bat an eye when they see 5 of them in the same room.

The very first time seeing the Icon's giant ugly face, it was like "woah... this is it, it's final boss time...", now I play through it again and again and I think "laaaaaaaaame".

[Chewyninja69]

Pavera said:

Eh, people who hate on D2 just don't get it man. Doom II is art. The levels are pure expressions of the designers at their fullest creative output -- they didn't have to clean up a bunch of boring Tom Hallways so they could bust out two more lazy episodes in order to fill mail orders. Yeah I know about MAP10.

Doom 2 is easily the purest dooming experience of the Id iwads. It's harder, the levels are bigger and loopier and more creative, and it features MAP24: The Chasm which is the greatest map of all time. There's nothing more to say here.

I thought you were being serious with this post until you said 'and it features MAP24: The Chasm which is the greatest map of all time'. I seriously laughed out loud, posted my response and went to bed. Thanks for the laugh.

[Lila Feuer]

CARRiON said:

Now any DOOM veteran doesn't even bat an eye when they see 5 of them in the same room.

I blame Hell Revealed for desensitizing me to repeated Cyberdemon attacks, when I see one in a PWAD these days I just go 'oh, you again', like the cool bad dudes do in fiction when in the face of great danger.

[Jan]

At the time, like almost everyone else, I thought Doom II was the best thing since sliced bread and even cooler than Doom I. In hindsight though, it really hasn't aged as gracefully as Doom I, and a lot of the new features it introduced are problematic.

So let's talk about the things I dislike about it.

1. The level design is lackluster

Most levels look rather bland and uninspired. There's no overarching theme binding them together like in Doom I. Despite the attempts to mimic real world places, the levels never convey a sense of location. There's no sense of wonder, and I never feel like I want to explore more of this place. It just becomes about "beating the level", "finding all the secrets", "killing all the monsters". You're battling the game logic instead of trying to survive on a lost moon base.

People sometimes attribute this to Sandy Petersen, but I think Romero's levels are just as bad in Doom II. Only some of American McGee's levels are somewhat memorable in my opinion. It's not just the level design either, but the general art and texturing as well. If you look at the unique Doom II resources, they feel a bit second rate to the Doom I ones. There's nothing as iconic as BROWN1 or STARTANX/STARGX.

I also feel like they started to go past the limits of what the Doom engine is capable of, and I don't mean technical limits but the limit of what still looks good. Doom looks at its best with levels that are medium sized, indoor and with limited access to the outside. Let's face it, large outdoor levels look like ass.

Natural areas look poor because you can inevitably see the tiling of the various sp_rockx textures, and canyons and caves shouldn't have only perfectly vertical walls.

Seeing large outdoor city levels may have been neat in 1994, but they just looks ridiculous to me now.

2. The super shotgun screws up the balance

It used to be that a pack of imps or shotgun sergeants was a challenge, and you had to carefully pick them off one by one, making sure to aim your shot properly especially with imps because they can easily survive a badly aimed shot.

With a SSG though, you can just blap through hordes of lower tier monsters with impunity. It's even more ammo efficient because a SSG shot delivers more damage than two regular shotgun shots.

Don't even get me started on demons and spectres, they get rendered completely useless by the SSG.

To even things out again, they introduced more higher hitpoint monsters, but again, the SSG screws up things here because you hardly ever need to switch away from it in favor of the "heavy" weapons. In Doom I, if you were fighting a baron, what would you use? Depending on the situation you would alternate between shotgun, rocket launcher, plasma gun or even the BFG if you want a quick kill. In Doom II, 99% of the time you'd just use the SSG.

Oh, and you get the SSG already in MAP02, not even in a secret.

3. Some new enemies are annoying

Case #1: Pain elementals. Does anyone even like them? I wonder what the thought process was when they created it. So we have the Lost Soul, easily the most annoying Doom I enemy, let's create a big blob that's hard to kill that spawns an infinite number of them?

Case #2: Chaingunners. They are just unfair. They deliver way too much damage for a hitscan enemy and are too hard to kill. A single shotgun blast, even perfectly placed at close range doesn't reliably kill them, so again, you have to resort to the SSG.

And then you have those incredibly annoying chaingunner traps where a closet opens up behind you and before you even have time to react, chaingunners start to tear you apart. I guess id thought we weren't using the savegame function enough.

Equally annoying is the "chaingunner on a far away ledge picking you apart" trick (I'm looking at you, MAP15). Bleh!

If you're a level designer and you use one of those tricks, rest assured that I'm not going to reload a savegame. I'm going to quit, delete your wad and then overwrite the disk sector where it was ten times with a random combination of zeroes and ones.

Case #3: Arachnotrons. Their continuous plasma stream moves too quick to dodge and is too punishing. I think the issue here is that with regards to threat they are too "binary". They are either completely unfair, or, if you can dodge behind cover, no threat at all.

I think that an enemy should be threatening, but taking some damage doesn't have to be the end of the world, requiring a load from savegame. If you get hit by a baron, it hurts, but it doesn't grind you up like the arachnotron. You can take it like a man and soldier on.

Case #4: The Mancubus. This enemy just doesn't work for me. It's ugly, slow, and once you learn to do the little Mancubus dance, you can easily dodge their fireballs. Hell, you can even stun it with a chaingun.

That leaves the Revenant, which I do like gameplay wise, but it's a bit of an ugly tall mf. The Archvile is a pretty neat trick too, if used correctly (and sparingly!). It's very threatening, but it's not completely unfair. The Hell Knight works too, but again, too easy to kill with the SSG.

tl;dr I think the overall lesson here is that taking a good thing and cranking it up to 11 doesn't always produce a better result.

[pavera]

Chewyninja69 said:

I thought you were being serious with this post until you said 'and it features MAP24: The Chasm which is the greatest map of all time'. I seriously laughed out loud, posted my response and went to bed. Thanks for the laugh.

Not sure what you find funny about that. The Chasm is a magnificent map that dares to go places other level designers would have feared to. Sandy didn't want you to have fun, he wanted you to fall off ledges and yell in frustration -- and you probably did.

It's a complete work of art that's probably cited as the "worst map of all time" more so than any other map. It's a bold "fuck you" to players all over the world that could have only happened in a mapset as brash and care-free as Doom II. It's a cocky display of hubris that could have only come from an id Software in perfect synergy at the top of their world domination game. Thank you for The Chasm, Sandy.

[Olroda]

roadworx said:

Why do so many people dislike Doom II?

I think DooM II is a great game, but DooM is even better. In fact, D2 is more like an expansion pack than its own game. Just think of all the recycled stuff! The levels are also uglier, at least when compared with E1.

[Looper]

janvknn said:

At the time, like almost everyone else, I thought Doom II was the best thing since sliced bread and even cooler than Doom I. In hindsight though, it really hasn't aged as gracefully as Doom I, and a lot of the new features it introduced are problematic.

I think it is the opposite. No body even plays doom 1 anymore. If you watch streams, it is always Doom II or Doom II mod. That's the shit people seems to enjoy the most, and I think popularity is a fine argument here. doom 1 is just a downgrade from the "real" Doom.

janvknn said:

There's no sense of wonder, and I never feel like I want to explore more of this place. It just becomes about "beating the level", "finding all the secrets", "killing all the monsters".

I think the opposite about this, too. Too many maps in doom 1 looks the same. You really don't want to wander around in the same looking, tight corners (tubes?) and look for the secrets. Doom II on the other hand offers different looking maps and secrets. Every map in Doom II is unique and unforgettable. Also, the gameplay kicks doom 1's ass.

janvknn said:

Case #2: Chaingunners. They are just unfair. They deliver way too much damage for a hitscan enemy and are too hard to kill. A single shotgun blast, even perfectly placed at close range doesn't reliably kill them, so again, you have to resort to the SSG.

Sorry but shotgun just sucks. Perfectly placed close range shot doesn't reliably kill a single imp!!