Doom 1 or 2?

[Maser]

2 hours ago, Marcaek said:

 

It's actually probably easier than something like map04. AFAIK the early game in doom 2 is the real hurdle for nightmare because of all the zombies. Later maps have more projectile monsters which you can at least have a chance to dodge...

 

I know that there's some newer versions of the original Doom and Doom 2 where Nightmare difficulty has been changed.  From what I remember reading, enemy speed and projectile speed are no longer doubled.  The port I play has the original Nightmare difficulty and let me tell you, dodging enemy projectiles that are 2x speed is not as easy as it sounds. 

[Maser]

10 minutes ago, GoatLord said:

We seem to get "Doom 2's level design sucks" threads every few months and rarely does the OP attempt to dissect what is so lacking. 

 

I may be new here, but certainly not new to forums in general and while these types of threads kind of come off as just threads meant to stir the pot, they do get good discussions started which I feel are healthy for forums whatever the main topic may be. 

[Erick]

Is there some current trend to dislike Doom 2's levels, or really just bash Doom 2 as a whole for the sake of it? I may have a preference with some of the levels from Doom 1/Ultimate Doom, but in terms of replay value, Doom 2 definitely delivers more with its base levels, monsters, and the Super Shotgun. And that isn't taking the countless custom levels made for Doom 2 into account.

[amackert]

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

[Nine Inch Heels]

5 hours ago, doomslayer11122 said:

DooM 2's level design starts getting confusing starting at level 2

At this point I wonder why this topic is getting seriously discussed while this line from the very same person who opened this thread remains almost entirely unchecked... I'm just sayin'.

 

23 minutes ago, Maser said:

The port I play has the original Nightmare difficulty and let me tell you, dodging enemy projectiles that are 2x speed is not as easy as it sounds.

First of, not all projectiles are doubled in speed on NM difficulty: Cyberdemon rockets and rev missiles are just some examples.

 

Secondly, projectiles can be dodged, hitscans can not. Yes projectiles that are twice as fast are harder to evade, that's the point...

 

It's not the maps with loads of imps and cacos that will wreck you on nightmare, it's the early maps with their fuckloads of shitscans that'll ruin your day if you're not quick enough.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Nine Inch Heels

[GarrettChan]

26 minutes ago, Maser said:

I know that there's some newer versions of the original Doom and Doom 2 where Nightmare difficulty has been changed.  From what I remember reading, enemy speed and projectile speed are no longer doubled.  The port I play has the original Nightmare difficulty and let me tell you, dodging enemy projectiles that are 2x speed is not as easy as it sounds. 

I don't know why it seems that you assume Marcaek using a new port (eg: D3 BFG Edition) or something to play the game... or I'm just imagining thing (if so, I apologize for that). It's said that BFG Edition fixed this "Nightmare! = Ultra-Violence -respawn" thing later, so I'm curious whether there's actually a port you're talking about.

 

As you raised an example of Map15 on Nightmare!, I would say Map15 is not really beyond imagination because of an Invul sphere, or maybe other stuff. If you play continously, you even has better weaponry to deal with things. The starting area of Map04 is really rough due to the high density of hitscanners. As someone likes to play a lot of "UV -Fast", I would say the increased speed projectiles seem like a good relaxation compared to the ridiculous hitscan enemies.

[The_SloVinator]

Nothing is maze-like. Neither Doom 1 nor Doom 2. 

Memorization is the key.

[seed]

Nope, I love Doom 2's levels. Different style from Doom 1, and that's perfect.

 

1 hour ago, The_SloVinator said:

Nothing is maze-like. Neither Doom 1 nor Doom 2. 

Memorization is the key.

 

This. Plus, there's so much more complex levels made by modders out there, some radically more confusing than the original games. The originals are very straightforward.

[Marcaek]

9 hours ago, The_SloVinator said:

Nothing is maze-like. Neither Doom 1 nor Doom 2. 

Memorization is the key.

 

Objectively untrue because e3m7 contains a literal honest-to-god cereal box maze :P

[Dragonsbrethren]

11 hours ago, GuyNamedErick said:

Is there some current trend to dislike Doom 2's levels, or really just bash Doom 2 as a whole for the sake of it? I may have a preference with some of the levels from Doom 1/Ultimate Doom, but in terms of replay value, Doom 2 definitely delivers more with its base levels, monsters, and the Super Shotgun. And that isn't taking the countless custom levels made for Doom 2 into account.

Current? Nah, these threads have been around forever.

[Marcaek]

Does it qualify as a tradition yet?

[Deadwing]

TBH I love most of Doom 2 levels, but there are some that are indeed weaker :P (I would say maps 3, 13, 21, 23, 24 and 30)

[seed]

16 hours ago, Doomkid said:

Doom 2 has so much more variety than Doom 1 which is what makes me return to it every couple years for a fresh play through. Some sprawling maps with lots of vertical combat, some small maps that are easy to breeze through, some nonlinear designs that force you to explore, some more straightforward linear maps, some hard as balls (for the time), some a piece of piss. On top of all that you have some super memorable setups like the Baron army VS the Cyber on map08, the Spider VS Cyber on map20, and a final boss that's actually engaging and challenging as opposed to the 'dead in 3 seconds' Spider at the end of Doom 1.

 

Also this so, so much.

 

Both games are great at what they do and have their memorable or iconic moments, but I have never found myself wanting to replay the original game anywhere near as often as I did with Doom 2. The biggest problem of Doom 1 is the lack of variety in the bestiary so it becomes tiring or outright boring very quickly. Doom 2 corrects this major flaw. It has much greater replayability.

[SaladBadger]

i honestly really hope "level 2" was just being used as an exaggeration since it's frankly impossible to get lost in that map. it has a really reasonable flow with a relatively straightforward goal and some stuff off to the side to check out if you want. it's a favorite of mine as far as early game levels go, even if it's far from the best. its probably one of the most linear iwad maps, not maze-like at all heh...

[Cacodemon345]

Doom 2's levels feel ugly. I would rather play other non-ugly megawads nowadays.

[Poncho]

3 minutes ago, Cacodemon345 said:

Doom 2's levels feel ugly. I would rather play other non-ugly megawads nowadays.

Uggh, do I have to explain again? If a map PLAYS well, it should be given a pass. Points down for ugliness, but more points, uh, "up", for being fun to play though (like Suburbs).

 

That's all. I won't elaborate for a second time.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Poncho

[Cacodemon345]

Let me say this: A map that plays well but is extremely ugly enough to make people vomit doesn't deserve a pass.

 

Next time I notice you saying that again, I will simply ignore you.

[Erick]

1 hour ago, Cacodemon345 said:

Let me say this: A map that plays well but is extremely ugly enough to make people vomit doesn't deserve a pass.

Define ugly megawads? Most recent megawads I've seen are as well-crafted and detailed as they can be.

[Liberation]

I think most people only remember episode 1 from Doom in discussions like this, I struggle playing through the later 2. 

 

For the most part I believe that Doom2 maps were pretty solid in design really, a couple of totally rancid maps towards the end but never mind that.

[GarrettChan]

12 minutes ago, GuyNamedErick said:

Define ugly megawads?

Try not to save someone who only gives opinions without actually stating them ;P

 

(Most of these doesn't make sense, don't mind)

 

In my views, so of these opinions may come from somebody else, not originated from the person who talks about them (if this makes sense). Here's an example: I really hated Doom 2 Map24 before. The reason is not I am bad at that map or I really have an opinion about that, but it's just because many people said that map is bad. Eventually I developed my own opinions towards maps, so I'm neutral about Map24 right now.

 

I personally prefer Doom 2 more because of the variety of monsters and the Super Shotgun, so you have more strategic planning going on, but well, talking about mazes, all Doom maps are literally mazes. They're just less mazy than Wolf3D due to more variety of textures or stuff (that's the reason why I don't like Plutonia Map11).

 

[Guest Unregistered account]

14 hours ago, Poncho said:

Uggh, do I have to explain again? If a map PLAYS well, it should be given a pass. Points down for ugliness, but more points, uh, "up", for being fun to play though (like Suburbs).

 

That's all. I won't elaborate for a second time.

I agree with the second sentence, but visual design constitutes a large portion of  enjoyment in a level, particularly when aspects such as environment storytelling, lighting and atmosphere are brought into account.

 

A greybox map containing objects placed with the utmost precision and planning will probably still feel dull and lifeless for many reasons (no, 50 Shades of Graytall doesn't count because it uses interesting architecture).

 

For instance, colour choice alone can greatly impact the mood of the scene, how the player interprets it, and even what temperature it seems to be.

 

Some areas in Doom 2 really don't look great. A lot of parts in The Pit and the various city levels have dull colour schemes and their rooms don't have the same contextual purpose that Doom's do (computer recesses in walls, bright and interesting colours like metal greens and oranges), and instead feel more like sectors and lines - which is what a level should do its best not to feel like.

Edited July 20, 2018 by Unregistered account

[Koko Ricky]

I have a theory that a project which was literally Doom 2 with improved texturing and slightly more immersive lighting would drastically improve the campaign. I played through it recently and while a handful of the maps outright sucked (The Chasm and The Citadel, I'm looking at you!), the vast majority of them were enjoyable to play through, and in particular it was satisfying that I had to relearn a few of the layouts. However, at the same time, there was this almost subconscious "yuck" feeling I had, echoes of old memories of playing through the levels and thinking they were kind of bland. And really it came down to texturing and lighting being a bit subpar (especially the former). The id boys got a bit stuck on the brown textures and indeed most of the textures exclusive to Doom 2 use a whole lot of brown.

[Remilia Scarlet]

I wouldn't say I dislike Doom 2's maps, but I do definitely prefer Doom 1's. There are exceptions, of course.  I really dislike the openness of most of the city levels of Doom 2, while I really like maps 2, 4, 6-8, 11, 12, 20, and 23-28. Meanwhile, I only dislike E3M6 and E2M5 in Doom 1.

[RustyGold]

The end of the day opinions are like assholes, Everyone has one. There are some maps I love on the original two Doom IWADS that everyone else hates, So None of this really matters.

[GarrettChan]

3 minutes ago, YukiRaven said:

(D2 Map12)

Is there anything particular about Map12 but not in other city maps? I would love to hear reasons :D

 

I don't know whether it's the problem of the last room because it seems many people dislike Map12, not really sure though.

[Remilia Scarlet]

Just now, GarrettChan said:

Is there anything particular about Map12 but not in other city maps? I would love to hear reasons :D

 

I don't know whether it's the problem of the last room because it seems many people dislike Map12, not really sure though.

I think it's the darker, creepier atmosphere, honestly.  It also has one of my favorite songs from the game in it. The last room never bothered me much, and I actually always kinda thought it was inventive.

 

I also have a fond memory of when I was in middle school where I would challenge myself to beat a Doom map on UV before I had to leave for school.  I called it "Level A Day" and I started randomly with map12.  So there's some nostalgia I associate with it as well, I guess.

 

The other city maps bother me for their brighter light levels, the map design that doesn't direct the player where to go as well, and the general openness of them.  Especially map13.  God I hate that map so much >_<  I dunno, I just like the other maps better, and Doom 1's maps much better overall.

[Avoozl]

I really can't understand people who call the OG Doom games "maze like", Wolf 3D on the other hand is definitely maze like. Doom levels are simply non-linear and too many gamers these days are so used to their linear CoD type games that they can't seem to adapt to non-linear level design in older games.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Avoozl

[Remilia Scarlet]

I can't see where most of them are non-linear. You almost always need to do steps in a specific order to progress. It's not like most maps let you get the X key before Y key when both are needed, for example. To me they're linear with unrestricting interconnected areas.

[The_MártonJános]

23 hours ago, doomslayer11122 said:

[...] DooM 2's level design is [...] extremely maze like [...]

Yo, did you get lost in The Citadel or something?

Though I can agree on that sometimes the moving space in Doom 2 is just too huge and barren. This doesn't reach up to the level of TNT's so-called "nothing", but man, I get bored easily when projectile monsters pose absolutely no threat.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Cell

[Archanhell]

I don't dislike either DooM level designs, while it's DooM I'll play it over and over, specially with mods like Real Guns Hardcore.

Though, I prefer visually beautiful maps, those with unique mechanics, maybe one or another open map with a lot of stuff to do with side missions or side quests and mega-campaigns or TCs.

 

If I had to choose between DooM I and DooM II maps though...

I wouldn't choose either of them.