Doom 1 or 2?

[Koko Ricky]

2 hours ago, YukiRaven said:

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.

What constitutes as non-linear layout is not something I think the community universally agrees on. If we get overly literal and black-and-white about it, then any map with even a single alternate route or a backtracking element would fall under "non-linear." But really, what most people probably mean to say is that the fewer ways one can navigate a map, the more linear it is, the opposite being true for larger numbers of routes. I would argue that, aside from most of the boss maps (E1M8, E2M8, E3M8, MAP30), Doom's maps are generally fairly to very non-linear, because "linear with [sic] unrestricting interconnected areas" sounds like a description of a non-linear layout. But I would also agree that you don't always have the option to get the keys in an arbitrary order.

 

And this brings to mind E1M9, which I recently revisited. It's pretty brilliant because it only requires the blue key to exit, but has all three keys, and to an extent they can be acquired in different orders. I get why people say Doom 2's maps don't reach that level of polish, but Doom 2 was also about experimentation and larger environments. It had in a way a different goal in terms of layout.

[Mayomancer]

It boils down to a matter of taste in my opinion, even though i prefer how The Ultimate Doom's maps are designed, Doom 2 was a great experience and has a lot of memorable moments. I tend to dislike most of the 'city' style maps, even though they are very good, the lack of a new boss monster is kinda sad, but it was still a step forward.

[HAK3180]

4 hours ago, YukiRaven said:

I really dislike the openness of most of the city levels of Doom 2 [and] I ...dislike E3M6 ... in Doom 1.

Dagger inserted into heart. Now just say you hate Odyssey of Noises start twisting it.

[pulkmees]

Oh boy, again with this.

 

Doom 1 - more realistic textures and environments, limited bestiary, Romero's maps as first impression, more connecting tissue between maps(story), easy as fuck, but also less cheap traps.

 

Doom 2 - more bestiary, but not utilized fully, rushed maps, experimental maps by Sandy leave a lasting impression, less connecting story, a lot more space(which in turn means a lot of the same textures), Super Shotgun, harder difficulty.

[CasualScrub]

Same honestly. The art style just doesn't work very well IMO, and overall I just find none of the level in particularly memorable. Doom 1, on the other hand, I really love its level design. It makes much more sense, and you really get a feeling of the slow transition from the tech of the UAC to the fleshy hell of... well, Hell. It's just a lot better realized than Doom 2 IMO.

[seed]

8 hours ago, pulkmees said:

Doom 1 - easy as fuck

 

E4M1 and E4M2 want a word with you.

[Aquila Chrysaetos]

8 minutes ago, Agent6 said:

E4M1 and E4M2

These are the best maps of Ultimate Doom, and I'm somewhat distressed that Doom II didn't have any levels like this, which is understandable, of course.

E4M2 isn't even that hard, it's just the beginning is hell to get through.

I started with Doom II, so I'm obviously biased toward it, but I liked the somewhat open ended nature of some of the maps.

The only map I had to look up a guide to finish was MAP30, but nobody likes MAP30 anyway.

[seed]

1 minute ago, Aquila Chrysaetos said:

...and I'm somewhat distressed that Doom II didn't have any levels like this, which is understandable, of course.

E4M2 isn't even that hard, it's just the beginning is hell to get through.

I started with Doom II, so I'm obviously biased toward it, but I liked the somewhat open ended nature of some of the maps.

 

Bingo & agreed.

[GarrettChan]

9 hours ago, Agent6 said:

E4M1 and E4M2 want a word with you.

There you go ;P

 

I agree with Aquila. E4M2 is difficult at the beginning, which I usually describe it as not new player/blind play friendly. Actually E4M6 is often overlooked when talking about difficulty because E4M6 is not easy, and there's no Armor in it.

[Xegethra]

I feel the same way, can't get along with Doom 2. I still get that dizzy queasy feeling while playing and it just makes me uncomfortable. As being mentioned before, all the brown certainly doesn't help. I love the new enemies though, they're fun. I only ever really use Doom 2 to play custom WADs as well, I hardly ever go back and play it. However playing it co-op can help take the edge off it a bit for me but otherwise I stay away. Nothing against those who like it more, we all prefer different things.

[Dragonsbrethren]

I don't really understand the complaints about art in Doom 2. I suppose what people mean are that the episodes aren't as consistently themed as Doom 1...but I still think Doom 2 has more aesthetically pleasing maps than the opposite, and it follows its themes well enough, even if sometimes the sky alone is all that makes the difference between "city" and "hell".

 

The techbases are still techbasey, with lots of great new texture series like TEKGREN and METAL2. American McGee's bases wouldn't feel out of place in E1, and he even gave the E1 maps a retexture to look more like his stuff in JagDoom.

 

The end of the starport levels and the city levels suffer from Sandy Syndrome, like a lot of Doom E2/E3, but most of them are passable. There were even new BRICK and MODWALL series created for these levels...Duke Nukem 3D definitely sold a modern city setting better than Downtown or Suburbs do, but most of Doom 2's city levels work because they put you in a single structure surrounded by the city, rather than trying to model the city itself.

 

Romero's stuff is very natural, he clearly fell in love with those STONE and ZIMMER textures and uses them practically everywhere. I will say that Circle of Death and Gotcha really stand out in stark contrast to their "episodes" where everything else is pretty techy/urbanized--the rest of Romero's maps mesh well, and both of these are supposed to be at the heart of hell's invasion, so I'll give them a pass.

 

Hell in Doom 2 is just all over the place compared to the slightly more consistent themes seen in E3. I'd say only Barrels o' Fun really stands out as decidedly "not hell", and it's still no worse than Pandemonium.

[CaptainTristy]

I loved the cohesive theme of Doom 1's levels, but the variety in Doom 2's allows for more creative takes, if a bit poorly executed.

[Doommarine_maxi]

I mean, Doom 1 (at least episode 1) level design is just superb, you can somehow understand where you are, the architecture of the place try to make some sense (atleast a bit) there're some parts with well-placed lights (even some twinkling lights). I wanna say that I can sense some atmosphere going on while playing Doom 1.

But while I'm playing Doom 2 the architecture feels just so bad, so so bad. Everything looks like some random map, I cannot tell where I'm, all these places makes no-sense at all for me and many maps looks really really different from others, and not in a good way. Yeah, it's fun but there's no atmosphere at all, I cannot feel submerged in the game compared from how I feel while playing Doom 1.
 

So my question is, why this happened?.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Doommarine_maxi

[wolfmcbeard]

I will say the city themed levels felt way off, the game play was there for sure but something just doesn't feel the same.
I think it was just what people were into at id, kinda like taking the philosophy of mappers putting there design choices first and and let people decide if they like it afterwards, it's not a bad thing in my opinion, just not what some people were into like the city levels.
Then again, maybe my lack of sleep is clouding my judgement.

[VanaheimRanger]

What happened is they were extremely rushed.  It is known.

[nrofl]

@guitardz Isnt it because thay wanted quake out sooner?

[seed]

No idea, but frankly I don't find Doom 2's levels inferior to those of Doom 1, just that they have a very different style that rarely ever tries to be realistic.

[nrofl]

The only time it really aims to be realistic are in the city levels but im afraid those are a little... dated.

[Xyzzу]

Why?

 

Why another one of these threads?

[Doomkid]

I personally feel that “FooM”, the text-based adventure, was far more evocative and compelling than either E1 or Doom2.

[bonnie]

2 hours ago, Doommarine_maxi said:

Everything looks like some random map

That's because they practically were just random maps. They weren't really trying for any interesting themes or mapping conventions, they just wanted to show off the improved hardware by having bigger, more wide open maps. The maps were closer to standalone tech-demos than they were to consecutive maps in a game.

 

They also made little to no attempt at weapon balance, giving players the SSG on map02 and every single weapon in the game by map08, and the new monsters aren't even used well either. Immediately throwing every weapon in the game at the player and barely making effective use of your new beastiary somewhat ruins the point of including the new weapon and monsters in the first place.

 

With that said, E2 and E3 also check off almost every item in that list:

✓ Smaller roster

✓ No SSG

✓ No coherent theme (although E3's theme is more about being chaotic)

Yet they still manage to be quite fun gameplay-wise and appealing visually, so I guess Doom 2 was just a big ol' missed opportunity all around.

[Nancsi]

Only episode 1 stands out. The two Hall/Petersen episodes felt like some lovecraftian Wolf3D, E2M2 and maybe E2M7 aside the maps had zero sense. Episode 4 is a mishmash of "various artists", like Master Levels or TNT. E4M6 stood out design-wise, but it had some awkward gameplay moments like consistent falls to lava pit and sloppy flow (not to mention the almost obligatory secrets to help you out with ammo in pistolstart mode).

 

Doom 2 had some good maps with a sense of place. I really like the bunch from Map02 to Map07, particularly The Crusher. Map11, 15 and 17 from Romero are also pretty sweet, they have that episode 1 feel. But the best part is the final part, Map27 (Monster Condo) for example is a masterpiece of paranoid horror theme, so was Map28 and Map29 with their infernal theme. Sure it had some stinker levels, but I don't see any valid arguments that it's worse than D1's episode 2-4 stuff.

[seed]

39 minutes ago, bonnie said:

giving players the SSG on map02 and every single weapon in the game by map08

 

I also remember Sandy (I think?) saying that he was never satisfied with the difficulty of the final game. They tried to balance the game primarily for pistol starting, too bad most people played continuous. Dropping the episodic format of Doom 1 surely didn't help either.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Agent6

[GarrettChan]

1 hour ago, Xyzzy01 said:

Why?

 

Why another one of these threads?

I'm too late, so you said what I wanted...

[geo]

The first Doom's levels felt more fun, so I guess that makes them feel superior? Doom 2 felt like it took a shot at realism. More browns, more logical areas. More arch-vilves, mancubi and skeles to make it feel worse. It's like they had so much time to construct grander, yet blander levels that it derailed the charm and fun.

 

As for the extremely rushed... they did have a full 9 months to come up with 32 levels. That doesn't seem rushed for the DOOM engine even with the tools that 1993 could provide. Know what is hard and time consuming? Modern 3D levels with modern textures with lighting effects. But hey good ole iD did produce 9 games in 12 months for one year, so if anyone could shit out a game, they can.

 

Anyone wanna try the "make 32 Doom 2 level challenge using 1994 era tools?"

[leodoom85]

2 hours ago, Xyzzy01 said:

Why?

 

Why another one of these threads?

This gets old...

[DooM_RO]

It's uglier but plays better.

[_bruce_]

3 hours ago, Nancsi said:

Only episode 1 stands out. The two Hall/Petersen episodes felt like some lovecraftian Wolf3D, E2M2 and maybe E2M7 aside the maps had zero sense. Episode 4 is a mishmash of "various artists", like Master Levels or TNT. E4M6 stood out design-wise, but it had some awkward gameplay moments like consistent falls to lava pit and sloppy flow (not to mention the almost obligatory secrets to help you out with ammo in pistolstart mode).

 

Doom 2 had some good maps with a sense of place. I really like the bunch from Map02 to Map07, particularly The Crusher. Map11, 15 and 17 from Romero are also pretty sweet, they have that episode 1 feel. But the best part is the final part, Map27 (Monster Condo) for example is a masterpiece of paranoid horror theme, so was Map28 and Map29 with their infernal theme. Sure it had some stinker levels, but I don't see any valid arguments that it's worse than D1's episode 2-4 stuff.

 

 

Well said. DoomII has some classic maps to back up its legacy. Map11 is one of the levels that I love playing around with when testing a "new" PC(newly acquired old 486/586 stuff actually).

 

McGee's maps have a nice compact/industrial/abandoned feel to themt with the updated, more earthly/realistic, style rendering it different to the original Doom's(with METAL-, BRICK- and TEKGREN- being THE textures establishing DoomII's, in parts, more organic approach).

Edited December 28, 2018 by _bruce_
grammar/wording

[Gez]

28 minutes ago, Nancsi said:

The two Hall/Petersen episodes felt like some lovecraftian Wolf3D, E2M2 and maybe E2M7 aside the maps had zero sense.

I can't agree with that. E2M3, E2M4, E2M5 all have strong senses of place too IMO.

[Nine Inch Heels]

Honestly, this thread boggles my mind. Reading the OP, it looks like sense of location and atmosphere were the only important things a map can have going for it, while it completely ignores that - already just by virtue of concept alone - many of the Doom II maps are a cut above most of the maps in Doom(1).

 

You prefer what you want, but one thing I would like to point out is that id made some bold design decisions in Doom II, which really shows and shines in maps like 'The Chasm', 'Barrels of Fun', 'Nirvana', 'Monster Condo' to name just a few. You may or may not like the maps I brought up and that's fine, but all these maps (and others) have one thing in common, which is fresh gameplay concepts you didn't see in Doom(1) like that at all (or at least nowhere near as pronounced).

 

The Chasm really was a movement-skill check at the time, and even today some people hate that map with a fiery passion, while others like myself think of it as one of the best iWAD maps overall. The tightropes and the platforming are concepts which are appreciated by more people than one might expect at first, and still to this day people love to incorporate platforming and movement-skill checks into their maps to add a different gameplay component to their maps that respects the player's time like nothing else. There is no RNG in platforming, it's you, the game's physics, and the geometry.

 

Nirvana for example brought the concept of slowly expanding areas to Doom, and really played that card fairly well for its day and age. A concept that's still being used in all kinds of genres, including challenge and slaughter maps, but it's also used to create climactic fights in more "traditional" maps as well.

 

Barrels of fun was an interesting take on a gimmick that wasn't really used as much in Doom(1), and even though it polarizes people's opinions quite a bit, it's still a map that's worth playing for some quick arcade-y action.

 

I guess I'd better keep this at least remotely brief, because it's all down to personal preference after all, but I really believe that judging the quality of level design solely based on how much it "resembles a place" is a fairly onesided way of looking at a product that has many different facets to it.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Nine Inch Heels