TheMagicMushroomMan

Quella???

It's too vague a question since the answer depends on what kind of game you're making. Even a seemingly cover-all answer such as "it should be fun to play" fails to cover many games. Making a bad game is unavoidable - you might just decide not to publically release it, or even come close to completing it. Most developers refer to these as "experiments", but they are still games. The only way to avoid making a bad game is to never make one. You have to fuck up before you succeed, people learn through failure. You can't know what works if you don't know what doesn't, and you can't play to your strengths if you don't know your weaknesses. But if you want specific advice, you gotta be a little more specific.

The pace in DOOM 3 is so much slower than Quake 2 that I can't really see any similarity, especially when it comes to player movement and mobility. The realistic-ish environments are just a byproduct of the game being more technically advanced than DOOM/DOOM 2. And even if Quake 2 had kept the same aesthetic as the original, I would reckon that the maps would still be a lot less abstract than Quake 1, at the very least, let alone DOOM. By the time Quake 2 was out, abstract map design wasn't really in style. The fact that it's objective-based doesn't change much about the overall moment-to-moment gameplay. I can understand how you percieve it as an evolution leading to DOOM 3 in terms of technology, but I think the only way that it leans closer to DOOM 3 is simply in the fact that the environments look more realistic. The combat has very little in common with DOOM 3. Thankfully. For me, the MachineGames expansions are in this awkward spot where they try to have a more grounded map design, but it comes across as an illusion - the maps still feel abstract to their own detriment, but they don't offer the satisfying exploration that good abstract maps can provide. It feels hollow. The "two hallways" trope that Individualised mentions is a good example. It feels like the map design is more appropriate for a modern shooter, not a Quake. But even if you compare it to retro-modern stuff like Dusk, it still comes up short.

I really don't see how Quake 2 is closer to DOOM 3 than DOOM 2.

I really wouldn't doubt it - I find the level design in modern Wolf to be incredibly dull in nearly every aspect. It feels like the areas were designed to look decent first and foremost, instead of being built around satisfying combat and exploration. I have no idea if the same people worked on Wolf and Quake/Quake2, but all of them just feel so uninspired to actually navigate and fight in.

DotM (edited comment at the same time you replied to clarify lol), but really CotM felt the same way to me. I have to say though, that I can't stand anything MachineGames in general has ever done - I really, really dislike the modern Wolf games.

I felt that it relied too much on detailing/visuals and not enough on gameplay and combat encounters. Not a huge Q2 fan, though, so my opinion on that expansion probably doesn't line up with the rest of the community.

I can imagine this working really well with a Lost Civilization style of gameplay.

What kind of sick fuck wears pepperoni on their nipples without a shirt on?

In relation old wads, I think over time as you play more and more old games, it becomes pretty easy to "put yourself in the mindset" of the time they were released. Playing PSX games still gives me the same feeling and vibe that I remember from back then, and it's not just nostalgia because I get the same feeling from playing games I never played back then. So I can only assume that when I play games from before I was born, such as Dragon Quest, Megaman, etc. that the "charm" those games hold for me today is pretty similar to how they would have made me feel back then. On the other hand, some games are only impressive if you played them back then. For example, when I moved from my PS2 (my PC couldn't do anything) to my PS3 and played stuff like Heavy Rain and Bioshock, I was blown away by the technology and that really enhanced my enjoyment of them, enough so that I could forgive shitty or uninteresting gameplay. One of those games I mentioned no longer impresses me at all, and it's not hard to guess which one. You can draw the same comparison with wads - some wads that were really impressive back then ("oh my god, are those slopes?") are just kind of lame today ("oh my god, why is everything sloped?"). You just have to accept that you missed out on these novelties and their associated gimmicks, because they are no longer novel, they are just gimmicks. Other wads hold up well enough that they can put you in the 1994 mindset even if you were born in 2004, because there's no irritating bullshit preventing the time travel. Some people enjoy the (being blunt) shittiness of old wads, but I think those people are more on the hardcore/nerd side, and I don't mean that as an insult. That stuff is more interesting if you're able to understand why they were so shitty. I won't lie, missing out on multiplayer stuff can suck. But it's probably better than enjoying it and then having to watch it die. I don't know why I'm giving you this advice though, you're a Neanderthal. A fucking troglodyte, a relic of the past. You were born in 2000BC and wish you were born in the 1990's? You were made for TV commercials, not deep thinking.

There are two Hitlers, and one of them is the other Hitler's son. Hitler never exploded, it was a hallucination by the son (the series switched from 2D to 3D to make it look like the hallucination). The real Hitler is the father of the one in Wolfenstein 2. That's why there's a new Hitler in Wolfenstein 3D every time you start a new game even if you've already killed him. Plus the game came out in 1992. 1+9+9+2=21. If you flip the number "1" backwards, you can make the letter "D" using the top part of the number, which I've always perferred to refer to as a "hat" although some people perfer to use other terms to describe it. So, 1992=1+9+9+2=21=2D, an obvious reference to Doom. It helps to set the timeline straight. Keep in mind that this is all assuming that the Thanos Snap isn't intended to be canon. Otherwise, we'd have to start all the way back with X-Men 2 before Joel was killed.

I used Dolphin with a widescreen patch. You can probably set something up so your mouse emulates an analogue stick. I don't know how well it would work though, the controls and mechanics are specifically made with a controller in mind. The campaigns in 2/Future Perfect are fun an varied, but the games are mainly played for their splitscreen multiplayer. The map editor in Future Perfect was a lot of fun back then. Timesplitters was some of the most fun I've had with a videogame ever. Even for singleplayer, there is a lot of content between the campaign and its optional objectives, arcade challenges, etc. It's one of the few multiplayer games where having a match against the AI in singleplayer is actually fun.

@hybridial I don't doubt what you're saying to be honest. I played 2016 when it came out and at the time I wasn't a hardcore DOOM fan, I wasn't too discerning about anything so I just thought it was a solid 7.5/10 game. It was a nice change of pace for me, the glory kills made it feel like an FPS version of God of War and games like God of War lock you into arenas all the time. I don't remember how prominent it was, so I'm sure you're right about it in regards to its design. Either way, I never played it more than once so I wasn't overly impressed with it. And because I only played it once, not being able to skip cutscenes is something I didn't notice (or don't remember) but yeah, I'd be very annoyed with that on a second playthrough. No reason not to allow players to skip cutscenes in general, that's a poor and obvious oversight. I don't really get the hardcore 2016 fans, myself. One of the things they seem to really like is the plot, which I thought was bland as shit. The game is certainly not some "ground-breaking" revolutionary thing with innovative "push forward combat", if that's what the developers claimed. I liked Eternal less, but I understand its fanbase better because it's a much more ambitious game trying for a more specific style. I liked the combat most of the time (although I disliked the DLC in general - it was very irritating in many aspects, and overcoming its challenges felt like a chore rather than a challenge) but I don't like the plot, the artstyle/setting, the lore cards, etc. so it just doesn't line up with my interests. Nice shoutout to Jericho, that game had a great atmosphere. I bought it based on the demo back then. Undying is also pretty cool, though I had problems running it on my PC. Also Wolfenstein '09 was the first PS3 game I ever bought, again based on the demo. I loved the gore, and that axe. I like RE in general, and I think Village is a great game. I really liked the unique setting and enemies/theme in that game. It had a lot of variety between the village itself, the castle/vampires and the Silent Hill-esque Doll parts. I really think the factory part at the end brings it down though. You have good taste.

It's no different than people who think that all modern music sucks - they just look at the popular, mainstream shit (which I agree did go further downhill around 2000 or so, in terms of music, games, and movies) and come to the conclusion that it all sucks because they're ignorant of anything that isn't popular and/or want to be negative about everything new in general. I think that sometimes they try to sound special by showing off the fact that they don't like mainstream things, but they aren't intelligent enough to look beyond what's mainstream.

That's because they're getting high sniffing their own farts. Much of the "aggression" of DOOM 2016 comes from the animation, gore, music, etc. as well as the glory kills that were cribbed from other non-FPS games. Considering DOOM Eternal, they must not have liked the concept of "push forward combat" all that much, unless their idea of "push forward" means "fight enemies while locked into an inescapable arena while figuring out how to avoid running out of resources, then stop to read an exposition dump on a lore card before and after the next rudimentary platforming sequence". DOOM 2016 is a pretty good game, but it's not doing anything ground-breaking or revolutionary. Everything it did was already done by other games. And DOOM Eternal is the antithesis of "push forward". Post-2000, a lot of popular FPS games, mainly of the military type, were indeed bland, colorless, and soulless. But there were plenty of games that weren't, and you had an entire sub-genre of games like Serious Sam and Painkiller that were built around the concept of doing little more than mowing down hordes of enemies in colorful environments.

Honestly any of the good Blood mapsets surpass the original maps the vast majority of the time. Stuff like Death Wish and Fleshed Out are on another planet compared to the base maps. I love Blood, but it does have some problems. Like we were saying, the bosses suck - they aren't even ballbusters, they're just lame and tanky. The phantom enemy has the most annoying scream, and has a tendancy to be irritating to fight. The maps in the second half of the game aren't as good as the first half. I don't like the voodoo doll/staff/deodorant can that much. The Nightdive port had problems. But when you get a good mapset that uses the game's resources with today's knowledge of what makes the game work (and what doesn't) it really just works.

Fleshed Out is also excellent, except for the first few maps. It plays things a little more loose and exploratory, though. 30 massive maps. French Meat is pretty good as well. I like all of those mapsets more than the base game by a huge margin.

I looked at your "Return of the Icon" map and I can't believe nobody commented on it, even with two threads. It looks well above average based on the screenshots, and immediately stands out thanks to the colored lighting. I love colored lighting, so I added it to the top of my list. The only recommendation I have is to include some full-size screenshots. I think a lot of people, especially more casual players just looking for something good in general, tend to just open a thread and immediately look at the screenshots to see if the map catches their eye. I'm sorry that the map got no attention though, that really sucks. I know I would be disappointed too if that happened to me.

Anyone who would dismiss your maps just because you made threads that they didn't like probably can't be trusted to give useful and fair feedback anyway, so it's probably no major loss. To be honest, I didn't know you were a mapper. If anything, I would have been more likely to look at your maps just because of the *hits blunt* thing and your reputation for oddball threads. Now, if a member that's a complete dick posts a map, I'm not going to rush to check it out, but I don't know why anyone would dislike you to such an extent. Hell, tbh I never knew that *hits blunt* was something that a moderator came up with. I thought it was something you said in the past yourself, which is another example of why moderator-appointed titles/signatures are no good.

It means the snail had sex

Haven't read the thread yet (was posted 8.5 seconds ago) but yes. The bosses suck donkey balls and ass though.

Besides that, what exactly did Goatloard do that was "something incredible, or unbelievably stupid"? As far as I know he was known for making posts that were either a little eccentric or for "shower thoughts". In fact, I've yet to see any evidence that the "forum retard" whose thread and aforementioned title lead to the implementation of custom titles to begin with did anything incredible or unbelievably stupid. Well, they did create chocorenderlimits, so I guess incredible things were awarded with the same kinds of titles as unbelievably stupid things. Now, I have no problems with Doomworld now and I highly doubt I would have had personal problems with it back then. But why not be honest and just admit that the titles were bestowed upon people not because they were genuises/dumbasses, but because they were simply easy targets? Why defend what is basically a different forum entirely when you can just say "some of the mods back then were assholes", which seems a bit more honest. It's not like it's insulting to any of the current staff. It's also not true that you couldn't insult people's sexuality/culture/interests. Anyone who has browsed through old threads knows this. Using Steve's own example: I custom-searched the word "furries" with results even up until 2016, not just 2000-2010. On the first page of results, you can clearly see users calling furries "autistic" "weird" "retarded" and a post targeting trans people. Again, as Doomkid said, that's the way the internet was and posts like that were mild compared to the rest of the internet at large. But to suggest that this was some sort of squeaky-clean utopia of kindness where only the biggest imbeciles were made fun and nobody got targeted because of who they were/what they liked, is demonstrable as false, and the demonstration consists of nothing more than clicking the search button.

I would have to say Ubisoft. [5752 XP to reach level 5! CURRENT MISSION: -Craft a +1 Super Shotgun- STATUS: -Completed!- ACTIVE SIDE MISSIONS: -Talk to the UAC soldier- -Bring 10 bundles of Hellwood to Borris- -Craft a saddle for Daisy- -Craft a meathook- -Hunt a Hell Critter- -Go to the Armory- -Build a Doomcycle- -Talk to the friendly Revenant- 89 Hell Towers Remaining! 525 Toys left to find! 38 corrupted UAC bases unclaimed! 80 Hell Rifts to cleanse! 120 Hell Commanders to vanquish! 100 UAC Soldiers to rescue! CURRENT SPECIALS 5000 DOOM Coins bundle $9.99 100 Hell Crystals $4.99 Emote: "Rip and Tear!" $7.99 Three-day XP Booster $5.99 Retro skin pack $4.99 Assassins's Creed Ezio Armor $9.99 Exclusive pre-order content bundle that we're selling to anyone with FOMO $29.99 Connect to Ubisoft+ and claim your Rabbids skin today!]

Not to mention the fact that Win7 does not support DirectX12 (except some specific games via an added compatibility layer), so any future games utilizing it will not work. I think developers shouldn't waste effort and resources to support a minority of users who are using an outdated OS and/or have outdated specs. It only holds back the final product for the majority. I've had arguments with people about this before. Sometimes they'll say shit like "not everyone is privileged enough to afford a new CPU/GPU/more than 512MB of RAM" as if that's someone else's fault. They recognize the fact that every other industry on the planet must move forward, but when it comes to video games, everyone else has to bend over backwards to support their eMachines PC they bought 10 years ago for $200 at Walmart. They call other people entitled for having the money to build a decent PC, but they think they're entitled to lifetime support (that costs other people time and money) for what might as well be scrap metal. Not talking about anyone in this thread to be clear, it's just something that irks me.