Antroid

Isnt this a completely different issue from locking yourself out of secrets and monsters until another playthrough? Or is "permanently missable" implied in this case somehow? Missing esoteric secrets is an effort problem, missing permanently locked ones is mostly luck.

Absolutely. I treat Hexen as a Might and Magic 6 without the rpg elements and with far more involved dungeons. I get that people come expecting a high octane action game, but people having wrong expectations isn't the game's fault. As a kid I came expecting a slow exploration-focused game with grindy combat, just because it was fantasy (M&M conditioning), and I loved it and still do.

Oh hey, long time no see. I'm certain you remember that one time when I chainsawed a spider mastermind! I don't recall absolutely any context for what was going on. I think I was sharing my screen, but why?..

I've seen people express that if they check out a gzdoom-only project, they want the gzdoomness to be fully warranted instead of mostly a limit removed project with a few extras. Though maybe the times have changed. It feels a little silly to limit myself out of using scripts and udmf and stuff too, since nobody is going to care that the maps were done under this self-imposed limitation while they're still gzdoom-only, but that's the choice I made. But it would be validated if there was a prboom+decorate source port %)

I like water levels. The slower pace is never a real problem, the alternate controls aren't usually hard to handle, if they're mazey that's just a plus for me, but the main point is that they tend to be incredibly atmospheric and immersive.

I think the only lyrics for songs I've ever enjoyed were Tim Minchin's. Most of the time I prefer not being able to make the lyrics out.

I played it for a few days so far. It's surprisingly high quality for a shitpost game, though still not free of bugs (especially if you play online). It's addicting, but I'm not burned out on survival games, having played none of them personally (I've seen some streams of ark, valheim and such). It's not the kind of game you go to for a meaningful artistic experience, so using assets or AI assistance in asset making doesn't bother me as it normally would. But with some details and things in the game, you can definitely tell someone was having fun making it and sincerely wanted to make it fun to play, which they accomplished 100%. And how blatant it is about using barely legally distinct pokemons adds to the charm, as someone who has no emotional investment in the original franchise.

I'm always there for both. Either one without the other is dull to me.

Is the ceiling height different on different sides of those linedefs? I've experienced a similar issue with gzdoom, where textures would shift vertically while ingame compared to the editor view. For me it's always when I also use the affected linedef as a border between two different ceiling heights. I'm not sure of the technical reasons (something about maybe gzdoom and everyone else using different methods to pick from the two ceiling heights to adjust textures by?), but if that's the case for you, my advice would be to make ceiling height changes happen on separate linedefs that are not otherwise displayed in any way. I just cut across existing sectors when I need different ceiling heights. (This may also only happen when the ceiling is a sky, I'm not certain.)

It's kinda wild to me how everyone decided to intentionally misinterpret what OP meant and gang up on him, while talking in absolutes. Today I learned that there are only two settings to realism: on and off. Therefore there is literally no difference between how abstract Doom 1 and Doom 2 are. Also, pretty sure it's not at all hard to understand that "commercial crap" is just a suboptimal way of calling it a lower effort cash grab. Talking seriously, I can see where OP is coming from. Doom 1 was absolutely less abstract than Doom 2 in my opinion. I also hated the levels with the gimmick names (tricks and traps, barrels of fun in particular) because I enjoyed having Doom 1 at least pretend that it was meant to feel like a place (not look like one, mind you - but the theming was much more solid and consistent). The levels definitely seemed lower effort and more bare when I played the game first time back in the day. And also, I kinda wanted the earth environments to be much more futuristic than they were. Heck, they did it again in Eternal - I was really hoping for some hellified cyberpunk environments... The only problem with the thread is that this sentiment is not new and the horse has been getting beaten for more than two decades.

Way back when I was doing the "doom 2 the way id did" letsplay with Alfonzo co-commentating, I had a series of unfortunate events in the map "Borderlands" (I think?) where I kept dying to zombiemen over and over and over. here's a link, if the timestamp doesn't work it's 1:12

I honestly just want a port that is like DSDA but with the full DECORATE functionality for full freedom with custom monsters and objects. If I want to make a largely classically styled wad with purely prboom+ format maps but slightly more advanced custom monsters that aren't possible with the limited functions we have, I have to jump to gzdoom with all the problems and expectations that that imposes on me. Though I realize that it would probably be a monumental amount of work replicating everything that decorate has.

Nah, I understand it, I just disagree with equating both sides as equally useless and annoying (and especially with claiming that but still using clickbait titles). But if you think I don't, maybe you can say something that will make that sentence I quoted not so incredibly hilarious. Because it is incredibly hilarious.

What a horrible situation! We wouldn't want to inflict this on the innocents! Trying something and possibily not liking it??? It's much safer to never try anything new at all, which is why we must make videos about how everything sucks instead. You have convinced me.

Might just be because calling things overrated is much more obnoxious than calling them underrated. I'd much rather see praise that I disagree with than nitpicking I disagree with. One comes off as the author wanting to bring attention to something they think deserves it, and the other comes off as the author claiming to have superior taste to "the masses" and explaining why something you like actually sucks. Ragebait is a thing, but I don't think there is a term for praisebait? Anyway, I agree with Astar about not giving a click to something with a ragebait title and thumbnail (the fact that you were just being cheeky does not make it not annoying). So I can only comment on something that was brought up in the thread: I think labirynthine progression is an absolute plus, because normally if there are no snags while beating a level and it's all smooth, it just as smoothly slides out of my memory. Getting lost means you are actually forced to engage with the level and makes it more immersive and memorable. Apart from that one weird yellow key thing I don't really remember getting lost in Doom 64, though.