Does anyone have Doom impressions?

[Austin]

Finished Ultra Violence yesterday morning. Working on Nightmare now.. it's hard as hell. This game is going to last me a long, long time.

[atarifanboi]

This is a question that I can only answer by saying "I will buy this regardless, due to my age old love of Doom".

 

It's just a question of when I guess, but I am still playing original Doom to this day, albeit now on my Shield tablet, and it still plays as well today as it always did. I have Doom2 and Doom3 BFG edition on my Shield too, plus some expansions, and I've played it on everything from DOS to Windows to PSOne, PSP and a number of less well known handheld platforms.

 

Provided they have managed to capture the essence of the original game, at least in part, it should be wicked. I guess I'll have to vote with my wallet.

[cimerians]

Provided they have managed to capture the essence of the original game, at least in part, it should be wicked. I guess I'll have to vote with my wallet.

 

I think they did but its just my opinion. Its bare bones and no nonsense. Like the original games. The marine lifts a middle finger to the storyline. Can't help but laugh at the marines actions and all the easter eggs and stuff I'm finding. Ridiculous.

 

I had great concerns, but I like this a lot. I haven't read many reviews but I'm assuming a lot of the negative ones are trying to compare it to some grand game like Destiny or something. It isn't that and it doesn't care.

[xenomorpher]

I finished the campaign and enjoyed it. I blew through it so I didn't find any secret levels. They're well hidden and not obvious, so you're not likely to accidentally run across one. The only thing I didn't care for in the campaign was the ending, but I figured they would do something like that.

 

I messed around with Snap Map fifteen minutes or so without doing any of the tutorials and I already found it pretty intuitive. I was able to add logic, have a monster appear when a door open and then text appear when the monster appears. This is definitely going to be the thing that I'll keep coming back for. The multiplayer I have no interest in unless they change it.

[cimerians]

I messed around with Snap Map fifteen minutes or so without doing any of the tutorials and I already found it pretty intuitive. I was able to add logic, have a monster appear when a door open and then text appear when the monster appears. This is definitely going to be the thing that I'll keep coming back for. The multiplayer I have no interest in unless they change it.

 

I bet someone already made the original Doom maps. Have you played any out there? I bet they aren't great but at least worth a try.

[xenomorpher]

I saw a couple videos on YouTube that have the first few levels. Classic Doom mod for Doom 3 looks better, but people had full mod capabilities and weren't so limited. It would be cool if they released classic textures so the maps look more classic.

[Austin]

I only played the "E1M2 Throwback" map that's on the front page and it was a complete joke. I'll be interested to see what people are able to cook up when they have more time with it. It seems like you can customize quite a bit with each room, so we should start seeing some pretty believable single levels eventually.

[slab0meat]

I bought this yesterday and only played through the first mission (a few times) and one Doom II throwback level. Seems OK, though I'm still a sucker for the old pixelated Doom.

[Major Havoc 2049]

This is a question that I can only answer by saying "I will buy this regardless, due to my age old love of Doom".

 

It's just a question of when I guess, but I am still playing original Doom to this day, albeit now on my Shield tablet, and it still plays as well today as it always did. I have Doom2 and Doom3 BFG edition on my Shield too, plus some expansions, and I've played it on everything from DOS to Windows to PSOne, PSP and a number of less well known handheld platforms.

 

Provided they have managed to capture the essence of the original game, at least in part, it should be wicked. I guess I'll have to vote with my wallet.

Since you love Doom, you should have bought this yesterday. Doom 3 was good, but it had a more slow paced survival horror vibe, while Doom 2016 hearkens back to Doom & Doom II, but cranks up the intensity even more. The combat flow is great and the music is the best in an id game since Quake.

[BurritoBeans]

Bit late to the party but I've gone through the game a few times so yeah.

 

Overall, is it worth $60? To me, not exactly. The campaign is absolutely amazing, I love fast-paced action and not having to wait ten hours for story, so this made me really happy. Snapmaps are also cool too, I'm a sucker for custom levels and I thought it was better than say the Timesplitters editor which I used to use a ton back when TS2 and Future Perfect were my favorite two xbox games.

 

Now for the issues that I saw:

The campaign was short as all hell. I ran it on Ultra-Violence twice and then Nightmare once in the span of four days, and unless you search every corner for secrets, you really won't get a ton of time out of it. I think I got about six to ten hours out of the first run as I blasted through it, then ten to twelve out of the 2nd run looking for secrets, and finally ten hours on Nightmare. Multiplayer, this is the major thing I don't like. Multiplayer, well it's online only junk and there's no such thing as co-op that exists right now. Overall it feels pretty boring to me - They're the usual gamemodes you find in FPS games with online, nothing really new to see here. The guns are kinda boring, nothing you'll love and master. Sure people can become demons, but again, they feel generic and in the end it just makes you a bigger target for people. The maps are like small CoD maps, and the gameplay feels kinda like halo in this mode, so I really couldn't get into it.

 

So that's my impression of the game. I think I played it for a week and I haven't touched it since. Would I buy it over Uncharted 4, yeah sure it's more exciting and I ended up choosing DOOM, but honestly I was almost going to say Uncharted as I've got a lot more out of the singleplayer and really enjoy the story of it.

[atarifanboi]

Since you love Doom, you should have bought this yesterday. Doom 3 was good, but it had a more slow paced survival horror vibe, while Doom 2016 hearkens back to Doom & Doom II, but cranks up the intensity even more. The combat flow is great and the music is the best in an id game since Quake.

Personally I like Quake 2 better than Quake, and I loved the multiplayer element, especially setting up my own servers with bots.

 

Doom 2016 is on my list of next games to buy, but I've got a lot on atm, as I am off to a 2 day karate black belt seminar at the end of June, plus the Atari ST projects I have lined up, all of which will take up a little more money that I have free to spend, due to a car replacement.

 

It will happen though, maybe I can convince my wife i need it as a wedding anniversary gift, as it's ours in June

[Austin]

I don't think the campaign is short at all for the kind of game it is (old school run 'n gun). Unless you perfect every fight and don't die (highly doubtful on UV or Nightmare), it's probably going to take eight hours at a bare minimum.

 

My first playthrough on UV was about 15 hours. My second playthrough (Nightmare) was probably about 13 hours (I died quite a bit, naturally). I'm on my third playthrough now (UV once again), clocked four hours on it today and am a little less than halfway through.

 

Everyone has different ways to quantify in time whether the experience was worth the price of entry. Personally, I'd say 30+ hours in repeated playthroughs is pretty good value for the money. It's an addictive game that I think people will be playing far longer into the future than DOOM 3 (I don't say that lightly, I really liked DOOM 3).

[Iwantgames:)]

I played about 23 hrs in 2 playthroughs so at $60 thats roughly $2.60 an hr. And I know I'll be playing it again in the near future so it'll be even less per hr than that. So to me yes its worth the money.

[cimerians]

At my age with my backlog I prefer most games to be between 8 and 16 hours. RPG's max 30 with the exception of titles like Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, Fallout etc. I expect those to be way over 30 obviously.

 

I've played some games that just dragged on for no reason other than to provide additional hours of content where I would have been happier with less.

[Austin]

I could see someone finishing this game in about six hours if they manage everything perfectly and skip all the bonus areas (i.e., highly unlikely on a first or even second playthrough). I just wrapped up my third playthrough (back on Ultra Violence) and it took roughly eight hours. I died dozens of times, usually by my own doing. I didn't do much searching for secrets and skipped all but two rune challenges.

[leods]

I am all for content in games. I am playing Dark Souls 3, am 30 hours into the game and there is no filler content at all. I know many people finished the game in less than 30 hours, but it takes at least 20 unless you're speedrunning or something. So Doom kinda seemed short at 10 hours.

 

Then I started thinking about it: yes, Dark Souls has more lenght in the campaign, but it's actually an exception. Most games, even if they take 20 or 30 hours to beat, at least half that time is either story exposition or walking around trying to find something to do. For an action FPS with multiple difficulty settings, level editor and multiplayer, 10 hours in the campaign is actually fine.

 

Still I think they're asking quite a lot of money for this game. There are not that many monster models, not that many different places, and they saved money by having no story at all. The multiplayer isn't anything that special, and at the end even if it's a good game it still is a budget game in AAA development standarts.

 

I don't think we should ever judge a game by how lont it takes to beat it, but by how much actual content is in the game. Doom seems a bit slim for 60 bucks. For 40 that you can get on ebay it's fine already...

[Austin]

Still I think they're asking quite a lot of money for this game. There are not that many monster models, not that many different places, and they saved money by having no story at all. The multiplayer isn't anything that special, and at the end even if it's a good game it still is a budget game in AAA development standarts.

 

So, crafting a new 3D engine and providing arguably the most impressive looking experience at this point in time qualifies a budget price tag? Hmm..

 

Listen, I get that this kind of game isn't for everyone. Maybe you're the kind of person that truly only plays a game through once and treats it as a disposable experience to never be repeated again. That's fine and I understand. However, if you have to quantify how much value a game should cost based on how much story is in it, you are really reaching hard for excuses at that point, especially for the type of game this is intended to be. You might want to pick up a book, watch a movie, or stick with your role playing and adventure games instead.

[xenomorpher]

The Doom series never had much of a story, just like the majority of id games. John Carmack was against having a heavily involved one in the original Doom actually. Doom 3 had the most story but even then there wasn't a lot. With this, most of the story is going to be in the codex. Slightly off topic, but Masters Of Doom is a must read for those interested in the series. I finished the book in two sittings and was stunned how great it was. It reminded me a heck of a lot of Pirates Of Silicon Valley.

[atarifanboi]

The Doom Story:

 

Kill all the bad guys.

 

Survive to the end.

 

Works for me.

 

I see games like Doom as a puzzle that needs solving.

[cimerians]

Slightly off topic, but Masters Of Doom is a must read for those interested in the series. I finished the book in two sittings and was stunned how great it was. It reminded me a heck of a lot of Pirates Of Silicon Valley.

 

Awesome thanks, I may look for it on Audible. I'm tempted to get the book though since its kind of cheap used.

[leods]

 

So, crafting a new 3D engine and providing arguably the most impressive looking experience at this point in time qualifies a budget price tag? Hmm..

 

Listen, I get that this kind of game isn't for everyone. Maybe you're the kind of person that truly only plays a game through once and treats it as a disposable experience to never be repeated again. That's fine and I understand. However, if you have to quantify how much value a game should cost based on how much story is in it, you are really reaching hard for excuses at that point, especially for the type of game this is intended to be. You might want to pick up a book, watch a movie, or stick with your role playing and adventure games instead.

 

I think I was pretty clear in my statement. Discarting the speculation about my taste as a gamer, that are irrelevant to the conversation, I never said in my post you should "quantify how much value a game should cost based on how much story is in it". What I said is an objective estimate I am making on how much it actually cost to make the game. Yes I do think a game that costs much less to be made should be sold for less money. Maybe I'm wrong? Maybe this engine was absurdly expensive to make, and the couple dozen different models they needed to create (based on already existent designs) were incredibly expensive to make. But I don't think so.

 

What I think happened is: They developed this game during 3 years, and then realyzed it was crap, because it was just another CoD bullshit game (Just like wolfenstein). So they scraped it, and went back to the drawing board, and made Doom in 2 years. Now they are making the money back for all 5 years of development they put into this, even though half that time just got canned.

 

My objective with this comments is not to convince people wether the game is worth buying or not with their money. I can't know that, neither am I intersted in that. I'm just talking about production values, cost of development and comparing it to other games out there.

 

If I have a subjective criticysm on this game and the community, it's that this Doom game should be considered kinda mediocre. This kind of game should be what we get all the time. Instead we get trash. So when one game comes around that's decent it's suddenly something amazing, so we cut it major slack. But that doesn't mean I want to crap on this game, cause as I said, it's one of the few AAA games that at least seem decent. I thougt it was gonna be horrible. I am pleasantly surprised. But Doom could have been much more. It should have been much more. But we'll never get more. Cause it doesn't make money.

[Major Havoc 2049]

 

If I have a subjective criticysm on this game and the community, it's that this Doom game should be considered kinda mediocre. This kind of game should be what we get all the time. Instead we get trash. So when one game comes around that's decent it's suddenly something amazing, so we cut it major slack. But that doesn't mean I want to crap on this game, cause as I said, it's one of the few AAA games that at least seem decent. I thougt it was gonna be horrible. I am pleasantly surprised. But Doom could have been much more. It should have been much more. But we'll never get more. Cause it doesn't make money.

 

Your criticism isn't based on reality though. Most people really enjoy Doom 2016 and think the gameplay and campaign are great and the Metacritic and Gamerankings average is between 85-90. Doom comes with a single player campaign, Snapmap and multiplayer. What more could they have added, since you say it could have been so much more?

[leods]

 

Your criticism isn't based on reality though. Most people really enjoy Doom 2016 and think the gameplay and campaign are great and the Metacritic and Gamerankings average is between 85-90. Doom comes with a single player campaign, Snapmap and multiplayer. What more could they have added, since you say it could have been so much more?

First they could have had more variety of enemies than a game that's over 20 years old. Then they could, Like the first and second games, have the monsters already spread around the levels, so progression has the tension and meaning it used to have.

 

I am not sure wether they made it or not, but Doom adds more enemies in harder dificulty levels. This is one of the best things oldschool FPS used to do: Change enemy placement on different difficulty levels to improve replayability, and keep the same level of tension in the progression, since things might change and you don't know where enemies might be,

 

Maybe the gameplay is actually a progression in comparison to other FPS games, specially balanced and well done, with tactical and strategic approach required. I didn't really hear anyone say that though, and from the footage I see it doesn't seem to be that deep. It seems to be a run and shoot game. That's fine for the most part, but Doom (the original one) at least tried to be more than that, and they developed that game with the most depth they could at the time. And it's 20 years old. A remake at the same level is cool, but I would like to see progression.

 

Also the multiplayer could have been balanced and at a higher level for competitive play I guess, considering Quake, it's spiritual successor, is one of the epitomes of FPS competitive play.

 

And considering the original doom is fully moddable, snapmap is just a dumbed down version of what Doom already had.

 

So in the end, 20 years latter we get more of the same. WOW mindblowing. Yeah, in comparison to all the trash out there, it actually is mindblowing. But IMO we should ask for more.

 

To put in perspective, Dark Souls is one of my favorite games, and I am enjoying Dark Souls 3 a lot. Dark Souls 3 has both "professional" and user review scores higher than Doom has, and yet it's unpolished and iterative. It's a game that has disappointed a large ammount of the users, including me. Yeah, it's one of the best games this year. Still the flaws are glaring. Just because I like a game it doesn't mean I have to blidnly defend it. I wanted it to be polished. I wanted it to be better than the first game. I wanted it to fix all the problems that previously existed, and progress the other elements to be even better than they were. So I'll just tell From Software: This is the last time you're getting away with this. Want my money you do the next game amazing. Cause I already have a good one to play. You either push it forward or you shouldn't even bother doing another one.

[PhoenixMoonPatrol]

I caved and bought it a few nights ago. Lots of platforming and exploring to go with the gun play. Visuals are really really nice. Shocked it looks this damn good,one of the best shooters I've seen outside of Killzone and Halo this gen,damn beautiful stuff.

 

The level design is daunting though,easy to get lost and you'll have to really look the maps over to know where to go to meet those objectives. But to me thats good,this Doom is really deep on size and diversity. Love the platforming between all the gun play. I'm usually jaded over buying games day one with modern gaming but this one really shines. Love it .

[slab0meat]

Someone help me out, please. I haven't had a lot of time to play, so I've only beaten the first two missions.

 

I've tried replaying the second mission a few times to get the three secrets I missed, but each time I was cut short and had to bail on it. If I choose to continue next time I turn it on, it starts me on the next mission (#3).

 

If I'm replaying a mission, can I save IN that mission? It's getting annoying, though possibly it's my own fault. I'm on Xbox One.