Jump to content

Photo

DOOM Eternal

doom doom eternal doom II

39 replies to this topic

#26 eightbit OFFLINE  

eightbit

    River Patroller

  • 3,381 posts
  • Location:USA

Posted Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:02 PM

Don't worry, they will.

There you go, I just saved you $60.

 

 

Well, yah never know. They didn't do it with Doom and that was especially cool. But if they do that $60 will go somewhere else. There are already too many physical games to choose from as it is.



#27 Tanooki OFFLINE  

Tanooki

    River Patroller

  • 4,983 posts

Posted Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:20 PM

Oh I'd still get it, on Steam, like I did with the original one before the Switch idea was real.  It's 50/50 they'll do it, kind of depends how big the game is and how large a card Nintendo will allow them to have access to at the time.  I don't blame them entirely for Wolfenstein II.  The game is larger than the current 32GB card you can buy, but that said it probably should have still been able to fit because that larger file size accounts for multiple assets for other systems which can use 1080p/4K level assets (PS4 and Pro, PC even.)  There's no reason given what we know about Doom or Wolf2 as it is, they'd need ot have any of that given the game rarely I think runs over 600p or something of the sort.  If it uses that as a cap then 720p assets would be scaled back, so the larger files needed for the bigger resolutions aren't needed and they eat up considerable space for all that imagery.  So you have to wonder, didn't bother due to the delay it already was hit with, or even after that it still didn't quite fit?  Doom didn't quite fit, but they only made multiplayer a download and non-required too, so the primary single player campaign was on the card.



#28 Rocket Man OFFLINE  

Rocket Man

    Star Raider

  • 71 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted Wed Aug 22, 2018 10:21 PM

So, do we call this Doom 5 or is this an Expansion for Doom 4? I saw how ID mentioned this is IDTech 7, which I find cute considering it looks identical to IDTech 6. :lolblue:



#29 DoTheMath OFFLINE  

DoTheMath

    Star Raider

  • 96 posts
  • Location:Paris, France

Posted Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:35 AM

So, do we call this Doom 5 or is this an Expansion for Doom 4? I saw how ID mentioned this is IDTech 7, which I find cute considering it looks identical to IDTech 6. :lolblue:

It looks the same because art direction. ID Tech 7 is more efficient. They can show more stuff. Some developers change the art direction in sequels for the game to appear more advanced but most engines are advanced enough nowdays that the evolution comes with what we perceive as diminished returns.



#30 Tanooki OFFLINE  

Tanooki

    River Patroller

  • 4,983 posts

Posted Thu Aug 23, 2018 9:23 AM

Given the story, how it handles, the changes and how ti seems more Quake in flow, I'd say this is very similar but updated and new.  It would be like calling Doom II an expansion to the original.



#31 Rocket Man OFFLINE  

Rocket Man

    Star Raider

  • 71 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted Sat Sep 1, 2018 7:13 PM

It looks the same because art direction. ID Tech 7 is more efficient. They can show more stuff. Some developers change the art direction in sequels for the game to appear more advanced but most engines are advanced enough nowdays that the evolution comes with what we perceive as diminished returns.

 

I hear you.  From what they've shown, the engine looks identical to me.  Even if it's doing more Post Processing effects, and showcasing more on screen at once, even with more Frames... it still looks the same to me and doesn't warrant having a different engine #, but that's me.  The difference between IDTech 3 & 4 is remarkable, and is a perfect example of why I think this new game simply looks like IDTech 6.

 

Given the story, how it handles, the changes and how ti seems more Quake in flow, I'd say this is very similar but updated and new.  It would be like calling Doom II an expansion to the original.

 

So, Doom 5 then.... ;)

 

I disagree with ID naming these two games the way they did.  I think it's disrespectful to the Franchise, because imo... it looks like they're trying to distance themselves from the old school days of ID, I'm not entirely sure why though.



#32 DoTheMath OFFLINE  

DoTheMath

    Star Raider

  • 96 posts
  • Location:Paris, France

Posted Sat Sep 1, 2018 7:42 PM

I disagree with ID naming these two games the way they did.  I think it's disrespectful to the Franchise, because imo... it looks like they're trying to distance themselves from the old school days of ID, I'm not entirely sure why though.

It's a mess:

 

Doom 64 is technically Doom 3 (Sequel to Doom 2)

Final Doom is an alternate sequel to Doom 2 (also Doom 3 then)

"Doom 3" is technically a reboot

Doom 2016 is technically Doom 4 (Codex entries hint it's a quiet sequel to Doom 64 aka "soft reboot")

Doom Eternal is technically Doom 5 (unless ID cement that Doom 2016 is finally a full reboot)


  • jhd likes this

#33 Tanooki OFFLINE  

Tanooki

    River Patroller

  • 4,983 posts

Posted Sat Sep 1, 2018 9:48 PM

That whole list is a giant mess on trying to number any of it, so maybe that's why they rebooted not just how the game worked in 2016 but the name as it's a mess.  Funny we have 'DoTheMath' attempting to do the math with iD.

 

The fascinating thing to me is how different Doom 2016 and Eternal are.  The existing game plays like it's cracked out of its mind, always notched up to 11 having to just not be tactical, just run in and kill crap and use that chainsaw a lot for all the instant ammo/health refill explosions since they no longer leave enough in the stages anymore.  Then you saw the demo of the new one, it's obviously slower, more calculating and bits of discovery to it which made it feel like when the Quake franchise first came out 20 years ago.  I really hope it works out well for them and if I'm right in how I see it, it goes forward that way.  Doom 2016 is too brainless and fast for my taste, but I still like to open it up every rare often to shoot things but the pacing sucks.  It's just rampantly fast on kills, much like some mass bot fight or online multiplayer deathmatch.



#34 Rocket Man OFFLINE  

Rocket Man

    Star Raider

  • 71 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted Sun Sep 9, 2018 6:05 PM

It's a mess:

 

Doom 64 is technically Doom 3 (Sequel to Doom 2)

Final Doom is an alternate sequel to Doom 2 (also Doom 3 then)

"Doom 3" is technically a reboot

Doom 2016 is technically Doom 4 (Codex entries hint it's a quiet sequel to Doom 64 aka "soft reboot")

Doom Eternal is technically Doom 5 (unless ID cement that Doom 2016 is finally a full reboot)

 

:lolblue:

 

A hot mess indeed...

 

That whole list is a giant mess on trying to number any of it, so maybe that's why they rebooted not just how the game worked in 2016 but the name as it's a mess.  Funny we have 'DoTheMath' attempting to do the math with iD.

 

The fascinating thing to me is how different Doom 2016 and Eternal are.  The existing game plays like it's cracked out of its mind, always notched up to 11 having to just not be tactical, just run in and kill crap and use that chainsaw a lot for all the instant ammo/health refill explosions since they no longer leave enough in the stages anymore.  Then you saw the demo of the new one, it's obviously slower, more calculating and bits of discovery to it which made it feel like when the Quake franchise first came out 20 years ago.  I really hope it works out well for them and if I'm right in how I see it, it goes forward that way.  Doom 2016 is too brainless and fast for my taste, but I still like to open it up every rare often to shoot things but the pacing sucks.  It's just rampantly fast on kills, much like some mass bot fight or online multiplayer deathmatch.

 

Ha! 8)

 

I imagine that Eternal will also be frantically fast like Doom 2016 is... I think it's too soon to make that call, just from the available demo.  My two cents anyway.  I loved the 'in your face' aspect of Doom 4, but it seems that I share your sentiment, in that the 'glory kill' dynamic is a necessity to progress in the game.  That upset me, considering ID said it wasn't going to be necessary, but imo... it was necessary.  Mind you, I played it on the Playstation 4.  If I played it with a M&KB on the PC, it would be much easier.

 

My MAIN gripe with Doom 4 - and I'm surprised I haven't seen many other Gamers mention this... is how absolutely LAZY and chickenshit of a move it was, for them to not change the Placements up for the varying difficulties.  They went the Noob route and simply add health to the NPCs, and also how much damage they do to the player.  I was extremely disappointed to learn that, after beating the game and wanting to play it on a higher difficulty.  :roll:   Absolute dingbat move on their part and if I was a journalist, I would lambast them with that point until I was blue in the face.  They need to work for a living, and do unique NPC placements for each difficulty.  That is a standard that should be respected, but I digress.... :pirate:



#35 DoTheMath OFFLINE  

DoTheMath

    Star Raider

  • 96 posts
  • Location:Paris, France

Posted Sun Sep 9, 2018 8:55 PM

 

:lolblue:

 

A hot mess indeed...

 

 

Ha! 8)

 

I imagine that Eternal will also be frantically fast like Doom 2016 is... I think it's too soon to make that call, just from the available demo.  My two cents anyway.  I loved the 'in your face' aspect of Doom 4, but it seems that I share your sentiment, in that the 'glory kill' dynamic is a necessity to progress in the game.  That upset me, considering ID said it wasn't going to be necessary, but imo... it was necessary.  Mind you, I played it on the Playstation 4.  If I played it with a M&KB on the PC, it would be much easier.

 

My MAIN gripe with Doom 4 - and I'm surprised I haven't seen many other Gamers mention this... is how absolutely LAZY and chickenshit of a move it was, for them to not change the Placements up for the varying difficulties.  They went the Noob route and simply add health to the NPCs, and also how much damage they do to the player.  I was extremely disappointed to learn that, after beating the game and wanting to play it on a higher difficulty.  :roll:   Absolute dingbat move on their part and if I was a journalist, I would lambast them with that point until I was blue in the face.  They need to work for a living, and do unique NPC placements for each difficulty.  That is a standard that should be respected, but I digress.... :pirate:

Yup. The difficulty mechanics felt a bit disapointing especially since the rune to get bfg ammo kinda breaks the game with endless supply of panic buttons.

Enemy variety between modes would have added more replay value and surprise like in the previous games.

 

The glory kill mechanics i think was to prevent the "enter this room, shoot to alert the demons of your presence and wait by the door with a shotgun" syndrome that the first games suffered. But it has brought the syndrome of "glowing dude! Gotta slap!" syndrome maybe to please twitchy mobile game addicts with "instant gratification".

 

The humor shoehorn kinda bothers me with its lack of subtlety. The 2016's game was better at this.



#36 Rocket Man OFFLINE  

Rocket Man

    Star Raider

  • 71 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:38 PM

Yup. The difficulty mechanics felt a bit disapointing especially since the rune to get bfg ammo kinda breaks the game with endless supply of panic buttons.

Enemy variety between modes would have added more replay value and surprise like in the previous games.

 

The glory kill mechanics i think was to prevent the "enter this room, shoot to alert the demons of your presence and wait by the door with a shotgun" syndrome that the first games suffered. But it has brought the syndrome of "glowing dude! Gotta slap!" syndrome maybe to please twitchy mobile game addicts with "instant gratification".

 

The humor shoehorn kinda bothers me with its lack of subtlety. The 2016's game was better at this.

 

Your post makes sense.  It was most likely because they didn't want to spend time on it, costing more money in the end I imagine.



#37 DoTheMath OFFLINE  

DoTheMath

    Star Raider

  • 96 posts
  • Location:Paris, France

Posted Mon Sep 10, 2018 5:03 PM

 

Your post makes sense.  It was most likely because they didn't want to spend time on it, costing more money in the end I imagine.

Yea, especially since the almost finished, previous draft of "Doom 4" got canned, Bethesda must have kept the budget tight. I can't imagine the money that got wasted on that.



#38 Tanooki OFFLINE  

Tanooki

    River Patroller

  • 4,983 posts

Posted Mon Sep 10, 2018 8:16 PM


I imagine that Eternal will also be frantically fast like Doom 2016 is... I think it's too soon to make that call, just from the available demo.  My two cents anyway.  I loved the 'in your face' aspect of Doom 4, but it seems that I share your sentiment, in that the 'glory kill' dynamic is a necessity to progress in the game.  That upset me, considering ID said it wasn't going to be necessary, but imo... it was necessary.  Mind you, I played it on the Playstation 4.  If I played it with a M&KB on the PC, it would be much easier.

Actually I went from M&KB to the Switch and found the game more approachable using a gamepad.  Because of that forced mechanic with the glory kills, I found it easier to ram my fist down somethings face one way or the other than rapidly swinging the mouse around and key mashing to get the same result.  Kills were just more cleaner like the game was designed with console first in mind before the more normal approach from the PC. Sure old D1/2 were more gamepad oriented though the other was a choice, and it's like this one went back to that.



#39 Austin OFFLINE  

Austin

    Quadrunner

  • Topic Starter
  • 12,704 posts
  • Location:Fairfax, VA

Posted Mon Sep 10, 2018 8:56 PM

I imagine that Eternal will also be frantically fast like Doom 2016 is... I think it's too soon to make that call, just from the available demo.


Uh.. The demo (and the devs themselves) made it pretty obvious it's going to be frantically fast, just like the first game. Not really sure how it's "too soon to make that call".

#40 Rocket Man OFFLINE  

Rocket Man

    Star Raider

  • 71 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted Yesterday, 5:36 PM

Uh.. The demo (and the devs themselves) made it pretty obvious it's going to be frantically fast, just like the first game. Not really sure how it's "too soon to make that call".

 

Fair enough, I only watched a few minutes of the Demo... I think it was 20+ minutes long and I didn't see the majority of it.  I suppose I missed all the frantic gameplay.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: doom, doom eternal, doom II

1 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users