Basically, if you liked Doom (2016) then you'll like this one! I was extremely impressed with just how well the previous entry managed to keep up the intensity for so many hours.
Basically, if you liked Doom (2016) then you'll like this one!
I was extremely impressed with just how well the previous entry managed to keep up the intensity for so many hours.
I feel like we're talking about two different games here. I'm watching Markiplier's playthrough, and it's... goofy. Cartoony, like someone tried to make it more children-friendly, in a "kids these...
I feel like we're talking about two different games here.
I'm watching Markiplier's playthrough, and it's... goofy. Cartoony, like someone tried to make it more children-friendly, in a "kids these days see this kinda stuff anyway" sort of way. It looks a lot more like Quake 3 now, and more like the original Doom. It's lost its grittiness is exchange for... what?
The HUD, enemies exploding into small chunks that are in no way proportional to their volume, soldiers that look like cartoon versions of supersoldiers... Wall-firing traps like it's 2003, Doomguy with a face, no grit that made the previous installment so grounded and appealing (for a game that revels in gore)...
Mark is gleeful. I'm incredulous. It has its moments – like that giant monster right as you exit the first facility – but, like... why? You had an excellent style established, and you threw it away for a UI that looks like its goal is to sell more toys.
The initial presentation makes little sense of the lore, either. "Eh. Earth was under attack, fell quickly. You have VEGA helping you now 'cause... yeah. You have a giant blade in your armor now, and a safe place to return to in orbit. Now go chunkify some zombinos." So many chances for equally-cool storytelling thrown away for reasons entirely beyond me.
You started the first game with an awesome, concise show of what you are and what you can do. It guided you somewhere. This one just... throws you in.
I actually partially agree with you here so far. I've gotten through the first two campaign missions, and while I really like the new UI and color scheme – I think the colorful nature of it really...
I actually partially agree with you here so far. I've gotten through the first two campaign missions, and while I really like the new UI and color scheme – I think the colorful nature of it really works, personally – I really do dislike how the story starts in the middle-of-nowhere. 2016 DOOM was great in that it had a sensible start point where you knew as much as your character did. Now we've got what's apparently like 3 months (?) of lost time the story just skips over.
I also really didn't like the fact that a bunch of cutscenes seem to suddenly swap to third-person and how guns float in the air and such. I get that things like the latter are there to be like older shooters, but it really hurts the immersion. I loved getting animations every time I picked up a new gun and the character actually picked it up from the world where it was lying in a way that made sense. Now it's just there because-we-say-so, and it's just not as fun.
Disclaimer: I should note that I actually do like DOOM Eternal so far, primarily because the combat is wicked fun, but I still hold these gripes and so far the game's not done much to address them.
In exchange for being like the original two Doom games, basically. I don't think anyone was really into Doom 2016 for the grittiness, not really. The cartoonish over-the-top attitude about...
In exchange for being like the original two Doom games, basically.
I don't think anyone was really into Doom 2016 for the grittiness, not really. The cartoonish over-the-top attitude about everything is what won people over since it flew in the face of grittiness and realism. Also the gameplay, it was just a ton of fun to play. The graphics were really good but graphics really weren't what made the last game so special.
As long as the gameplay is just as fun or more, people are going to enjoy the hell out of it.
As far as lore goes... I mean, it's Doom. If anything, it's anti-lore.
It had a grounded, mature style that had all the shot in the world to grow into something even better. It made sense, it was made with consideration to the environment the players found themselves...
I don't think anyone was really into Doom 2016 for the grittiness
It had a grounded, mature style that had all the shot in the world to grow into something even better. It made sense, it was made with consideration to the environment the players found themselves in, and it looked very cool.
If anything, that's regressive design.
The cartoonish over-the-top attitude
That's the thing: it wasn't cartoonish. It was unrestrained, it was gratuitious, and it was gory for the sake of the gore – but it was nothing like cartoonish. The fact that people like the current iteration baffles me.
As far as lore goes... I mean, it's Doom. If anything, it's anti-lore.
It hasn't been in the 2016 installment, for the better. It had that just-enough style of delivery that's really fucking attractive when it comes to the unknown. Warframe had that in the mid-beta. Dota 2 has that as we speak. Half-Life 2 had it pretty good, too.
"Anti-lore" is not how you describe Doom 2016.
They exchanged an excellent game design framework for something that hasn't been around since late 90s for good reason: design evolves.
When Doom 2016 came out, the aspects that were more like the originals were well received while the "gritty" leftovers from earlier development on Doom 4 were less so.
When Doom 2016 came out, the aspects that were more like the originals were well received while the "gritty" leftovers from earlier development on Doom 4 were less so.
When games like this come out, I always miss totalbiscuit. I think a TB review would sound pretty similar to LGRs, but I would still like to hear it. Sometimes I go back and watch his videos just...
When games like this come out, I always miss totalbiscuit. I think a TB review would sound pretty similar to LGRs, but I would still like to hear it. Sometimes I go back and watch his videos just because.
Basically, if you liked Doom (2016) then you'll like this one!
I was extremely impressed with just how well the previous entry managed to keep up the intensity for so many hours.
I feel like we're talking about two different games here.
I'm watching Markiplier's playthrough, and it's... goofy. Cartoony, like someone tried to make it more children-friendly, in a "kids these days see this kinda stuff anyway" sort of way. It looks a lot more like Quake 3 now, and more like the original Doom. It's lost its grittiness is exchange for... what?
The HUD, enemies exploding into small chunks that are in no way proportional to their volume, soldiers that look like cartoon versions of supersoldiers... Wall-firing traps like it's 2003, Doomguy with a face, no grit that made the previous installment so grounded and appealing (for a game that revels in gore)...
Mark is gleeful. I'm incredulous. It has its moments – like that giant monster right as you exit the first facility – but, like... why? You had an excellent style established, and you threw it away for a UI that looks like its goal is to sell more toys.
The initial presentation makes little sense of the lore, either. "Eh. Earth was under attack, fell quickly. You have VEGA helping you now 'cause... yeah. You have a giant blade in your armor now, and a safe place to return to in orbit. Now go chunkify some zombinos." So many chances for equally-cool storytelling thrown away for reasons entirely beyond me.
You started the first game with an awesome, concise show of what you are and what you can do. It guided you somewhere. This one just... throws you in.
I actually partially agree with you here so far. I've gotten through the first two campaign missions, and while I really like the new UI and color scheme – I think the colorful nature of it really works, personally – I really do dislike how the story starts in the middle-of-nowhere. 2016 DOOM was great in that it had a sensible start point where you knew as much as your character did. Now we've got what's apparently like 3 months (?) of lost time the story just skips over.
I also really didn't like the fact that a bunch of cutscenes seem to suddenly swap to third-person and how guns float in the air and such. I get that things like the latter are there to be like older shooters, but it really hurts the immersion. I loved getting animations every time I picked up a new gun and the character actually picked it up from the world where it was lying in a way that made sense. Now it's just there because-we-say-so, and it's just not as fun.
Disclaimer: I should note that I actually do like DOOM Eternal so far, primarily because the combat is wicked fun, but I still hold these gripes and so far the game's not done much to address them.
In exchange for being like the original two Doom games, basically.
I don't think anyone was really into Doom 2016 for the grittiness, not really. The cartoonish over-the-top attitude about everything is what won people over since it flew in the face of grittiness and realism. Also the gameplay, it was just a ton of fun to play. The graphics were really good but graphics really weren't what made the last game so special.
As long as the gameplay is just as fun or more, people are going to enjoy the hell out of it.
As far as lore goes... I mean, it's Doom. If anything, it's anti-lore.
It had a grounded, mature style that had all the shot in the world to grow into something even better. It made sense, it was made with consideration to the environment the players found themselves in, and it looked very cool.
If anything, that's regressive design.
That's the thing: it wasn't cartoonish. It was unrestrained, it was gratuitious, and it was gory for the sake of the gore – but it was nothing like cartoonish. The fact that people like the current iteration baffles me.
It hasn't been in the 2016 installment, for the better. It had that just-enough style of delivery that's really fucking attractive when it comes to the unknown. Warframe had that in the mid-beta. Dota 2 has that as we speak. Half-Life 2 had it pretty good, too.
"Anti-lore" is not how you describe Doom 2016.
They exchanged an excellent game design framework for something that hasn't been around since late 90s for good reason: design evolves.
When Doom 2016 came out, the aspects that were more like the originals were well received while the "gritty" leftovers from earlier development on Doom 4 were less so.
When games like this come out, I always miss totalbiscuit. I think a TB review would sound pretty similar to LGRs, but I would still like to hear it. Sometimes I go back and watch his videos just because.