Doom 4 officially announced. - by june gloom
sNeaksieGarrett on 23/7/2008 at 16:40
I just want to reply to what renzatic said:
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Ultimately, to me anyway, that's what Doom is supposed to be about. Not quick little scares that involve 2 or 3 monsters jumping out behind closed doors, PDAs, or cutscenes, but straight up balls to the wall intensity with 30+ imps heading towards you and 20 lost souls screaming up from behind. Anything else wouldn't be Doom to me.
I disagree. While doom 1 and 2 are classics, and I love them to death,
if you're looking for scaryness, having 30+ monsters rushing at you is not scary. Scary is like doom 3, with shit sneaking up on you. However, I did think after beating doom 3 once, that it's a predictable game, and there were actually probably too many monsters in some parts to make it less scary.:erg: Plus, they always spawned in the same spots. If monsters spawned randomly, or didn't "portalize" into the world with you seeing it happen (you could just run up and shotgun an imp as it portalized lol) that would have made doom 3 better. I also think that with the new generation of graphics technology and everything, doom would be fine re-imagined. Hell, that's all doom 3 was, a remake. It's just that doom 3 didn't really work in most people's minds eye, but to me, doom 3 is a good game in it's own right. I give it an 8 point something rating. I posted a review on doom 3 on gamespot a while back. And I think part of the reason doom 3 didn't work for people is the storyline.
---
@ZymeAddict: The alpha of doom 3 had flashlights on the guns. I wish id software would have left those on, but thankfully modders have made "duct tape" mods if you know what I mean. Also, if you look closely you can see that the weapons are different too. I have an alpha video favorited on my youtube account if you want me to fetch it for you.
Back on topic:
I actually was a bit suprised that doom 4 is in development. I just hope it's badass. Or at least good enough to deserve a decent score (such as an 8 out of 10).
Bjossi on 23/7/2008 at 17:36
Doom 3 was a predictable game, hopefully Doom 4 will "switch between" scares throughout the game to keep it scary all the way through.
SS2 is a good example. On MedSci it was this dim-blue lighting and hybrids walking around, then in Engineering there are the big doors that make this weird sound that creeps the shit out of me, no better are the cargo bays. Then comes Hydroponics and its disgusting nature, with worm piles everywhere.
It sort of cycles through different types of scares throughout the game.
SubJeff on 23/7/2008 at 18:16
I'm not so much a fan of weapon degradation but I can't see why we can't have a Director (from Left 4 Dead) style "overwatch" process that only spawns as much ammo as you need to just keep you alive in a survival horror setting.
The problem with getting good at the game (or on 2nd/3rd playthrough) is that you'll know where the ammo is. Randomly spawning enemies, in an AvP style (there were a finite number of Aliens I think, but the spawn locations changed) and low ammo would keep you on your toes.
gunsmoke on 23/7/2008 at 18:42
Agreed ^^^ great point subjeff!
Quote Posted by Bjossi
Doom 3 was a predictable game, hopefully Doom 4 will "switch between" scares throughout the game to keep it scary all the way through.
SS2 is a good example. On MedSci it was this dim-blue lighting and hybrids walking around, then in Engineering there are the big doors that make this weird sound that creeps the shit out of me, no better are the cargo bays. Then comes Hydroponics and its disgusting nature, with worm piles everywhere.
It sort of cycles through different types of scares throughout the game.
That was one of the main reasons why I was initially so immersed and attracted to the game. Same thing w/Thief & DX. The environments changed semi-frequently, and with them the gameplay was altered a bit to suit the new environ. SS2 was masterful at keeping the player on his toes and never allowing him to become comfortable/familiar w/the gameplay/enivironments.
SubJeff on 23/7/2008 at 19:32
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
semi-frequently
The word you are looking for is occasionally. Lets quash this newspeak.
catbarf on 25/7/2008 at 01:15
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
I'm not so much a fan of weapon degradation but I can't see why we can't have a Director (from Left 4 Dead) style "overwatch" process that only spawns as much ammo as you need to
just keep you alive in a survival horror setting.
Random ammo spawn is fine. But giving you just enough and making sure your ammo hovers around a certain point is just annoying as hell.
The_Raven on 25/7/2008 at 02:14
Everyone loves a game that rewards you for wasting your ammo. :rolleyes:
catbarf on 25/7/2008 at 02:27
Quote Posted by The_Raven
Everyone loves a game that rewards you for wasting your ammo. :rolleyes:
And can never, ever let you screw yourself over and
lose.
Hang on, that comment seems awfully familiar.
The_Raven on 25/7/2008 at 02:31
I stole it from someone here who mentioned it in a thread that discussed Bioshock's adaptive difficulty. This was pre-release, of course.
catbarf on 25/7/2008 at 05:46
Quote Posted by The_Raven
I stole it from someone here who mentioned it in a thread that discussed Bioshock's adaptive difficulty. This was pre-release, of course.
I was sarcastically referencing my own post as a jab at Bioshock's 'Everybody can be a winner' game design ethic.
