I know this is a pedantic point, but nobody seems to understand the Doomguy's motivation. He doesn't hate the other characters because he's just there to kill demons, he's disgusted in them for releasing the demons from hell. Along with the clip in the video where he destroys the energy receptors, during the intro as Hayden is saying "for the betterment of mankind", he looks *directly* at a corpse but apparently everyone missed that. In fact I theorized he saved the Vega chip to put into Hayden because he thinks Vega wouldn't put people at risk. It could still turn out that he's just a psycho that kills everything but if they're keeping with the original games, the only characterization we know of Doomguy is that he won't shoot civillians and he loves his pet rabbit Daisy.
***** Everyone says he doesn't care about the plot and just wants to kill demons, even though he's only acting disrespectfully to Hayden for letting the demons trough. His "don't care just kill" attitude is subtextual but people take that too literally.
This causes so much of a cognitive dissonance to me. When I play a game I'd like to be motivated in a different way than just "rip and tear," and Doomguy in this game is so clearly made to do just THAT. To put it bluntly I don't like him.
I loved the irony when Doomguy looked at the corpse under him at exactly the moment Hayden says "for the betterment of mankind". He's got a lot more personality than people give credit, and he's a very righteous individual eager to punish the UAC for its arrogance and greed.
Well Hayden goes over the Doom Slayer (what the game calls the protagonist)motivation at the end. He needs to kill them all. All the demons, until there is no trace. This is very similar to another ID character, BJ from Wolfenstein in the last Wolfenstein game. If he keeps killing Nazis, they will eventually run out of Nazis. BJ's purpose for existing is to kill Nazis. The Doom Slayer's purpose for existing is to kill demons.
ok, so this is perhaps the best case I've seen AGAINST day one reviews. Nuanced, human critique completely free from hype. This is the piece on Doom I've been waiting for since its release - I've grown to really enjoy the game in short bursts, but there were so many issues for me with repetition that I was surprised and even angry that more people weren't picking up on that. This does a really good job articulating why the combat is repetitive and why it perhaps lacks an identity of its own, whilst also acknowledging just how fun it is. Really great job man, thanks for this.
Well said. I also don't really care very much for day one reviews. If I'm hyped for a game I don't want the reviews to ruin it because I'll get the game for myself and feed off the hype. If I'm interested in a game I usually let things pan out for a bit and see if it is worth picking up or not. Day one reviews are also done under a crunch and I don't want that to affect how I feel about a game.
Oodli You're totally right. There weren't any review copies sent out before the release of the game. I guess we are talking about super early reviews, or maybe just day 1 reviews in general...
wait. you play doom searching for human critique? even videogames ABOUT human critique have very insane and egotastical ones (unless they are japanese games...) sure the combat is "repetitive" (as most modern shooter out there... how come Call of Duty gets a free pass when you play for 6 hours"shooting the same guy in the face"? because the 10 minutes of cutscene before?), the game is also graphically repetitive, it's too short, it does not "try" enough and the design is utter shit... that said it's doom. that's the game you wanted if you want a game called "doom"... I did not play doom and then expect is Persona.
I strongly disagree with the idea that every weapon is worth the same, weapons are more or less effective vs some enemies and it's up to you to use them in a smart way. This is even more true for the bosses, where some weapons are way better than others to counter their attacks and deal maximum damage. The fact that every weapon is good doesn't mean they are all optimized for every situation.
@@lobachevscki and they fucked it up, especially in the dlcs, by making some weapons *required* to kill specific enemies. or otherwise having to play the game a specific way to deal with them. Marauder is of course the most prominent example, but there are many more
After finishing the campaign, I struggle to think of a game that I'll have more fun jumping into to wreak havoc and let off steam for a couple hours than this. In that way, it's exactly like what the old Dooms were when I was a kid, and that's really welcome.
@Ca Wh nice, I like that we don't share the same opinions and I think we're looking for very different things in games. You seem to be very passionate about your feelings on games, so are there any others you want to share? (serious question)
@Fe Cu i will take doom any day over gta or rdr The open world feels very boring after a while and the combat is just cover shooter with no fun in the combat and weapons feels very weak
With the right preparation and safeguards, a portal to an alternate dimension of infinite flame and heat could provide effectively unlimited electrical power. Add to this the possible scientific applications of exploiting the creatures and magic there (canonically, hell does have magical glyphs and things in it in this series) It isn't that unreasonable.
"It would've been easy for Doom (2016) to present itself as a serious story [....] but it could've easily overcorrected into self-parody" ** Cries in Doom Eternal **
"Once the nostalgia buzz runs out, what's left?" Easy. This game functions as proof to the modern AAA industry that in 2016, a fast paced shooter can still work, even if it's a bit too samey. While the modern industry relies a lot on trends and sales charts, it often forgets to look at what the actual fans want, and the developers and publishers of doom smartly realized this. They've capitalized on a hole in the market that indie games and serious sam just couldn't fill. What this means is that while this particular shooter is just a retread, fast paced first person shooters are now back on the idea table when it comes to making AAA games, and that could lead to a resurgence of this particular subset of this genre, and some creative people might be given a chance that they otherwise wouldn't have.
@Fe Cu yeah except in Eternal there is a really good damage model. Additionally, the enemies flinching is part of the gameplay- knowing how to get enemies to falter isnt about realism or whether something is modern or not, it is about juggling enemies that can put you down quickly. God knows I dont think these games are perfect but the idea that RDR2 has better gunplay because you 'have to chamber a round' strikes me as a false premise. Similarly, glory kills are about giving you breathing room to assess your resources and positioning- reducing them to QTEs isnt quite right.
Feel much of the criticism about the combat/level design "variations of a theme" and the like is fixed in Doom 2016 by cranking up the difficulty. This "weapon selection is a personal preference" thing isn't the case when you essentially instantly die to most attacks. On the top two difficulties, you _must_ use heavy weaponry on the hardest enemies, you _must_ be careful about your chainsaw usage; in this way, the survival-horror aspect of old Doom is melded into Doom 2016, just through more Quake-esque Arena shooter gameplay and to that effect, the _best_ shooter Id has made (on "hard" mode). So all in all, I think that criticism is incredibly unfair, as the old school Doom played on a difficulty too easy for you will indeed play as if "weapon selection is a personal preference", just like too-easy-for-you Doom 2016. However, I suppose if you do play the game with easier combat, at the very least, the sparse, scattered resources of old-school Doom can still be compelling at a lower difficulty. Also, I've seen a few reviews where incredibly specific nostalgia cries or otherwise nit-picky points are made. Here "it felt so good when sprite's corpses remained" making it feel "cleansed" ... Completely not mentioning that Doom 2016 literally changes the atmosphere of rooms when they've been "cleansed," so they clearly did have that concept in mind, but debatably did it _better_ this way, as you rip the core/heart thing out of those statues, all hell breaks lose, you kill everything then the area is literally "cleared" including the air, which I think indeed does let you "bask in the results of your battles" it just does it in a more general gameified way of "the lights turned back on cuz you won!" rather than the early 90s fascination with brutally disfigured corpses (not that there isn't a lot of that in Doom 2016 anyway, they just don't 'linger' on the floor). "Once the nostolgia buzz wears off, what's left?" Well for 1, they could make an awesome multiplayer, rather than "Modern Halo/CoD shooter via Doom Skin" but really, I think it's unfair to hold such high standards for the game. Doom's designers' goal wasn't to redefine gaming (or maybe it was, but there was no way to know how successful they'd be _beforehand_) they just made a bad ass game. That's what Doom 2016 is to me; but whereas original Doom was a catalyst to an era, Doom 2016 is relighting that fire when most games don't play this way or this well anymore and that's all it needs to do for me to be great.
Since weapons in Doom '16 can be swap-loaded, High-difficulty becomes even less variable due to SSG->RL->Gauss weapon rotationing. Watch some Ultranightmare runs to see what I mean.
SinaelDOverom I’ll be honest I really love swap-loading in games because it keeps the fast pace and feels great but yeah it can get incredibly over powered.
FREEDO this is an amazing comment. everything you said is great. also wow i didn't even conciously realized beating gore nests does change the air of the room. thanks for that observation!!
Strawberry Princess i think they just mean switching between different weapons really fast. it's much easier with mouse and keyboard than a controller.
In response to the Cover song analogy, almost every great band/artist began doing covers. It was their way of establishing not so much an identity, but a frame of reference for themselves and their audience. The greatest works of art are a mish-mash of influences, and embracing that is key to evolving. This is the first DOOM game made without John Carmack or really any of the original crew, so in a way it really is a brand new game for Id. I imagine there'll be sequels, and I'd like to think that they'll continue to try and combine the best aspects of 90s DOOM with the best aspects of modern-day. Was it a 100% success the first time around? No, and because this wasn't a passion-child of only 15 members, there was no way that everything worthwhile could have been considered. It will be tough, because this sort of clash of ideologies always is, but I think this game is a good first step and maybe, just maybe, they will be able to successfully update things like the level design and editors the next time around.
FINALLY! Finally a review addressing some of the issues I see. Everyone's just gushing over it and how it managed to recapture the "Doom" feel. I posit that while not a bad game, it has captured nothing more of the old Doom than any other shooter. The old Doom is an action puzzler that happens to be in first person. The new Doom is a game of aiming. If you remove the theme, there's almost nothing liking the two games. And I couldn't see anyone agreeing with that, so this review is highly cathartic. Thank you.
I may be exaggerating by saying "nothing more". I should've said "little more", but I do have a point, it's not like I'm spewing nonsense for the sake of it. I don't get why you are so assertive and aggressive, though; you could ask for why someone is saying something you disagree with, instead of bashing; or, alternatively, you could explain why you think what they say is "total nonsense". If you did that, you and I could've had a civil conversation and one - or more probably both - of us might've walked out of it smarter. The way you've answered accomplishes nothing; it doesn't tell me why I'm wrong, if I am. It doesn't give you a way to change your opinion, if you are. I humbly propose to you to revise your answer, and then I'll be happy to converse. If you don't feel like it, no harm done, and good day.
Before playing on nightmare ive never even had a need in a plasma rifle, but once I did, it found it's place in specific situations, just like every other gun. They are not all equal, there is a clear effectiveness difference between guns when it comes to countering different enemies.
The Cyberdemon wasn't necissarily scripted. As evident by it's presence in one of the classic maps, where it roams around freely, and you can take it on at your own pace, and strategy.
I much prefer the Cyberdemon in Doom 2016, seeing it as an actual boss fight with patterns, multiple attacks and phases is epic whereas I think the classic Doom's bullet sponge tank version doesn't hold up (Perhaps the only thing that I feel is dated in classic Doom), the same applies to the Spider Mastermind. Pumping stupid amounts of rockets into a big enemy that only has one attack and one walk pattern is not a good boss fight at all in my eyes, it just makes for a tedious battle in my opinion. I feel they definitely work as a huge threat that players are better off avoiding and I like how some modders recognize that. I've seen some people saying the bosses should have been lumbering bullet sponges with one attack and one movement pattern and I can't help but feel that kind of design would make the boss fights utterly horrible in this day and age.
Yea, the Cyberdemon in the original doom is treated like a glorified normal monster, not like a boss, same with the Spider Mastermind, but that's fine, a "classic" boss fight would not had fit in the old doom.
I wonder how much your last point fails to take into account the perspective of people who don't have any nostalgia for teh old games and/or have never played them. What's left? A fun energetic romp. And personally, I am interested in seeing where a DOOM 2016 Part II would carry the story. One specific point I disagree on in the proposed same-ness of the weapons. As the game increased in difficulty and intensity, I found the super shotgun, chaingun, and railgun (whatever they're called) much for effective than the default shotgun, or either of the machine guns/rifles. I hardly ever was suing the plasma rifle by the end, because I found it too weak for all the bigger enemies being thrown at me.
As much as I loved deum, as much as the samey level design didn't bother me, I still agree with what's being said. Let us hope deum 2 can take this opportunity for bigger badder, more complex, more veritable levels and run home with it.
I hate it when (seemingly) overwhelming majority of people act like level design structure is completely irrelevant. I haven't had the time to watch through this video yet so I don't know if Campster brings up the issue, but I haven't seen a single fan of Doom 4 say a word about level and encounter design when they talk how old school and true to its roots this game is.
I am a doom fan and I'd say DooM4 design is kinda shit... the game is designed in a simple "arena-corridor-arena", but after all that's the best way to portray what it's easily seen as a "beat em up design" adapted to a shooter...
The game has a wide variety of levels. Some of them are sprawling and non-linear with keycard hunts and isolated encounters, whereas others are very straight-forward and arena battle-focused. I think that's actually one of this game's greatest strengths: It doesn't just do the same thing over and over. There's even a level that revolves _very_ heavily around platforming, which is something you very rarely see in shooters.
you clearly didn't play the same game as everyone else then, because the level design in Doom 4 is ace. First levels have the arena feelings because of the gore nests, but then the game opens up and you pretty much have enemies everywhere and levels are just like Doom 1 levels but with a lot more verticality. And it's not like the first Doom didn't had arenas. It had plenty of rooms with enemies spawning or walls opening up made for bigger fights
At the end of these videos I can never seem to put together what admiration I have for this channel. the thoughtful analysis of systems that feel like the furthest thing the games industry could produce, the apt humour and the understanding of the games ecosystem that could only come from love. I feel it could almost be a disservice to call errant signals videos game reviews. ten outa ten
The game was in a development hell, so it's still amazing it came out that way. Now, when they learned how to nail this new formula, and if they decide to make a sequel, I'm hoping for including more varied encounter design. They can go much deeper and spend time on including more interesting scenarios and a more developed story (its tone was changed very far into production, so it had to be rushed). Basically, I believe that can build a lot on top of this reboot.
Coming back to this years after the fact, years after Doom Eternal, I find myself still caught up on how it feels like Doom 2016 did something unintentionally great with story themes and Doom Eternal just didn't land it well, although I don't know how it could. Obviously its both serious and campy and weird and fun in its tone, but Doom 2016 really feels like a duel between two extremely human, determined, and talented people, with fundamental disagreements on what is best. Samuel Hayden viewing things in the near and the now with an energy crisis looming and a source of energy ripe for the picking, needing a relatively small amount of sacrifice to solve a worldwide issue, and supercedes his own body and death to realize this solution. And Doomguy is more forward thinking, and almost bizarrely sympathetic to the human cost of this solution, seeing Hell for what it is: Hell, a horrific end point of life that should not be quartered with by anyone but the damned, and no problem is worth working with demons for the pain they cause. And while they need to work together, to a degree, to stop the immediate threat, these two HATE one another, and no amount of working together or seeing what the other is doing with their perspective will change their minds. It's a beautiful, human conflict, if you engage with it that way. Then Doom Eternal made it a profoundly unhuman topic, with the changing of Samuel and the dialogue shift of Doomguy, and I just feel like its a mistake. A misstep. They had something really fun with just two opposed, extraordinary humans, who were posed to butt heads, and it became something much less human. IDK how they could have continued 2016s narrative thread, though, without mucking up this part of it. But still, feels like something was lost.
Weirdly, what got stuck in my head when you were going into how Doom 2016's level design, weapon usage and enemy placement were restricted compared to the original was how good the first few Halo games were at that. Certainly not Doom levels, but the guns have a basic hierarchy, and the enemies all capable of being thrown together in different configurations. What I'm saying is I think Doom/Doom 2 and the original Halo games are the only shooters I know (maybe Half-Life?) that have people making youtube videos of NPC fighting tournaments.
I've been following this channel since your Dues Ex: Human Revolution episode and this has to be one of your best video. Well written, well edited, and good pacing on the narration.
Well, to me, the way to answer the question of "What's left" is by pointing at the new Star Wars movies: First you make sure your new formula is workable and well received, then you go crazy with it. At least, that's the intention I gleaned from Star Wars VII, despite only having that one episode.
Doom 2016 tried its best to give us an update on everything that we love from the originals, and the result is definitely a mixed bag. Despite that, it's an incredible experience.
One more note, since I am a few bottles deep into my night, your videos are excellent, well researched, and spoken in a very professional voice. Keep up the good work mate.
I liked the little shift in movement control. The projectile dodging is still there, but because the enemies are generally faster in every aspect than before, you also have to use the cover to minimized the amount of enemies you have to encounter at once in an arena. You have to constantly think where will be the next position I want to take a fight on. A clear weapon hierarchy would have been nice to have, because that usually creates a player specific difficulty curve: in a game where ammunition is at least virtually scarce, it encourages the player to cope with as little as possible while saving the items he has for a moment he really needs them. For example in Alan Wake, flashlight batteries are very valuable because boosting your light source is the only way to defeat tougher enemies, but even tho the batteries were even too plentiful in the game, I kept hoarding them just because I was thinking that they were very valuable and I didn't want to waste them.
You figure out weapon hierarchies mechanically: one shot from a BFG or Gauss and you know it's better for big monsters, the super shotgun's extra power comes with longer reloads meaning it's better for single-target medium kills, assault rifle headshots small dudes, plasma is good for getting some glory kills on small fry as you can control the damage output better, rockets nuke cacodemons, etc. It's up to the player to find these interactions and exploit them.
Well, that really isn't a hierarchy, more just the specific applications of each gun. I think he means hierarchy as in tiers that work off inventory management such as Resident Evil 4, the Dead Space Series (1 & 2), and most survival horror. Like he said, this would require ammo scarcity through out the entire game and with disparate weapon ammo availability. I know the chain saw has relatively scarce amount but that is because it is suppose to reward you with a "boss fountain" worth of ammo for the rest of your guns. The Chain Gun & Gauss can basically used forever with the right upgrades. So this new DOOM can be thought of as a more arcade twitch approach to rebuilding DOOM. I think he is trying to say that the original DOOM had a more survival horror aspect of inventory management build within the level design, where as the new DOOM seems more focused to reward constant assault regardless of weapon choice, relatively at least.
This analysis is much better than I thought, especially in the whole combat/level design/player speed domain. Some of the things, I was thinking about, like the fact that in the old Doom you felt like a king moving faster than your rocket and avoiding hundreds of slow projectile, while in the new Doom you move slower (even if faster than other FPS) and the projectiles are really fast and the have an angle arc that can sometimes hit your strafe, the monsters climb on walls/ceiling (which is cool, more clever than classic Doom monsters) but the whole affair makes you struggle all the time and force you to glorykill which is also dangerous, since during the glorykill animation maybe a projectile was coming at you, yes you are invincible during the animation but not just right after, where you might need 0.5 sec to regain your perception and where your player and enemies and projectile currently are, which is even chaotic on it's own the way the battles happen with arena and teleportations. And there are much more said, very well explained, it's exactly how I feel. I do like new Doom but not enough to replace old Doom which I still enjoy playing user levels and making my own maps. And yes, just plugging tiles of rooms is not interesting to me anymore, no more designing a room line by line (which I agree would be far more complex in a real 3d game than Doom with it's mostly 2d map data) . Also,. not mentioned, there is a monster limit of 64 in Snapmap, and that's ok compared to another limit of no more than 12 active monsters. And that doesn't mean 12 on your view, but 12 currently alive on the map, so if you have closed doors with more than 12 monsters, some will no appear unless you kill others, you have to design your level linearly so that the first 12 monsters in priority will be killed before you get a key to open the other door with new monsters (and there doesn't appear to be a way to affect this priority with an id or something, it depends on which rooms or monsters you added first in an invisible list). This is even apparent in the classic Doom easter egg levels (which you can't design in snapmap of course but they still have the limitations). In E1M5 remake, you could go up the stairs and shoot zombie soldiers from the window. But in the new Doom, I go up there and there is nobody outside and I am like WTF? Only when I kill other enemies in the vicinity and open the door to that room I see them teleport. That's why they never made E1M6 or E1M7, too many enemies in open spaces and windows to be active at the same time.
What's left? A game that focuses on being fun. Its undeniable that doom (2016) steers away from other modern shooters. It tries to look back at what made the classics so great. Doom (2016) isnt perfect but i think that it may be the beginning of a turn in the industry into re-evaluating what you need to make a good game.
Having worked in a few factories, the "this is the history of our company" videos that played on the TVs in DOOM 3 are very very commonplace in orientation / onboarding for different departments. Sometimes those videos are made for visiting shareholders / stakeholders too.
And also, there's nothing like the feeling of being in the archvile labyrinth in Doom 2 Plutonia and having been reduced to nothing but a chainsaw. New Doom has nothing on that.
I agree with your points on all of this. And in some cases like the gun variety I have to say I really like Doom 3 in. You said Doom 3 went far away from its roots, but the enemy placement, ammo variety and gun efficiency is still there. In the old dooms I used different weapons to kill different enemies for maximum efficiency and I feel that is still there in Doom 3. Doom 3 is given a lot of flack, like its serious story. Why do you need your protagonist to shove it aside to make an example of the story like in Doom 2016? You can just ignore whatever story goes on in Doom 3. It has a gritty atmosphere and tries to give some slight realism in how people behave in the game, whilst you gun down enemies. It doesn't force much story down your throat or tries to be super serious with it, it just shows a story and you can do whatever you want with it. If you prefer to immerse yourself with the datalogs and whatnot you are fully able to do so, but you can also skip all of it, with just a few plot points you are fed throughout the game just like in the remake. There were Doom games like the PSX Final Doom and Doom 64 that went with atmosphere and ambience instead of metal and gunning. I loved these games too, and Doom 3 is very much alike those. So I don't see the whole "It's not like the original" when it really is a lot like Doom. Doom 2016 is samey, play the first level and you've pretty much played it all. There's nothing more to it, all the samey weapons with tacked on upgrade systems and samey enemies that are so slightly varied that the way of killing them feels the same. There's no threat to them as you slaughter through them every time and it feels more like a massacre than you fighting the hordes of hell. It's boring, there's no stakes, you're overpowered. Just look at how feeble the enemies look like. They don't feel threatening at all. The imp is tinier than you, the shambling skeletons look puny. The hell knights are almost the size of a normal imp now, and the enemies look more cartoon-y than hellish. Not once did I feel like I did in the old Doom games. It felt like a mindless romp of spamming all your guns and pressing melee a lot on the same enemy. Sure, it's fun, but like you said it's hugely repetitive and that's all there is to the game.
Padrier958 Amen. Doom '16 received a lot of praise for being similar to the OG games, when actually it's like a mish-mash of elements from different games, including some from the previous Doom titles and not exactly in the gameplay aspect. It's far from being bad, but it's not this "be all, end all" FPS that many fans claim to be.
You see, I didn't play any of the other games in the franchise, but I loved this one. You say this is pure nostalgia, but, that's not possible in my case. So, what is it that I love about it then?
xdan Doom '16 has elements of nostalgia regarding the OG Doom games in different levels, but the gameplay is more appealing to people that never played the OG titles than people who actually played them.
I might disagree with you on many topics Errant Signal, but my god do you make interesting and intriguing content. You are an inspiration to me. This was epic and well worth the time.
The tone the character sets in the beginning is kind of inconsistent though. After that the game keeps forcing cutscenes, unskippable monologues and weird holographic expositions on you, produces an encyclopedia of a shit ton of information about the game world and forces you into some sort of RPG-like points distribution mechanic. I mean, it's par for the course when it comes to AAA games to add a ton of irrelevant crap as a cheap way to maximize play time, but it creates a disparity between the player motivation and the player character motivation. If I can at all relate to the player character, I want to shoot and kill things, not distribute upgrade points, read about Argent energy or listen to some robot talk about his motivations.
Really nice analysis! I think the original doom' corridor shooting style was superior to the arena approach of the new one. That created more varied encounters, you could also retreat to a more tactical position and to heal. The arena style is almost the same every time. I also don't like that the demon's bodies disappear after killing them, it takes away that sense of accomplishment that you killed the said demon. Just look at brutal doom and how satisfying is to paint a room with the blood and parts of your enemies! I understand that is there to increase performance, but damn it's 2016, the original doom did that back in 1993! Overall, the thing that saves the new Doom is the SOLID gameplay. It's a very important if not the most important aspect in every game. The guns feel powerful, jumping and running feels smooth,and my god, the glory kills are so satisfying!
Kain Bastien You can still disengage and scramble for resources in arenas. It's like the original, just more fast paced. And another commentor pointed out that yes corpses don't stick around, however things get bloody and when you clear a gore nest the literal atmosphere of the room changes, so it's still in the spirit of things. (Would probably kill the framerate to have a couple dozen 3D rendered demon corpses sticking around, as opposed to simple sprites.)
Nice review! I'm curious what difficulty level you played the game at the first time. I played on Hurt Me Plenty and I have to say it makes the game quite challenging and kinda mixes up the combat more. Makes it much more interesting. I also feel you have to put more conscious thought in what weapons to use at what time. The action got so intense that the relief after surviving another encounter (because that's what it starts to feel like sometimes), becomes addicting. In that way I never got tired of the action.
I just finished playing the game, and what you said echoes pretty much all my thoughts on it! I think one other thing that contributes to the combat encounters lacking personality a little, is how mobile the enemies are. Almost every enemy moves around too much, and have no restriction on how much they can move. Some move around on their own, some just stay up in your grill. This makes battles chaotic in a way that cripples the designers' ability to craft specific combat situations with enemy placement. A few rooms in the game have monsters appear on little pedestals they shoot you from, but they quickly enough walk off of em and just join the rest of the fray. No matter what the designers prepare, after 30 seconds all battles blend together into a similar smoothie. Its a pretty good smoothie tho.
I really appreciate that you willing to be critical of the new Doom. I haven't played it yet but all I've heard is constant praise. Even if something is really good it's important to be critical of it so it can grow and improve.
The thing I'm happiest about with the new doom is how well Glory Kills were implemented. They last just long enough to give you a breath before jumping back into combat, but don't tie you up or require more button presses than necessary. They feel like the sort of thing that Doomguy would naturally do in combat to any demon that got too close.
The Shadow warrior reboot suffered from that same repetitive arena battle stuff that you mentioned And I'm happy someone acknowledged the issue. I hope someday the genre can go back to those crazy level designs.. I miss those moments in doom 2 where you enter a room and see a health on a pedestal, just chilling and you prepared for the trap that room was gonna u leash on your ass as soon as you touched it. I remember some maps in doom were more like big ass puzzles I guess I just miss monster closets and triggers. Also, I miss the massive enemy count old school shooters had as well. Bahh one day.. Till them, brutal doom will fill the void
I thought your opinion and the video production method was really great! Huge thumbs up, seriously. I was also pretty impressed with the aim of the person who made the source video, and it inspired me to go create a TH-cam channel video game source video. So I'mma go start that.
I really appreciate this review. It's smart. comprehensive, and you clearly took your time with it. It seems to take into account all of my favorite bits and concerns, and makes me aware of some I hadn't even thought of. Thank you for making this.
Chris, you really ought to write a book laying out your understanding of game design and critique. You're light years ahead of other games journalists. Thanks as always for the video
I'm really enjoying this game, it feels like it hits the right spot for me when it comes to the old school and the new, which is great because I was worried that I'd either find it too difficult or too dull, but I actually love the arena styled gameplay precisely because of it's core gameplay loop; it's weapon variety and quality, secondary fire modes, glory kills, the chainsaw, the speed and flow of horizontal movement and the verticality of many of the maps. Combine that with the down time found in map exploration, the enemy design, level/environmental design and the sound and music, it all combines to make one of the most cathartic experiences I've had in a while. That being said I have a few issues; The Summoner is an awesome enemy in my opinion, if they can be handled well by the player, but if they get any leeway they'll spawn wave after wave of enemies, which quickly turn's a tense and fast passed encounter into a frustrating mess. Secondly, while I enjoyed the campy, B movie-esque sci-fi plot and the way the Doom Guy interacts with it, I do wish they didn't take total control away from the player in some of these sections, also a skip option for repeat viewings would be nice. Lastly, the rune trials, fuck them; I thought they'd be a microcosm of what makes the game's core loops so compelling, instead they're arbitrary, frustratingly restrictive and over way too quick and what's more the game already had the combat ratings, combat challenges and weapon mastery challenges that could be tackled whenever and as quickly or slowly as the player chose.
Nice analysis. One thing I would say is that the game having no clear weapon hierarchy is a good thing for me. It works in tandem with the ammo placement as part of a strategy to force the player to become adept with different weapons, avoiding a 'stick with one gun the whole way through' mentality.
1r0zz The platforming, and the lower enemy count. Everything feels a little more Quake to me. DOOM was a first person version of established 2D design principles. Just open the map during combat and it looks like Smash TV. When id made Quake they moved away from that, and it was as much about navigating a 3D space as it was shooting. DOOM was more of a flat maze, while Quake was a 3D maze, and thus had a lot more emphasis on navigating through the levels than mowing down a horde of enemies that ambush you. DOOM 2016 is way more linear than either of them, though. That and the visual style just don't really say "DOOM" to me.
I think this is actually a great start to rebooting the franchise. While the total package isn't cohesive, they've effectively resurrected the individual components such that a sequel can spend much more time on fusing those elements together rather than just modernizing them. Not to mention it was a critical hit, so it's gotten people's attention back on Doom. We'll have to see how they handle the next one though.
The sprawling, labyrinthine hunt and conquest is such a good core mechanic that it's a shame AAA studios are unable to design their modern shooters that way.
I really like your videos! It's so refreshing to have even negative comments about a game coming from a place of love, instead of the far too typical "lol this game is so baaaaaaad." type of videos. I watch your videos whenever you publish one!
man you have some bizarre criticisms some time. certainly, the holograms do come close to parody, but this is the extent of doom's dedication to function over form. venturing deeper into the UAC complex and witnessing the hologram voices actually start sounding like cultists is one of the many interesting narrative touches this game makes with a laundry list of other information surrounding a decently fleshed out world, which is there if you want to read it. because at few points does the pacing of doom ever stall. this brings me to what you said about new doom not making you feel like a hunter. doom decided to instead make you feel like a murderer. you said that there are no levels that have unique enemy compositions, but the game is constantly introducing new enemies. when it does introduce new enemies, it introduces them with the understanding that you potentially will have to deal with this, maybe multiple times at once, with all the other enemies it has done this with. the game introduces hell's barons in the same level where you fight seven of them before it's done. the enemy ai behaviors are all exceptionally well tuned for the arena gameplay. you spoke a lot about arenas being a bit too same-y, then strangely complain about enemies being in a corridor. this is prob a taste issue but i find nothing awkward about this game structure, it feels very close to the same idea behind devil may cry. even the same way that game encourages you to try multiple weapons, doom does as well. i don't think limiting this is a good thing, it's the design decision behind 2 weapon limit. if you're getting the most out of your weapons, you'll frequently be needing to use different weapons due to dumping out ammo so quickly with mods like the mobile turret or the plasma rifle's stun bomb. also, when it comes to not being able to see the results of your destruction, barrels of blood smear walls and floors. of course new doom cannot have the cultural impact that doom had, but its acknowledgment of culture now is handled in a manner that's both cynical and strangely earnest. probably the most surprising game this year.
I disagree with your criticisms and all the differences you pointed out between new and old Doom I love instead of seeing as negatives. I feel like the arenas and levels are so well designed and varied I never get tired of it. I agree about the linear levels and backtrack blocking but thats about it. The game does not have an identity crisis at all. The intention is to modernize Doom and it does that gracefully. There is no "nostalgia buzz" and I have to say after agreeing the gameplay is great that has to be the stupidest thing in your entire video that you said. "What's left" is compelling gameplay, there doesn't need to be more than that because its a video game. Also snapmap is being fixed, you probably worked on this video for a long time and didn't see it but just yesterday at E3 Id announced they are adding a lot to it such as open outdoor areas, more than two weapons, and using the singleplayer engine instead of the multiplayer.
I couldn't possibly agree more. I also disagreed with what he said about the weapons all being equally good, and more of a "pick your poison" kind of thing. Some weapons are clearly better in certain situations than others. The rocket launcher's lock-on is perfect for quickly taking down those annoying Summoners before they have a change to teleport away, for example, and the plasma rifle's stun is insanely effective against the Possessed shield guys and Pinkies since they're only vulnerable from behind.
I suppose being left with good gameplay is still an indicator of something good. And the biggest thing about Dooms negatives is that it cannot compare to the orignal in some people's minds, so, as far as doom is concerned, I'm disinterested, it seems to be all fine. What gets me is the attitude that good gameplay should be enough. It's enough for a good game yes. But it's not even close to enough for a great game. This is a bit off topic here, I hope your willing to follow me here. I have a problem with the general gaming public with just wanting entertainment, actually, no, that goes to anyone for any fictional media. Why? Because it's the sign of living only to be entertained, and that could be its own topic. So I get concerned when I see something saying "good gameplay is enough." especially when I've played games with questionable mechanics but the other elements had me seeing the world in a new light, with the mechanics only serving that message the dev has in mind. Doom's response could say more about the audience more then it says anything about the game, perhaps with that in mind.
What he meant when he said "what's left", is that there's not so much in this game that it's not from the original. And yes obviously it is borrowing a lot from the original I mean it's DOOM 2016, but the point is that it doesn't work better than the old doom, it is a good game but it doesn't have so much value because there's almost nothing at all that is not borrowed or is not improved.
darkzarkaster93 Really? I feel like there are lots of unique things about this game that set it apart from the original Dooms. It isn't like this is just Doom and Doom II in true 3D.
One thing I've realized listening to a few people talking about Doom 2016 is how hard it is to talk about the game positively without sounding a little unhinged with all the praise for the ripping and tearing
Really cool to hear such a breakdown of both the original and new Dooms. Kinda makes me want to go back and play through Doom2 again, though also makes the 2016 one sound really dull and unappealing. I wonder if there has been a general industry shift away from mechanically varied level design?
Your point about the game's "saminess" and devaluing different approaches to personal preference reminded me of "Resistance: Fall of Man", an often forgotten but good-ass game that managed to avoid this pretty nicely in my opinion. I still remember several very different levels very fondly, sometimes even find myself launching the game on occasion for want of "that Cheddar Gorge moment".
Fantastic video. It always pleases me to see people who realize that there IS more to glean from Doom's design and style than what is on the surface. Due to the game being viewed as "simple" (Understandably so, yes, but still...) a lot of people tend to overlook all the minute aspects and the fact that even a simple game can be examined deeply.
Christopher Franklin.. your Errant Signal series is THE BEST from other similar things in web Seriously.. im kind of modder ovice indie game dev which play\seen\tried all game genre's and tons of game since 90s and i look ead a lot of game-dev related thing.. (More and more appear today) but your series always stand out for me! it always more than just a "fair" analysis of game \\ today many people try to create game-analysis videos\text \\ but most of them not even understand mechanics or story of game creation "Errant Signal" felt more like a book or TV series and i like it i like long format without cutting all little meaningful details and overall solidity But also "Errant Signal" analysis have real depth with personal opinion and emotions and this is what i really love in this series! its a pearl in modern world of polished consumption products : ] i will save and keep it for years - sometimes going back and revising Thank you - thank you for creation of this series and desire to continue it
I think there's potential here for a rebooted franchise. It will all depend on how they evolve the core gameplay going forward. It will never be the original doom, there's no way it could be. But if we're lucky, it might keep the spirit of the original doom while bring us many more hours of fun gameplay.
Very nice review. I very much dug a lot of what you had to say here, even if I didn't agree with all of it. The combat is "samey" in that there are a lot of encounters that take place in arenas, but the changing scenarios happen on an ever-evolving, ever-shifting, moment-to-moment basis. Because of the much more intense nature of the combat, the more complicated/vertical layouts of the arenas, and the expanded abilities of each enemy, combat is COMPLICATED. Enemies now form overlapping patterns of optimal approach and engagement that change depending on where they are in relation to each other and what they're doing. On top of that, you walk a very fine margin between life and death, because you take more damage and have much lower ammo caps in DOOM 2016 than the original games. Staying on top of those shifting situations and narrow margins requires a lot of very fast whole-situation analysis and decisive responses. I ... really don't see how you can call that "samey". Maybe the fact that that's always what's required of you? In like, a broad sense? But I don't see how you can call it repetitive. Maybe move up a difficulty or two if you find you've "solved" the game's encounters and are doing the same things each time. Anyway, again, nice review. And thanks for the article link, that was a great read! PS - the DOOM movie was fucking awesome
Very well thought out points! I had been considering picking this up during the Steam Summer Sale, but while it sounds fun it doesn't strike me as worth quite as much as it costs yet, at least to me. Thanks for this, I hadn't really seen any of this covered in any videos about it.
One thing I think you might have missed here is that there is a new generation of gamers coming in that never played the original DOOM. (Myself included. Just born a little too late, and only had NES, then Gamecube before getting into PC.) This new DOOM is radically different from other shooters, and regardless of nostalgic draw, the potentially from the theme, tone, and game mechanics are more than enough to guarantee a wave of players rushing to a sequel should they choose to make one. This was a VERY solid reboot, and absolutely works to lay the grounds for more to come.
I feel super validated by your opening statements. My first thought when I saw your new video was, "there's a Doom reboot? That's like redoing PacMan."
A lot of the reason Doom 3 was disigned that way was to show off the new engine.It was a huge leap in technology back then and they wanted it slow to show off all the lighting.Actually one of the greatest things about Doom 3 was the sound design.
Honestly, I like that it's just Doom in 2016, that's all I've wanted for a long time, purely because there's not really much else like it coming out anymore aside from The New Order by the same people. I honestly, really enjoy the gameplay not because of nostalgia for the original, I like it because it's fast as fuck and tense. I personally think the game adds enough variety to the combat, although I do agree it does get visually samey after a while. I also think you really understated how well executed the verticality is. With so many games coming out nowadays using that as a buzzword, I think this is one of the first times where I feel it was actually effectively implanted to combat and level design in a way that feels organic or natural.
If there's any musical analogy I can make about Doom 2016 it would be of a classic Metal band making a new album. It has the production and a few modern influences, but it still has the core of what made them so beloved in the first place. there was no "nostalgia buzz" at all, cute nods and throwbacks to be sure, but the game was most assuredly looking towards the future rather than staying stuck in the pass. Even the story has a surprising amount of lore in it if you care to look it up, the Slayer's Testament being a great example. I'll also make another analogy for the gameplay: the original Doom games were like the Xbox Ninja Gaiden titles. Still very much an action game, but there was still a great emphasis on exploration and enemy placement. The new Doom is like Devil May Cry, a balls to the wall action game focused on style and brutality, there are puzzles and platforming, but mostly to serve as a break from the action, where there are many ways to approach combat and make split-second decisions on how exactly you'll fuck your enemies' shit up.
Fantastic examination and discussion, but I gotta say I must counter your points on weapon preference and ammo consumption. Having played through the game partially on hurt me plenty, before starting again and completing on nightmare, I can say quite confidently that the game does force you to use different weapons for different enemies - and punishes you severely for making the incorrect choice. But, sadly, this only happens on nightmare difficulty. Just as a fore-note: I'm terrible at video games, especially FPS, it took me over a dozen attempts at the very first gore nest with the imps, in the prologue. Saying that, I did finish the entire game, with minimal stress, over a few days. On nightmare the bosses were the easiest thing about the game - because standard enemies are just terrifying. I can't spray my "favourite weapon" at a group of mobs "randomly" thrown in an arena - because each enemy really is a challenge, they can all kill me, and are damn good at it - each in their unique ways. As for weapons and ammo, I was constantly starved - never having enough to use the same weapon endlessly, even with economic use of the chainsaw. Even still, with infinite ammo I would never be able to "pick my poison", each weapon is definitely not equally valid on nightmare, while their damage remains competitive between them, they differ in fire rate and ammo efficiency. A Pinky is vulnerable to the Plasma Rifle, yet not the Gauss Cannon, because it's higher fire rate can deal more damage during the brief window you get to see a pinkies back - as it streams past you and remains stunned on the wall. A Gauss Rifle might only get one or two shots in it's back, which, on nightmare, terrifyingly, isn't enough - whereas the plasma rifle can kill it before it gets a chance to turn back around. On easier modes this optimisation isn't necessary. The Pinky can turn back around and charge again, no skin off the players nose, shoot it more with your favourite gun, end of. But harder difficulty demands you use the right tool for the job, another charge is all the more likely to end up with your death... because like everything else a Pinky hitting you is immediate, painful, death. I can't say I used every gun frequently, or every mod, but I can say that I repeatedly died to several areas until I started varying things up and experimenting. The game forced me to do that. Ultimately, on easier modes - when every enemy only hits you for 5-20 damage - you never have a reason to optimise and switch it up. Likewise, learning how each enemy behaves: their animations, different attacks, their weaknesses - it's unnecessary - one glory kill and the health is back anyway. It's an endless slurry of enemies, and after a while, they all look the same. I mean, everyone knows that pinkies are weak from the back, but less people know you can blind a Cacodemon by shooting it's eye out, causing it to randomly attack everything nearby - and I'm sure very few will know, despite that, the eye isn't actually it's weak spot. I know this, because on nightmare I couldn't afford to be hit once - glory killing enemies got me killed more than anything. Every arena isn't a slurry of random enemies, it's a unique set piece that forces me to use every bit of my arsenal, and the environment - you say you never found a reason to use a grenade to take down a large group, yet, on nightmare it saved my life over and over again, when no other weapon could. It's a common, and perhaps the only significant criticism I see of the single player game play - that it's repetitive, "same-ey". I can understand it, but I think, wholeheartedly, that the problem is solved simply by cranking up the difficulty. The exploration of different mechanics signalled by monster placement and ammo supplied in the original Doom series is done here also, not in terms of ammo, but certainly diversity of the arenas and variety of enemies provided in each arena. This isn't apparent at all on lower difficulties, every encounter is the same. Enemies shoot you, you shoot enemies, you might die if you get cornered, don't get cornered, rinse-repeat. It's satisfying yes, but it is the same, every time. Unless you play on nightmare - I die to everything - while being cornered is a nonnegotiable death, I can die anywhere, to any enemy, and I did, a lot. I died so much that my 1 playthrough took almost 20 hours - yet I still wasn't bored by the end - every area was a unique challenge. To me that's bizarre, I get bored very easily, and it's rare I ever finish a game. In most modern FPS upping the difficulty only turns the player into a sheet of paper, enemies into bullet sponges, while their hitscan weapons becomes a funless chore to overcome. In Doom 2016 I think upping the difficulty, oddly, really does make a better game, even when the basic Imps charged attack does more than 100% of your base health, they, like everything else, can be avoided. That's just my two cents, you might have played the entire game on nightmare, and may just be significantly better than me at video games, anyway, again, great video, your other criticisms were right on the mark, and I hadn't seen them elsewhere :D
It's been four years and a sequel later, and the "nostalgia buzz" is still going strong for me, and I'm far from alone it seems like. Given that, it's probably more than just nostalgia nostalgia
From all other critic videos, this video is the one I most agree with. It seems that what could be lacking can learn lessons from the old game. However, this doesnt mean it cant be changed. Just a reminder that a next level SnapMap is going to be released and people will be making new SnapMaps with their own definition of what their ideal version of single player campaign will be.
All of the weapons have a use. I'll agree that the rollout of the enemies is a but same-y when you replay it, but if you play the game on a higher difficulty than your choice of weapons decides whether you live or die. Also, plenty of these combat arenas have unique mixtures of enemies. Sure, we don't get a room with thirty eight Hell Barons, but we do get arenas with a large number of Summoners, forcing us to track down and kill the spawners before we deal with the ads. Or we get close-quarters with plenty of Cacodemons that require us to be aware of our surroundings as we out-manuever them. Or we get a massive space filled with Imps whose fireballs we constantly have to navigate to defeat them. or we get an average-sized arena with a decent mixture of low-level enemies but a concentrated burst of hit-scan shield enemies, who are largely immune to frontal attacks. Doom (2016) has a huge amount of variety in its encounters and a lot of this video comes off as nostalgia-laden picking and choosing. yes, Doom 2016 is not a perfect emulation of DOOM in a 3D space but it was never going to be that. it preserves the importance of weapon selection and enemy variety and transplants them into a modern shooter, bolstered by mechanics that encourage the movement that DOOM originally had. And yes, that movement is deliberate, not a cluster-fuck like this video shows.
To be fair, it probably woulda been nice to have an option to keep monster corpses on the screen, for folks who have enough memory in their screaming metal machine-beasts.
Since you mentioned the music at the end of the video... What you said kinda explains Mick Gordon's soundtrack for this game. When he worked on KI he took the key riffs from the original soundtrack by Robin Beanland and then made something completely new out of it. His KI soundtrack paid huge homage to Rare's original while being a stuff of its own in the best possible way. I'm not sure I can say that with Doom. He replicates the vibe, he covers E1M1, but after all it just feels like a spiritual reprise of Bobby Prince. Mick Gordon has made his own for quite some time and he's already famous for that. And that's not the case with Doom. In that way, the new Doom feels exactly like its soundtrack. It replicates well, but as a thing of its own, I still don't know.
Dude! your perspective on the game is the same as mine. Finally someone who points out its flaws along with its achievements. I have been discussing with my friend how the game is really fun but how the arena based maps really miss out on what the map design of the original was like and how doom 2016 seems to struggle with its identity. Your criticisms of doom 3 are also spot on, but I must admit that even though doom 3 strayed to far from the formula I actually find doom 3 to have more of an identity than 2016 doom, because the way I see it the first dooms had the action but doom 3 had the atmosphere, and doom 2016 does not achieve the same action or great map design like the originals, nor does it convey the atmosphere and immersion that doom 3 went for. So even though doom 2016 has more action; I think I personally enjoy doom 3 more since it is so different even if flawed in its execution. However, my favorite doom game is actually doom 64, I feel that it mixes the action and map design of doom 1 and 2 with the more down to earth atmospheric dark nature of doom 3. That's just me though ;)
"Once the nostalgia buzz wears off what's left?" I dunno, as someone who's never played original Doom and has no nostalgia for it at all I loved this game for its own merits
I think doom 2016 works incredibly well and for me it will probably remain fun long after the dust has settled, but I do see a lot of your points and more than anything they make me think of how a sequel will pan out. There is a side of me that is seriously worried that doom 2 2020 or whatever it will be will be more of the same, and that that sameyness will no longer be acceptable between games, but the optimistic side of me says that the doom 2016 team has all its tools at its' disposal now and can develop a new game with more focus on some of the things you mentioned that have been lost in the transition into today and doing more to carve out more of its own ideas as a game independent of the original doom titles. The team has a strong foundation and i think has proven themselves more than capable of completing their goals. I feel a lot of ambition from the devs of this game and that makes me feel somewhat safe in the idea that they can subvert the (very satisfying) sameyness of this game's combat effectively. I kept believing up til this game came out and i'll continue to believe because my already optimistic expectations were exceeded.
The only thing I felt this game really missed in capturing the essence of the old doom games was the secrets. I wish we had more hidden panels in doors you had to hunt for in order to really explore the map and find out all the secrets. The secrets weren't bad, but they didn't seem as well-hidden as DOOM I and II. Everything else about the game was amazing and so far it's my GoTY, yes, even over Overwatch.
I know this is a pedantic point, but nobody seems to understand the Doomguy's motivation. He doesn't hate the other characters because he's just there to kill demons, he's disgusted in them for releasing the demons from hell.
Along with the clip in the video where he destroys the energy receptors, during the intro as Hayden is saying "for the betterment of mankind", he looks *directly* at a corpse but apparently everyone missed that. In fact I theorized he saved the Vega chip to put into Hayden because he thinks Vega wouldn't put people at risk.
It could still turn out that he's just a psycho that kills everything but if they're keeping with the original games, the only characterization we know of Doomguy is that he won't shoot civillians and he loves his pet rabbit Daisy.
***** Everyone says he doesn't care about the plot and just wants to kill demons, even though he's only acting disrespectfully to Hayden for letting the demons trough.
His "don't care just kill" attitude is subtextual but people take that too literally.
This
This causes so much of a cognitive dissonance to me. When I play a game I'd like to be motivated in a different way than just "rip and tear," and Doomguy in this game is so clearly made to do just THAT. To put it bluntly I don't like him.
I loved the irony when Doomguy looked at the corpse under him at exactly the moment Hayden says "for the betterment of mankind". He's got a lot more personality than people give credit, and he's a very righteous individual eager to punish the UAC for its arrogance and greed.
Well Hayden goes over the Doom Slayer (what the game calls the protagonist)motivation at the end. He needs to kill them all. All the demons, until there is no trace. This is very similar to another ID character, BJ from Wolfenstein in the last Wolfenstein game. If he keeps killing Nazis, they will eventually run out of Nazis. BJ's purpose for existing is to kill Nazis. The Doom Slayer's purpose for existing is to kill demons.
ok, so this is perhaps the best case I've seen AGAINST day one reviews. Nuanced, human critique completely free from hype. This is the piece on Doom I've been waiting for since its release - I've grown to really enjoy the game in short bursts, but there were so many issues for me with repetition that I was surprised and even angry that more people weren't picking up on that. This does a really good job articulating why the combat is repetitive and why it perhaps lacks an identity of its own, whilst also acknowledging just how fun it is. Really great job man, thanks for this.
The game is indeed the best in short bursts, my skill gets worn out after a while and I keep dying so I stop and play it again the next day.
Well said. I also don't really care very much for day one reviews. If I'm hyped for a game I don't want the reviews to ruin it because I'll get the game for myself and feed off the hype. If I'm interested in a game I usually let things pan out for a bit and see if it is worth picking up or not. Day one reviews are also done under a crunch and I don't want that to affect how I feel about a game.
Um... I might be wrong, but I don't think DOOM had any day 1 reviews since the game got to the reviewers only after release.
Oodli You're totally right. There weren't any review copies sent out before the release of the game. I guess we are talking about super early reviews, or maybe just day 1 reviews in general...
wait. you play doom searching for human critique?
even videogames ABOUT human critique have very insane and egotastical ones (unless they are japanese games...)
sure the combat is "repetitive" (as most modern shooter out there... how come Call of Duty gets a free pass when you play for 6 hours"shooting the same guy in the face"? because the 10 minutes of cutscene before?), the game is also graphically repetitive, it's too short, it does not "try" enough and the design is utter shit...
that said it's doom. that's the game you wanted if you want a game called "doom"...
I did not play doom and then expect is Persona.
I strongly disagree with the idea that every weapon is worth the same, weapons are more or less effective vs some enemies and it's up to you to use them in a smart way. This is even more true for the bosses, where some weapons are way better than others to counter their attacks and deal maximum damage. The fact that every weapon is good doesn't mean they are all optimized for every situation.
This came 7 years later but DOOM Eternal fixed or tried to fix the problem of all the weapons having the same value.
@@lobachevscki and they fucked it up, especially in the dlcs, by making some weapons *required* to kill specific enemies. or otherwise having to play the game a specific way to deal with them. Marauder is of course the most prominent example, but there are many more
After finishing the campaign, I struggle to think of a game that I'll have more fun jumping into to wreak havoc and let off steam for a couple hours than this. In that way, it's exactly like what the old Dooms were when I was a kid, and that's really welcome.
Duke Nukem Total Meltdown?
I'm glad they brought back the arcadey feeling of the originals. I love it for that reason!
@Ca Wh nice, I like that we don't share the same opinions and I think we're looking for very different things in games. You seem to be very passionate about your feelings on games, so are there any others you want to share? (serious question)
@Fe Cu i will take doom any day over gta or rdr
The open world feels very boring after a while and the combat is just cover shooter with no fun in the combat and weapons feels very weak
@Fe Cu yes i do enjoy i play doom 2 wads almost every day being either single or multplayer
There is no game more fun then doom 2
lets steal from hell.
who thought any part of this sentence was a good idea?
if USA would have the possibility, you know they would try it sooner or later...
+1r0zz ALLAHU OILBAR
With the right preparation and safeguards, a portal to an alternate dimension of infinite flame and heat could provide effectively unlimited electrical power. Add to this the possible scientific applications of exploiting the creatures and magic there (canonically, hell does have magical glyphs and things in it in this series) It isn't that unreasonable.
"infinite flame and heat" You know we already have that. It's called the sun.
Not infinite in the literal sense of course but you get the point.
CanDelach
hard to harvest...
"It would've been easy for Doom (2016) to present itself as a serious story [....] but it could've easily overcorrected into self-parody"
** Cries in Doom Eternal **
"Once the nostalgia buzz runs out, what's left?"
Easy. This game functions as proof to the modern AAA industry that in 2016, a fast paced shooter can still work, even if it's a bit too samey. While the modern industry relies a lot on trends and sales charts, it often forgets to look at what the actual fans want, and the developers and publishers of doom smartly realized this. They've capitalized on a hole in the market that indie games and serious sam just couldn't fill.
What this means is that while this particular shooter is just a retread, fast paced first person shooters are now back on the idea table when it comes to making AAA games, and that could lead to a resurgence of this particular subset of this genre, and some creative people might be given a chance that they otherwise wouldn't have.
@Fe Cu yeah except in Eternal there is a really good damage model. Additionally, the enemies flinching is part of the gameplay- knowing how to get enemies to falter isnt about realism or whether something is modern or not, it is about juggling enemies that can put you down quickly. God knows I dont think these games are perfect but the idea that RDR2 has better gunplay because you 'have to chamber a round' strikes me as a false premise. Similarly, glory kills are about giving you breathing room to assess your resources and positioning- reducing them to QTEs isnt quite right.
Feel much of the criticism about the combat/level design "variations of a theme" and the like is fixed in Doom 2016 by cranking up the difficulty. This "weapon selection is a personal preference" thing isn't the case when you essentially instantly die to most attacks. On the top two difficulties, you _must_ use heavy weaponry on the hardest enemies, you _must_ be careful about your chainsaw usage; in this way, the survival-horror aspect of old Doom is melded into Doom 2016, just through more Quake-esque Arena shooter gameplay and to that effect, the _best_ shooter Id has made (on "hard" mode). So all in all, I think that criticism is incredibly unfair, as the old school Doom played on a difficulty too easy for you will indeed play as if "weapon selection is a personal preference", just like too-easy-for-you Doom 2016. However, I suppose if you do play the game with easier combat, at the very least, the sparse, scattered resources of old-school Doom can still be compelling at a lower difficulty.
Also, I've seen a few reviews where incredibly specific nostalgia cries or otherwise nit-picky points are made. Here "it felt so good when sprite's corpses remained" making it feel "cleansed" ... Completely not mentioning that Doom 2016 literally changes the atmosphere of rooms when they've been "cleansed," so they clearly did have that concept in mind, but debatably did it _better_ this way, as you rip the core/heart thing out of those statues, all hell breaks lose, you kill everything then the area is literally "cleared" including the air, which I think indeed does let you "bask in the results of your battles" it just does it in a more general gameified way of "the lights turned back on cuz you won!" rather than the early 90s fascination with brutally disfigured corpses (not that there isn't a lot of that in Doom 2016 anyway, they just don't 'linger' on the floor).
"Once the nostolgia buzz wears off, what's left?" Well for 1, they could make an awesome multiplayer, rather than "Modern Halo/CoD shooter via Doom Skin" but really, I think it's unfair to hold such high standards for the game. Doom's designers' goal wasn't to redefine gaming (or maybe it was, but there was no way to know how successful they'd be _beforehand_) they just made a bad ass game. That's what Doom 2016 is to me; but whereas original Doom was a catalyst to an era, Doom 2016 is relighting that fire when most games don't play this way or this well anymore and that's all it needs to do for me to be great.
Since weapons in Doom '16 can be swap-loaded, High-difficulty becomes even less variable due to SSG->RL->Gauss weapon rotationing. Watch some Ultranightmare runs to see what I mean.
SinaelDOverom I’ll be honest I really love swap-loading in games because it keeps the fast pace and feels great but yeah it can get incredibly over powered.
@@charlesgray6385 what is swap-loading? I've never heard that term before and a quick google search doesn't show anything useful.
FREEDO
this is an amazing comment. everything you said is great. also wow i didn't even conciously realized beating gore nests does change the air of the room. thanks for that observation!!
Strawberry Princess
i think they just mean switching between different weapons really fast. it's much easier with mouse and keyboard than a controller.
In response to the Cover song analogy, almost every great band/artist began doing covers. It was their way of establishing not so much an identity, but a frame of reference for themselves and their audience. The greatest works of art are a mish-mash of influences, and embracing that is key to evolving.
This is the first DOOM game made without John Carmack or really any of the original crew, so in a way it really is a brand new game for Id. I imagine there'll be sequels, and I'd like to think that they'll continue to try and combine the best aspects of 90s DOOM with the best aspects of modern-day. Was it a 100% success the first time around? No, and because this wasn't a passion-child of only 15 members, there was no way that everything worthwhile could have been considered. It will be tough, because this sort of clash of ideologies always is, but I think this game is a good first step and maybe, just maybe, they will be able to successfully update things like the level design and editors the next time around.
"Some of the best tearing I've had in ages" You clearly haven't had Taco Bell in a while.
FINALLY! Finally a review addressing some of the issues I see. Everyone's just gushing over it and how it managed to recapture the "Doom" feel. I posit that while not a bad game, it has captured nothing more of the old Doom than any other shooter. The old Doom is an action puzzler that happens to be in first person. The new Doom is a game of aiming. If you remove the theme, there's almost nothing liking the two games. And I couldn't see anyone agreeing with that, so this review is highly cathartic. Thank you.
I may be exaggerating by saying "nothing more". I should've said "little more", but I do have a point, it's not like I'm spewing nonsense for the sake of it.
I don't get why you are so assertive and aggressive, though; you could ask for why someone is saying something you disagree with, instead of bashing; or, alternatively, you could explain why you think what they say is "total nonsense". If you did that, you and I could've had a civil conversation and one - or more probably both - of us might've walked out of it smarter.
The way you've answered accomplishes nothing; it doesn't tell me why I'm wrong, if I am. It doesn't give you a way to change your opinion, if you are. I humbly propose to you to revise your answer, and then I'll be happy to converse. If you don't feel like it, no harm done, and good day.
Before playing on nightmare ive never even had a need in a plasma rifle, but once I did, it found it's place in specific situations, just like every other gun. They are not all equal, there is a clear effectiveness difference between guns when it comes to countering different enemies.
The Cyberdemon wasn't necissarily scripted. As evident by it's presence in one of the classic maps, where it roams around freely, and you can take it on at your own pace, and strategy.
Hence why that cyberdemon was in a classic map; the non-classic cyberdemon is probably scripted.
mralbum3256
Sure. But it means that he could be added like that into a DLC, or Snap Map, as just a roaming demon.
I much prefer the Cyberdemon in Doom 2016, seeing it as an actual boss fight with patterns, multiple attacks and phases is epic whereas I think the classic Doom's bullet sponge tank version doesn't hold up (Perhaps the only thing that I feel is dated in classic Doom), the same applies to the Spider Mastermind. Pumping stupid amounts of rockets into a big enemy that only has one attack and one walk pattern is not a good boss fight at all in my eyes, it just makes for a tedious battle in my opinion. I feel they definitely work as a huge threat that players are better off avoiding and I like how some modders recognize that. I've seen some people saying the bosses should have been lumbering bullet sponges with one attack and one movement pattern and I can't help but feel that kind of design would make the boss fights utterly horrible in this day and age.
Yea, the Cyberdemon in the original doom is treated like a glorified normal monster, not like a boss, same with the Spider Mastermind, but that's fine, a "classic" boss fight would not had fit in the old doom.
I liked that moment when you thought you had him, when spawning in hell & it just regenerated... I was like "oh no..."
I wonder how much your last point fails to take into account the perspective of people who don't have any nostalgia for teh old games and/or have never played them.
What's left? A fun energetic romp. And personally, I am interested in seeing where a DOOM 2016 Part II would carry the story.
One specific point I disagree on in the proposed same-ness of the weapons. As the game increased in difficulty and intensity, I found the super shotgun, chaingun, and railgun (whatever they're called) much for effective than the default shotgun, or either of the machine guns/rifles. I hardly ever was suing the plasma rifle by the end, because I found it too weak for all the bigger enemies being thrown at me.
14:34 "pick your poison... then upgrade it to be even more poison...ier"
I always find your love of messing with the english language funny.
As much as I loved deum, as much as the samey level design didn't bother me, I still agree with what's being said. Let us hope deum 2 can take this opportunity for bigger badder, more complex, more veritable levels and run home with it.
disagree with this review. this is the mad max fury road of 2016. the purest form of what it aims to be.
That's a pretty good way of putting it.
I hate it when (seemingly) overwhelming majority of people act like level design structure is completely irrelevant. I haven't had the time to watch through this video yet so I don't know if Campster brings up the issue, but I haven't seen a single fan of Doom 4 say a word about level and encounter design when they talk how old school and true to its roots this game is.
I am a doom fan and I'd say DooM4 design is kinda shit...
the game is designed in a simple "arena-corridor-arena", but after all that's the best way to portray what it's easily seen as a "beat em up design" adapted to a shooter...
The game has a wide variety of levels. Some of them are sprawling and non-linear with keycard hunts and isolated encounters, whereas others are very straight-forward and arena battle-focused. I think that's actually one of this game's greatest strengths: It doesn't just do the same thing over and over. There's even a level that revolves _very_ heavily around platforming, which is something you very rarely see in shooters.
you clearly didn't play the same game as everyone else then, because the level design in Doom 4 is ace. First levels have the arena feelings because of the gore nests, but then the game opens up and you pretty much have enemies everywhere and levels are just like Doom 1 levels but with a lot more verticality. And it's not like the first Doom didn't had arenas. It had plenty of rooms with enemies spawning or walls opening up made for bigger fights
I love how nearly every issue he had with the game was fixed in Doom: Eternal
At the end of these videos I can never seem to put together what admiration I have for this channel. the thoughtful analysis of systems that feel like the furthest thing the games industry could produce, the apt humour and the understanding of the games ecosystem that could only come from love. I feel it could almost be a disservice to call errant signals videos game reviews. ten outa ten
Wonderful stuff as usual. Thanks for making this, was really hoping you would.
Yes! I've been super excited for this since seeing on Twitter how much work you've been putting into it, haha.
The game was in a development hell, so it's still amazing it came out that way. Now, when they learned how to nail this new formula, and if they decide to make a sequel, I'm hoping for including more varied encounter design. They can go much deeper and spend time on including more interesting scenarios and a more developed story (its tone was changed very far into production, so it had to be rushed).
Basically, I believe that can build a lot on top of this reboot.
you are now my favourite reviewer. you actually go to the trouble of researching and playing the games. keep up dude :D
You're a talented and smart dude. Not enough people on TH-cam like you.
Coming back to this years after the fact, years after Doom Eternal, I find myself still caught up on how it feels like Doom 2016 did something unintentionally great with story themes and Doom Eternal just didn't land it well, although I don't know how it could. Obviously its both serious and campy and weird and fun in its tone, but Doom 2016 really feels like a duel between two extremely human, determined, and talented people, with fundamental disagreements on what is best.
Samuel Hayden viewing things in the near and the now with an energy crisis looming and a source of energy ripe for the picking, needing a relatively small amount of sacrifice to solve a worldwide issue, and supercedes his own body and death to realize this solution. And Doomguy is more forward thinking, and almost bizarrely sympathetic to the human cost of this solution, seeing Hell for what it is: Hell, a horrific end point of life that should not be quartered with by anyone but the damned, and no problem is worth working with demons for the pain they cause. And while they need to work together, to a degree, to stop the immediate threat, these two HATE one another, and no amount of working together or seeing what the other is doing with their perspective will change their minds. It's a beautiful, human conflict, if you engage with it that way.
Then Doom Eternal made it a profoundly unhuman topic, with the changing of Samuel and the dialogue shift of Doomguy, and I just feel like its a mistake. A misstep. They had something really fun with just two opposed, extraordinary humans, who were posed to butt heads, and it became something much less human. IDK how they could have continued 2016s narrative thread, though, without mucking up this part of it. But still, feels like something was lost.
Weirdly, what got stuck in my head when you were going into how Doom 2016's level design, weapon usage and enemy placement were restricted compared to the original was how good the first few Halo games were at that. Certainly not Doom levels, but the guns have a basic hierarchy, and the enemies all capable of being thrown together in different configurations.
What I'm saying is I think Doom/Doom 2 and the original Halo games are the only shooters I know (maybe Half-Life?) that have people making youtube videos of NPC fighting tournaments.
God I’d love to see you make a vid about Doom Eternal now
I've been following this channel since your Dues Ex: Human Revolution episode and this has to be one of your best video. Well written, well edited, and good pacing on the narration.
Well, to me, the way to answer the question of "What's left" is by pointing at the new Star Wars movies:
First you make sure your new formula is workable and well received, then you go crazy with it.
At least, that's the intention I gleaned from Star Wars VII, despite only having that one episode.
Doom 2016 tried its best to give us an update on everything that we love from the originals, and the result is definitely a mixed bag. Despite that, it's an incredible experience.
One more note, since I am a few bottles deep into my night, your videos are excellent, well researched, and spoken in a very professional voice. Keep up the good work mate.
I liked the little shift in movement control. The projectile dodging is still there, but because the enemies are generally faster in every aspect than before, you also have to use the cover to minimized the amount of enemies you have to encounter at once in an arena. You have to constantly think where will be the next position I want to take a fight on.
A clear weapon hierarchy would have been nice to have, because that usually creates a player specific difficulty curve: in a game where ammunition is at least virtually scarce, it encourages the player to cope with as little as possible while saving the items he has for a moment he really needs them. For example in Alan Wake, flashlight batteries are very valuable because boosting your light source is the only way to defeat tougher enemies, but even tho the batteries were even too plentiful in the game, I kept hoarding them just because I was thinking that they were very valuable and I didn't want to waste them.
You figure out weapon hierarchies mechanically: one shot from a BFG or Gauss and you know it's better for big monsters, the super shotgun's extra power comes with longer reloads meaning it's better for single-target medium kills, assault rifle headshots small dudes, plasma is good for getting some glory kills on small fry as you can control the damage output better, rockets nuke cacodemons, etc.
It's up to the player to find these interactions and exploit them.
Well, that really isn't a hierarchy, more just the specific applications of each gun. I think he means hierarchy as in tiers that work off inventory management such as Resident Evil 4, the Dead Space Series (1 & 2), and most survival horror. Like he said, this would require ammo scarcity through out the entire game and with disparate weapon ammo availability. I know the chain saw has relatively scarce amount but that is because it is suppose to reward you with a "boss fountain" worth of ammo for the rest of your guns. The Chain Gun & Gauss can basically used forever with the right upgrades. So this new DOOM can be thought of as a more arcade twitch approach to rebuilding DOOM. I think he is trying to say that the original DOOM had a more survival horror aspect of inventory management build within the level design, where as the new DOOM seems more focused to reward constant assault regardless of weapon choice, relatively at least.
Now that's the level of analysis I actually remember your channel for! Great job man! Details over 9000.
This analysis is much better than I thought, especially in the whole combat/level design/player speed domain. Some of the things, I was thinking about, like the fact that in the old Doom you felt like a king moving faster than your rocket and avoiding hundreds of slow projectile, while in the new Doom you move slower (even if faster than other FPS) and the projectiles are really fast and the have an angle arc that can sometimes hit your strafe, the monsters climb on walls/ceiling (which is cool, more clever than classic Doom monsters) but the whole affair makes you struggle all the time and force you to glorykill which is also dangerous, since during the glorykill animation maybe a projectile was coming at you, yes you are invincible during the animation but not just right after, where you might need 0.5 sec to regain your perception and where your player and enemies and projectile currently are, which is even chaotic on it's own the way the battles happen with arena and teleportations.
And there are much more said, very well explained, it's exactly how I feel. I do like new Doom but not enough to replace old Doom which I still enjoy playing user levels and making my own maps. And yes, just plugging tiles of rooms is not interesting to me anymore, no more designing a room line by line (which I agree would be far more complex in a real 3d game than Doom with it's mostly 2d map data) . Also,. not mentioned, there is a monster limit of 64 in Snapmap, and that's ok compared to another limit of no more than 12 active monsters. And that doesn't mean 12 on your view, but 12 currently alive on the map, so if you have closed doors with more than 12 monsters, some will no appear unless you kill others, you have to design your level linearly so that the first 12 monsters in priority will be killed before you get a key to open the other door with new monsters (and there doesn't appear to be a way to affect this priority with an id or something, it depends on which rooms or monsters you added first in an invisible list).
This is even apparent in the classic Doom easter egg levels (which you can't design in snapmap of course but they still have the limitations). In E1M5 remake, you could go up the stairs and shoot zombie soldiers from the window. But in the new Doom, I go up there and there is nobody outside and I am like WTF? Only when I kill other enemies in the vicinity and open the door to that room I see them teleport. That's why they never made E1M6 or E1M7, too many enemies in open spaces and windows to be active at the same time.
"Once the nostalgia buzz wears out... what's left?"
Replaying the game for fun. Duh.
What's left? A game that focuses on being fun. Its undeniable that doom (2016) steers away from other modern shooters. It tries to look back at what made the classics so great. Doom (2016) isnt perfect but i think that it may be the beginning of a turn in the industry into re-evaluating what you need to make a good game.
You say it's not a cohesive whole, but neither your video or the hours of LPs I watched of it showed me anything supporting that.
Dude bro I been watching your channel for like a couple hours and I'm addicted keep up the great work!
"...so when the nostalgia runs off.. what's left..?" .... THE FUCKING HEAVY METAL TRACKS!!! TURN THAT SHIT UP!!
Having worked in a few factories, the "this is the history of our company" videos that played on the TVs in DOOM 3 are very very commonplace in orientation / onboarding for different departments. Sometimes those videos are made for visiting shareholders / stakeholders too.
And also, there's nothing like the feeling of being in the archvile labyrinth in Doom 2 Plutonia and having been reduced to nothing but a chainsaw. New Doom has nothing on that.
I agree with your points on all of this. And in some cases like the gun variety I have to say I really like Doom 3 in. You said Doom 3 went far away from its roots, but the enemy placement, ammo variety and gun efficiency is still there. In the old dooms I used different weapons to kill different enemies for maximum efficiency and I feel that is still there in Doom 3.
Doom 3 is given a lot of flack, like its serious story. Why do you need your protagonist to shove it aside to make an example of the story like in Doom 2016? You can just ignore whatever story goes on in Doom 3. It has a gritty atmosphere and tries to give some slight realism in how people behave in the game, whilst you gun down enemies. It doesn't force much story down your throat or tries to be super serious with it, it just shows a story and you can do whatever you want with it. If you prefer to immerse yourself with the datalogs and whatnot you are fully able to do so, but you can also skip all of it, with just a few plot points you are fed throughout the game just like in the remake.
There were Doom games like the PSX Final Doom and Doom 64 that went with atmosphere and ambience instead of metal and gunning. I loved these games too, and Doom 3 is very much alike those. So I don't see the whole "It's not like the original" when it really is a lot like Doom.
Doom 2016 is samey, play the first level and you've pretty much played it all. There's nothing more to it, all the samey weapons with tacked on upgrade systems and samey enemies that are so slightly varied that the way of killing them feels the same. There's no threat to them as you slaughter through them every time and it feels more like a massacre than you fighting the hordes of hell. It's boring, there's no stakes, you're overpowered. Just look at how feeble the enemies look like. They don't feel threatening at all. The imp is tinier than you, the shambling skeletons look puny. The hell knights are almost the size of a normal imp now, and the enemies look more cartoon-y than hellish.
Not once did I feel like I did in the old Doom games. It felt like a mindless romp of spamming all your guns and pressing melee a lot on the same enemy. Sure, it's fun, but like you said it's hugely repetitive and that's all there is to the game.
Padrier958 Amen. Doom '16 received a lot of praise for being similar to the OG games, when actually it's like a mish-mash of elements from different games, including some from the previous Doom titles and not exactly in the gameplay aspect.
It's far from being bad, but it's not this "be all, end all" FPS that many fans claim to be.
Higher difficulties change this completely.
Just finished Matthewmitosis' latest video and now this comes along. Sweet!
You see, I didn't play any of the other games in the franchise, but I loved this one. You say this is pure nostalgia, but, that's not possible in my case. So, what is it that I love about it then?
xdan Doom '16 has elements of nostalgia regarding the OG Doom games in different levels, but the gameplay is more appealing to people that never played the OG titles than people who actually played them.
ended the doom review on a low note.. ended no man's sky review on a high note................ yeah that sounds about right lol
I might disagree with you on many topics Errant Signal, but my god do you make interesting and intriguing content. You are an inspiration to me. This was epic and well worth the time.
The best demonstration of tone is as the game begins and doom guy smashes a computer that's trying to exposition at him
The tone the character sets in the beginning is kind of inconsistent though. After that the game keeps forcing cutscenes, unskippable monologues and weird holographic expositions on you, produces an encyclopedia of a shit ton of information about the game world and forces you into some sort of RPG-like points distribution mechanic.
I mean, it's par for the course when it comes to AAA games to add a ton of irrelevant crap as a cheap way to maximize play time, but it creates a disparity between the player motivation and the player character motivation. If I can at all relate to the player character, I want to shoot and kill things, not distribute upgrade points, read about Argent energy or listen to some robot talk about his motivations.
Really nice analysis! I think the original doom' corridor shooting style was superior to the arena approach of the new one. That created more varied encounters, you could also retreat to a more tactical position and to heal. The arena style is almost the same every time.
I also don't like that the demon's bodies disappear after killing them, it takes away that sense of accomplishment that you killed the said demon. Just look at brutal doom and how satisfying is to paint a room with the blood and parts of your enemies!
I understand that is there to increase performance, but damn it's 2016, the original doom did that back in 1993!
Overall, the thing that saves the new Doom is the SOLID gameplay. It's a very important if not the most important aspect in every game. The guns feel powerful, jumping and running feels smooth,and my god, the glory kills are so satisfying!
Kain Bastien
You can still disengage and scramble for resources in arenas. It's like the original, just more fast paced.
And another commentor pointed out that yes corpses don't stick around, however things get bloody and when you clear a gore nest the literal atmosphere of the room changes, so it's still in the spirit of things. (Would probably kill the framerate to have a couple dozen 3D rendered demon corpses sticking around, as opposed to simple sprites.)
Nice review! I'm curious what difficulty level you played the game at the first time. I played on Hurt Me Plenty and I have to say it makes the game quite challenging and kinda mixes up the combat more. Makes it much more interesting. I also feel you have to put more conscious thought in what weapons to use at what time. The action got so intense that the relief after surviving another encounter (because that's what it starts to feel like sometimes), becomes addicting. In that way I never got tired of the action.
I just finished playing the game, and what you said echoes pretty much all my thoughts on it!
I think one other thing that contributes to the combat encounters lacking personality a little, is how mobile the enemies are.
Almost every enemy moves around too much, and have no restriction on how much they can move. Some move around on their own, some just stay up in your grill. This makes battles chaotic in a way that cripples the designers' ability to craft specific combat situations with enemy placement. A few rooms in the game have monsters appear on little pedestals they shoot you from, but they quickly enough walk off of em and just join the rest of the fray. No matter what the designers prepare, after 30 seconds all battles blend together into a similar smoothie. Its a pretty good smoothie tho.
I really appreciate that you willing to be critical of the new Doom. I haven't played it yet but all I've heard is constant praise. Even if something is really good it's important to be critical of it so it can grow and improve.
The thing I'm happiest about with the new doom is how well Glory Kills were implemented. They last just long enough to give you a breath before jumping back into combat, but don't tie you up or require more button presses than necessary. They feel like the sort of thing that Doomguy would naturally do in combat to any demon that got too close.
Awesome video, you raise some incredibly interesting points I'd never thought of.
I really hope you'll cover Eternal someday!
The Shadow warrior reboot suffered from that same repetitive arena battle stuff that you mentioned
And I'm happy someone acknowledged the issue.
I hope someday the genre can go back to those crazy level designs.. I miss those moments in doom 2 where you enter a room and see a health on a pedestal, just chilling and you prepared for the trap that room was gonna u leash on your ass as soon as you touched it.
I remember some maps in doom were more like big ass puzzles
I guess I just miss monster closets and triggers.
Also, I miss the massive enemy count old school shooters had as well.
Bahh one day.. Till them, brutal doom will fill the void
I thought your opinion and the video production method was really great! Huge thumbs up, seriously.
I was also pretty impressed with the aim of the person who made the source video, and it inspired me to go create a TH-cam channel video game source video. So I'mma go start that.
Does anyone have a link to that article Campster mentions around 6:20? I can't find anything with casual searching.
www.zam.com/article/571/sent-from-satan-why-doom-scared-us-back-in-1993 I'll go ahead and add a link in the text thing.
I really appreciate this review. It's smart. comprehensive, and you clearly took your time with it. It seems to take into account all of my favorite bits and concerns, and makes me aware of some I hadn't even thought of. Thank you for making this.
Chris, you really ought to write a book laying out your understanding of game design and critique. You're light years ahead of other games journalists. Thanks as always for the video
Man, I just finished Doom1 Doom2 and Doom3, it's good to see some of the levels again in the vid.
This game's soundtrack is amazing and probably the heaviest shit I've ever heard
I'm really enjoying this game, it feels like it hits the right spot for me when it comes to the old school and the new, which is great because I was worried that I'd either find it too difficult or too dull, but I actually love the arena styled gameplay precisely because of it's core gameplay loop; it's weapon variety and quality, secondary fire modes, glory kills, the chainsaw, the speed and flow of horizontal movement and the verticality of many of the maps. Combine that with the down time found in map exploration, the enemy design, level/environmental design and the sound and music, it all combines to make one of the most cathartic experiences I've had in a while.
That being said I have a few issues; The Summoner is an awesome enemy in my opinion, if they can be handled well by the player, but if they get any leeway they'll spawn wave after wave of enemies, which quickly turn's a tense and fast passed encounter into a frustrating mess. Secondly, while I enjoyed the campy, B movie-esque sci-fi plot and the way the Doom Guy interacts with it, I do wish they didn't take total control away from the player in some of these sections, also a skip option for repeat viewings would be nice. Lastly, the rune trials, fuck them; I thought they'd be a microcosm of what makes the game's core loops so compelling, instead they're arbitrary, frustratingly restrictive and over way too quick and what's more the game already had the combat ratings, combat challenges and weapon mastery challenges that could be tackled whenever and as quickly or slowly as the player chose.
Nice analysis. One thing I would say is that the game having no clear weapon hierarchy is a good thing for me. It works in tandem with the ammo placement as part of a strategy to force the player to become adept with different weapons, avoiding a 'stick with one gun the whole way through' mentality.
DOOM 2016 is way more like Quake than actual DOOM
except.. they are doing a new quake O.o
YES I was just thinking that
they are doing a new "quake 3", not quake.
yes and no... what do you think makes the title more quake than doom?
1r0zz
The platforming, and the lower enemy count. Everything feels a little more Quake to me. DOOM was a first person version of established 2D design principles. Just open the map during combat and it looks like Smash TV. When id made Quake they moved away from that, and it was as much about navigating a 3D space as it was shooting. DOOM was more of a flat maze, while Quake was a 3D maze, and thus had a lot more emphasis on navigating through the levels than mowing down a horde of enemies that ambush you.
DOOM 2016 is way more linear than either of them, though. That and the visual style just don't really say "DOOM" to me.
"It's some of the best tearing I've had in ages"
-Errant 2016
I think this is actually a great start to rebooting the franchise. While the total package isn't cohesive, they've effectively resurrected the individual components such that a sequel can spend much more time on fusing those elements together rather than just modernizing them. Not to mention it was a critical hit, so it's gotten people's attention back on Doom. We'll have to see how they handle the next one though.
The sprawling, labyrinthine hunt and conquest is such a good core mechanic that it's a shame AAA studios are unable to design their modern shooters that way.
I really like your videos! It's so refreshing to have even negative comments about a game coming from a place of love, instead of the far too typical "lol this game is so baaaaaaad." type of videos. I watch your videos whenever you publish one!
man you have some bizarre criticisms some time. certainly, the holograms do come close to parody, but this is the extent of doom's dedication to function over form. venturing deeper into the UAC complex and witnessing the hologram voices actually start sounding like cultists is one of the many interesting narrative touches this game makes with a laundry list of other information surrounding a decently fleshed out world, which is there if you want to read it. because at few points does the pacing of doom ever stall.
this brings me to what you said about new doom not making you feel like a hunter. doom decided to instead make you feel like a murderer. you said that there are no levels that have unique enemy compositions, but the game is constantly introducing new enemies. when it does introduce new enemies, it introduces them with the understanding that you potentially will have to deal with this, maybe multiple times at once, with all the other enemies it has done this with. the game introduces hell's barons in the same level where you fight seven of them before it's done. the enemy ai behaviors are all exceptionally well tuned for the arena gameplay.
you spoke a lot about arenas being a bit too same-y, then strangely complain about enemies being in a corridor. this is prob a taste issue but i find nothing awkward about this game structure, it feels very close to the same idea behind devil may cry. even the same way that game encourages you to try multiple weapons, doom does as well. i don't think limiting this is a good thing, it's the design decision behind 2 weapon limit. if you're getting the most out of your weapons, you'll frequently be needing to use different weapons due to dumping out ammo so quickly with mods like the mobile turret or the plasma rifle's stun bomb.
also, when it comes to not being able to see the results of your destruction, barrels of blood smear walls and floors. of course new doom cannot have the cultural impact that doom had, but its acknowledgment of culture now is handled in a manner that's both cynical and strangely earnest. probably the most surprising game this year.
I disagree with your criticisms and all the differences you pointed out between new and old Doom I love instead of seeing as negatives. I feel like the arenas and levels are so well designed and varied I never get tired of it. I agree about the linear levels and backtrack blocking but thats about it. The game does not have an identity crisis at all. The intention is to modernize Doom and it does that gracefully. There is no "nostalgia buzz" and I have to say after agreeing the gameplay is great that has to be the stupidest thing in your entire video that you said. "What's left" is compelling gameplay, there doesn't need to be more than that because its a video game.
Also snapmap is being fixed, you probably worked on this video for a long time and didn't see it but just yesterday at E3 Id announced they are adding a lot to it such as open outdoor areas, more than two weapons, and using the singleplayer engine instead of the multiplayer.
+Smokydogy - ""What's left" is compeling gameplay"
Good point.
I couldn't possibly agree more. I also disagreed with what he said about the weapons all being equally good, and more of a "pick your poison" kind of thing. Some weapons are clearly better in certain situations than others. The rocket launcher's lock-on is perfect for quickly taking down those annoying Summoners before they have a change to teleport away, for example, and the plasma rifle's stun is insanely effective against the Possessed shield guys and Pinkies since they're only vulnerable from behind.
I suppose being left with good gameplay is still an indicator of something good.
And the biggest thing about Dooms negatives is that it cannot compare to the orignal in some people's minds, so, as far as doom is concerned, I'm disinterested, it seems to be all fine.
What gets me is the attitude that good gameplay should be enough.
It's enough for a good game yes.
But it's not even close to enough for a great game.
This is a bit off topic here, I hope your willing to follow me here.
I have a problem with the general gaming public with just wanting entertainment, actually, no, that goes to anyone for any fictional media.
Why? Because it's the sign of living only to be entertained, and that could be its own topic.
So I get concerned when I see something saying "good gameplay is enough."
especially when I've played games with questionable mechanics but the other elements had me seeing the world in a new light, with the mechanics only serving that message the dev has in mind.
Doom's response could say more about the audience more then it says anything about the game, perhaps with that in mind.
What he meant when he said "what's left", is that there's not so much in this game that it's not from the original. And yes obviously it is borrowing a lot from the original I mean it's DOOM 2016, but the point is that it doesn't work better than the old doom, it is a good game but it doesn't have so much value because there's almost nothing at all that is not borrowed or is not improved.
darkzarkaster93 Really? I feel like there are lots of unique things about this game that set it apart from the original Dooms. It isn't like this is just Doom and Doom II in true 3D.
COUGH "cover album" COUGH. Great video by the way.
One thing I've realized listening to a few people talking about Doom 2016 is how hard it is to talk about the game positively without sounding a little unhinged with all the praise for the ripping and tearing
Really cool to hear such a breakdown of both the original and new Dooms. Kinda makes me want to go back and play through Doom2 again, though also makes the 2016 one sound really dull and unappealing. I wonder if there has been a general industry shift away from mechanically varied level design?
Your point about the game's "saminess" and devaluing different approaches to personal preference reminded me of "Resistance: Fall of Man", an often forgotten but good-ass game that managed to avoid this pretty nicely in my opinion.
I still remember several very different levels very fondly, sometimes even find myself launching the game on occasion for want of "that Cheddar Gorge moment".
Fantastic video. It always pleases me to see people who realize that there IS more to glean from Doom's design and style than what is on the surface. Due to the game being viewed as "simple" (Understandably so, yes, but still...) a lot of people tend to overlook all the minute aspects and the fact that even a simple game can be examined deeply.
Christopher Franklin.. your Errant Signal series
is THE BEST from other similar things in web
Seriously.. im kind of modder
ovice indie game dev
which play\seen\tried all game genre's and tons of game since 90s
and i look
ead a lot of game-dev related thing.. (More and more appear today)
but your series always stand out for me!
it always more than just a "fair" analysis of game
\\ today many people try to create game-analysis videos\text
\\ but most of them not even understand mechanics or story of game creation
"Errant Signal" felt more like a book or TV series and i like it
i like long format without cutting all little meaningful details and overall solidity
But also "Errant Signal" analysis have real depth with personal opinion and emotions
and this is what i really love in this series!
its a pearl in modern world of polished consumption products : ]
i will save and keep it for years - sometimes going back and revising
Thank you - thank you for creation of this series and desire to continue it
I think there's potential here for a rebooted franchise. It will all depend on how they evolve the core gameplay going forward. It will never be the original doom, there's no way it could be. But if we're lucky, it might keep the spirit of the original doom while bring us many more hours of fun gameplay.
Very nice review. I very much dug a lot of what you had to say here, even if I didn't agree with all of it. The combat is "samey" in that there are a lot of encounters that take place in arenas, but the changing scenarios happen on an ever-evolving, ever-shifting, moment-to-moment basis. Because of the much more intense nature of the combat, the more complicated/vertical layouts of the arenas, and the expanded abilities of each enemy, combat is COMPLICATED. Enemies now form overlapping patterns of optimal approach and engagement that change depending on where they are in relation to each other and what they're doing. On top of that, you walk a very fine margin between life and death, because you take more damage and have much lower ammo caps in DOOM 2016 than the original games. Staying on top of those shifting situations and narrow margins requires a lot of very fast whole-situation analysis and decisive responses. I ... really don't see how you can call that "samey". Maybe the fact that that's always what's required of you? In like, a broad sense? But I don't see how you can call it repetitive. Maybe move up a difficulty or two if you find you've "solved" the game's encounters and are doing the same things each time. Anyway, again, nice review. And thanks for the article link, that was a great read!
PS - the DOOM movie was fucking awesome
This is the best analysis of Doom I've seen, something that finally address the problems. I love the game to bits, but I had to hear this.
Great review. Your understanding of the original DOOM really shows in this video.
Very well thought out points! I had been considering picking this up during the Steam Summer Sale, but while it sounds fun it doesn't strike me as worth quite as much as it costs yet, at least to me. Thanks for this, I hadn't really seen any of this covered in any videos about it.
One thing I think you might have missed here is that there is a new generation of gamers coming in that never played the original DOOM. (Myself included. Just born a little too late, and only had NES, then Gamecube before getting into PC.) This new DOOM is radically different from other shooters, and regardless of nostalgic draw, the potentially from the theme, tone, and game mechanics are more than enough to guarantee a wave of players rushing to a sequel should they choose to make one. This was a VERY solid reboot, and absolutely works to lay the grounds for more to come.
I feel super validated by your opening statements. My first thought when I saw your new video was, "there's a Doom reboot? That's like redoing PacMan."
A lot of the reason Doom 3 was disigned that way was to show off the new engine.It was a huge leap in technology back then and they wanted it slow to show off all the lighting.Actually one of the greatest things about Doom 3 was the sound design.
Honestly, I like that it's just Doom in 2016, that's all I've wanted for a long time, purely because there's not really much else like it coming out anymore aside from The New Order by the same people. I honestly, really enjoy the gameplay not because of nostalgia for the original, I like it because it's fast as fuck and tense. I personally think the game adds enough variety to the combat, although I do agree it does get visually samey after a while. I also think you really understated how well executed the verticality is. With so many games coming out nowadays using that as a buzzword, I think this is one of the first times where I feel it was actually effectively implanted to combat and level design in a way that feels organic or natural.
Love how many contrapoints this video raises! Very refreshing to see, considering the game covered.
If there's any musical analogy I can make about Doom 2016 it would be of a classic Metal band making a new album. It has the production and a few modern influences, but it still has the core of what made them so beloved in the first place. there was no "nostalgia buzz" at all, cute nods and throwbacks to be sure, but the game was most assuredly looking towards the future rather than staying stuck in the pass. Even the story has a surprising amount of lore in it if you care to look it up, the Slayer's Testament being a great example.
I'll also make another analogy for the gameplay: the original Doom games were like the Xbox Ninja Gaiden titles. Still very much an action game, but there was still a great emphasis on exploration and enemy placement. The new Doom is like Devil May Cry, a balls to the wall action game focused on style and brutality, there are puzzles and platforming, but mostly to serve as a break from the action, where there are many ways to approach combat and make split-second decisions on how exactly you'll fuck your enemies' shit up.
Fantastic examination and discussion, but I gotta say I must counter your points on weapon preference and ammo consumption. Having played through the game partially on hurt me plenty, before starting again and completing on nightmare, I can say quite confidently that the game does force you to use different weapons for different enemies - and punishes you severely for making the incorrect choice. But, sadly, this only happens on nightmare difficulty.
Just as a fore-note: I'm terrible at video games, especially FPS, it took me over a dozen attempts at the very first gore nest with the imps, in the prologue. Saying that, I did finish the entire game, with minimal stress, over a few days. On nightmare the bosses were the easiest thing about the game - because standard enemies are just terrifying. I can't spray my "favourite weapon" at a group of mobs "randomly" thrown in an arena - because each enemy really is a challenge, they can all kill me, and are damn good at it - each in their unique ways.
As for weapons and ammo, I was constantly starved - never having enough to use the same weapon endlessly, even with economic use of the chainsaw. Even still, with infinite ammo I would never be able to "pick my poison", each weapon is definitely not equally valid on nightmare, while their damage remains competitive between them, they differ in fire rate and ammo efficiency. A Pinky is vulnerable to the Plasma Rifle, yet not the Gauss Cannon, because it's higher fire rate can deal more damage during the brief window you get to see a pinkies back - as it streams past you and remains stunned on the wall. A Gauss Rifle might only get one or two shots in it's back, which, on nightmare, terrifyingly, isn't enough - whereas the plasma rifle can kill it before it gets a chance to turn back around. On easier modes this optimisation isn't necessary. The Pinky can turn back around and charge again, no skin off the players nose, shoot it more with your favourite gun, end of. But harder difficulty demands you use the right tool for the job, another charge is all the more likely to end up with your death... because like everything else a Pinky hitting you is immediate, painful, death. I can't say I used every gun frequently, or every mod, but I can say that I repeatedly died to several areas until I started varying things up and experimenting. The game forced me to do that.
Ultimately, on easier modes - when every enemy only hits you for 5-20 damage - you never have a reason to optimise and switch it up. Likewise, learning how each enemy behaves: their animations, different attacks, their weaknesses - it's unnecessary - one glory kill and the health is back anyway. It's an endless slurry of enemies, and after a while, they all look the same. I mean, everyone knows that pinkies are weak from the back, but less people know you can blind a Cacodemon by shooting it's eye out, causing it to randomly attack everything nearby - and I'm sure very few will know, despite that, the eye isn't actually it's weak spot. I know this, because on nightmare I couldn't afford to be hit once - glory killing enemies got me killed more than anything. Every arena isn't a slurry of random enemies, it's a unique set piece that forces me to use every bit of my arsenal, and the environment - you say you never found a reason to use a grenade to take down a large group, yet, on nightmare it saved my life over and over again, when no other weapon could.
It's a common, and perhaps the only significant criticism I see of the single player game play - that it's repetitive, "same-ey". I can understand it, but I think, wholeheartedly, that the problem is solved simply by cranking up the difficulty. The exploration of different mechanics signalled by monster placement and ammo supplied in the original Doom series is done here also, not in terms of ammo, but certainly diversity of the arenas and variety of enemies provided in each arena. This isn't apparent at all on lower difficulties, every encounter is the same. Enemies shoot you, you shoot enemies, you might die if you get cornered, don't get cornered, rinse-repeat. It's satisfying yes, but it is the same, every time. Unless you play on nightmare - I die to everything - while being cornered is a nonnegotiable death, I can die anywhere, to any enemy, and I did, a lot. I died so much that my 1 playthrough took almost 20 hours - yet I still wasn't bored by the end - every area was a unique challenge. To me that's bizarre, I get bored very easily, and it's rare I ever finish a game.
In most modern FPS upping the difficulty only turns the player into a sheet of paper, enemies into bullet sponges, while their hitscan weapons becomes a funless chore to overcome. In Doom 2016 I think upping the difficulty, oddly, really does make a better game, even when the basic Imps charged attack does more than 100% of your base health, they, like everything else, can be avoided. That's just my two cents, you might have played the entire game on nightmare, and may just be significantly better than me at video games, anyway, again, great video, your other criticisms were right on the mark, and I hadn't seen them elsewhere :D
It's been four years and a sequel later, and the "nostalgia buzz" is still going strong for me, and I'm far from alone it seems like. Given that, it's probably more than just nostalgia nostalgia
From all other critic videos, this video is the one I most agree with. It seems that what could be lacking can learn lessons from the old game.
However, this doesnt mean it cant be changed. Just a reminder that a next level SnapMap is going to be released and people will be making new SnapMaps with their own definition of what their ideal version of single player campaign will be.
There's nothing like an awesome singleplayer FPS with awesome gunplay to sink your teeth into for a few days.
Awesome vid, Campster. You think these things through better than most TH-camrs.
I really appreciate these well thought out, reasoned looks at games. Thanks for doing it and keep up the good work 👍
All of the weapons have a use. I'll agree that the rollout of the enemies is a but same-y when you replay it, but if you play the game on a higher difficulty than your choice of weapons decides whether you live or die.
Also, plenty of these combat arenas have unique mixtures of enemies. Sure, we don't get a room with thirty eight Hell Barons, but we do get arenas with a large number of Summoners, forcing us to track down and kill the spawners before we deal with the ads. Or we get close-quarters with plenty of Cacodemons that require us to be aware of our surroundings as we out-manuever them. Or we get a massive space filled with Imps whose fireballs we constantly have to navigate to defeat them. or we get an average-sized arena with a decent mixture of low-level enemies but a concentrated burst of hit-scan shield enemies, who are largely immune to frontal attacks.
Doom (2016) has a huge amount of variety in its encounters and a lot of this video comes off as nostalgia-laden picking and choosing. yes, Doom 2016 is not a perfect emulation of DOOM in a 3D space but it was never going to be that. it preserves the importance of weapon selection and enemy variety and transplants them into a modern shooter, bolstered by mechanics that encourage the movement that DOOM originally had. And yes, that movement is deliberate, not a cluster-fuck like this video shows.
To be fair, it probably woulda been nice to have an option to keep monster corpses on the screen, for folks who have enough memory in their screaming metal machine-beasts.
Man I'm glad i fin found a channel like yours
Since you mentioned the music at the end of the video... What you said kinda explains Mick Gordon's soundtrack for this game. When he worked on KI he took the key riffs from the original soundtrack by Robin Beanland and then made something completely new out of it. His KI soundtrack paid huge homage to Rare's original while being a stuff of its own in the best possible way. I'm not sure I can say that with Doom. He replicates the vibe, he covers E1M1, but after all it just feels like a spiritual reprise of Bobby Prince. Mick Gordon has made his own for quite some time and he's already famous for that. And that's not the case with Doom. In that way, the new Doom feels exactly like its soundtrack. It replicates well, but as a thing of its own, I still don't know.
Dude! your perspective on the game is the same as mine. Finally someone who points out its flaws along with its achievements. I have been discussing with my friend how the game is really fun but how the arena based maps really miss out on what the map design of the original was like and how doom 2016 seems to struggle with its identity. Your criticisms of doom 3 are also spot on, but I must admit that even though doom 3 strayed to far from the formula I actually find doom 3 to have more of an identity than 2016 doom, because the way I see it the first dooms had the action but doom 3 had the atmosphere, and doom 2016 does not achieve the same action or great map design like the originals, nor does it convey the atmosphere and immersion that doom 3 went for. So even though doom 2016 has more action; I think I personally enjoy doom 3 more since it is so different even if flawed in its execution. However, my favorite doom game is actually doom 64, I feel that it mixes the action and map design of doom 1 and 2 with the more down to earth atmospheric dark nature of doom 3. That's just me though ;)
"Once the nostalgia buzz wears off what's left?"
I dunno, as someone who's never played original Doom and has no nostalgia for it at all I loved this game for its own merits
I think doom 2016 works incredibly well and for me it will probably remain fun long after the dust has settled, but I do see a lot of your points and more than anything they make me think of how a sequel will pan out. There is a side of me that is seriously worried that doom 2 2020 or whatever it will be will be more of the same, and that that sameyness will no longer be acceptable between games, but the optimistic side of me says that the doom 2016 team has all its tools at its' disposal now and can develop a new game with more focus on some of the things you mentioned that have been lost in the transition into today and doing more to carve out more of its own ideas as a game independent of the original doom titles. The team has a strong foundation and i think has proven themselves more than capable of completing their goals. I feel a lot of ambition from the devs of this game and that makes me feel somewhat safe in the idea that they can subvert the (very satisfying) sameyness of this game's combat effectively. I kept believing up til this game came out and i'll continue to believe because my already optimistic expectations were exceeded.
The only thing I felt this game really missed in capturing the essence of the old doom games was the secrets. I wish we had more hidden panels in doors you had to hunt for in order to really explore the map and find out all the secrets. The secrets weren't bad, but they didn't seem as well-hidden as DOOM I and II.
Everything else about the game was amazing and so far it's my GoTY, yes, even over Overwatch.
Same here about GOTY: Doom taught me the mistakes I was making without realizing in Overwatch. That by itself helped me appreciate it more.