Nice Try, But...

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

Enjoyed this game but it just didn't make the list of my favorites.
Too much dark dieing. Bugged me that after neutralizing an area
something would always jump out from no where and nail me. My last
couple of games were NWN and KOTOR, different I know, but I played
them for months. This one I played through once then had to
experiment to keep up my interest. It was a bit of fun editing the
weapons so that they gave me far greater destruction, but even that
lost my interest after Hell. If there were some mods out there to
keep up some interest it might have helped but I don't see any. Sorry
to see the Doom series end with this one. I just don't see how there
could be a IV after this one. Meanwhile, there are new mods in the
other games attracting me. AMF

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

> Enjoyed this game but it just didn't make the list of my favorites.
> Too much dark dieing. Bugged me that after neutralizing an area
> something would always jump out from no where and nail me.

For me, the "scariness" of the game was a semi-novel idea for a while.
But after a few hours, it just becomes predictable, boring, and over-done.
"Look, something for me to pick up. That means that a bad guy will appear
when I do." "Look, a bad guy just appeared. That must mean that another
one appeared right behind me." "Oooh, a dark corner. A bad guy must appear
behind/beside me when I go through there."

steve

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

> Enjoyed this game but it just didn't make the list of my favorites.
> Too much dark dieing. Bugged me that after neutralizing an area
> something would always jump out from no where and nail me.

pussy


--
-Scott

"Spreading a little of my sunshine throughout Usenet hell."

<bitbucket@linkline.com> wrote in message
news:dpccl0pnc7qnqnknudq9q795uf1oa3grf8@4ax.com...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

> For me, the "scariness" of the game was a semi-novel idea for a while.
> But after a few hours, it just becomes predictable, boring, and over-done.
> "Look, something for me to pick up. That means that a bad guy will appear
> when I do."

Bullshit.
This only happens a few times in Doom3.

> "Look, a bad guy just appeared. That must mean that another
> one appeared right behind me." "Oooh, a dark corner. A bad guy must
appear
> behind/beside me when I go through there."

Do you always talk like an 8 year old child?

--
-Scott

"Spreading a little of my sunshine throughout Usenet hell."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:10:46 GMT, "codethis" <GoBearsh@AOL.com> wrote:

>
>> For me, the "scariness" of the game was a semi-novel idea for a while.
>> But after a few hours, it just becomes predictable, boring, and over-done.
>> "Look, something for me to pick up. That means that a bad guy will appear
>> when I do."
>
>Bullshit.
>This only happens a few times in Doom3.

If it's that low, then why aren't you giving an exact number?

Besides, even if it does happen to be a fairly low number, such things
stick out much more significantly as it is a sign of inexperienced level
design. The only game which seems to have done "monster spawning on item
pickup" sequence was with the Serious Sam series - in those cases, it was
either somewhat obvious or otherwise considered valid.

>> "Look, a bad guy just appeared. That must mean that another
>> one appeared right behind me." "Oooh, a dark corner. A bad guy must
>appear
>> behind/beside me when I go through there."
>
>Do you always talk like an 8 year old child?

Is your lack of argument agreeing with his statement?

Of course, given your other recent postings, I doubt you have a complaint
with his behaviour either.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

Wierd. Its a game which has been known for over 15 years or something to be
exactly and ONLY this: YOU SHOOT THINGS. Now, please demonstrate what you
expected it to be. If it AT ALL diverges from the world-wide consensus of
sentient lifeforms' idea of what the game should hold, THEN you can whinge.
Until then, please PLEASE show an IQ at least equal to that of room
temperature in an igloo.

<bitbucket@linkline.com> wrote in message
news:dpccl0pnc7qnqnknudq9q795uf1oa3grf8@4ax.com...
> Enjoyed this game but it just didn't make the list of my favorites.
> Too much dark dieing. Bugged me that after neutralizing an area
> something would always jump out from no where and nail me. My last
> couple of games were NWN and KOTOR, different I know, but I played
> them for months. This one I played through once then had to
> experiment to keep up my interest. It was a bit of fun editing the
> weapons so that they gave me far greater destruction, but even that
> lost my interest after Hell. If there were some mods out there to
> keep up some interest it might have helped but I don't see any. Sorry
> to see the Doom series end with this one. I just don't see how there
> could be a IV after this one. Meanwhile, there are new mods in the
> other games attracting me. AMF

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Blaedmon" <ass@hell.com> wrote in message
news:cj63at$2q59$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
> Wierd. Its a game which has been known for over 15 years or something to
be
> exactly and ONLY this: YOU SHOOT THINGS. Now, please demonstrate what you
> expected it to be. If it AT ALL diverges from the world-wide consensus of
> sentient lifeforms' idea of what the game should hold, THEN you can
whinge.
> Until then, please PLEASE show an IQ at least equal to that of room
> temperature in an igloo.


If you follow your logic than _ALL_ sequels would be _exactly_ like the
original and that's just not the case. Look at Max Payne 2 compared to the
original, Q2 and Q3 compared to their original form. The Unreal franchise in
yet another example of a title that evolved it's gameplay to new heights.

Your argument that a new game produced in 2004 should play like a game that
was exciting on 486 class PC's is ludicrous.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Michael-NC" <NoAddress@desolate.com> wrote in message
news:TGC5d.38827$ci3.1675498@twister.southeast.rr.com...

....

The Unreal franchise in
> yet another example of a title that evolved it's gameplay to new heights.
>

Hang on, have you played Unreal2?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Lyrical Korma" <lyrical.korma@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:wvF5d.1553308$ic1.155304@news.easynews.com...
> "Michael-NC" <NoAddress@desolate.com> wrote in message
> news:TGC5d.38827$ci3.1675498@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
> ...
>
> The Unreal franchise in
> > yet another example of a title that evolved it's gameplay to new
heights.
> >
>
> Hang on, have you played Unreal2?

Yeah but I'm including Unreal Tournament in the equation as well.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

codethis wrote:
>>Enjoyed this game but it just didn't make the list of my favorites.
>>Too much dark dieing. Bugged me that after neutralizing an area
>>something would always jump out from no where and nail me.
>
>
> pussy
>
>

Doom3 was hatched a number a years ago during a big nostalgia craze for
older games.
ID threw unique innovative game engine advances at it.

You talk about an 8 yr olds vocabulary, how about a 16 yr. olds
2 sylabble one word reply?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Raymond Martineau" <bk039@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
news:jljdl0lqv578u8lc0lleidgovidk9rm89p@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:10:46 GMT, "codethis" <GoBearsh@AOL.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> For me, the "scariness" of the game was a semi-novel idea for a while.
>>> But after a few hours, it just becomes predictable, boring, and
>>> over-done.
>>> "Look, something for me to pick up. That means that a bad guy will
>>> appear
>>> when I do."
>>
>>Bullshit.
>>This only happens a few times in Doom3.
>
> If it's that low, then why aren't you giving an exact number?
>
> Besides, even if it does happen to be a fairly low number, such things
> stick out much more significantly as it is a sign of inexperienced level
> design. The only game which seems to have done "monster spawning on item
> pickup" sequence was with the Serious Sam series - in those cases, it was
> either somewhat obvious or otherwise considered valid.
>

I thought the whole spawning thing in SS was an homage to Doom series.
I find those kinds of games fun for a few levels, but they get tedious after
that.
I finished 80% of SS, then used a cheat because I just wanted to see what
happened at the end and I was quite impressed by the big dude.

When I think back the same thing happened when I played Doom (or was it
Doom2). I never finished the game because it became tedious, and the same
thing is happening with D3. It was very well done and atmospheric to start,
but now it's becoming annoying. A one trick pony I'm afraid. You know, I see
the secret stashes of armour etc, but I just cant be bothered to find a way
to them.
Playing on veteran btw. I'll probably finish it, but I find I'm not really
looking forward to it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Lyrical Korma" <lyrical.korma@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:wvF5d.1553308$ic1.155304@news.easynews.com...
> "Michael-NC" <NoAddress@desolate.com> wrote in message
> news:TGC5d.38827$ci3.1675498@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
> ...
>
> The Unreal franchise in
>> yet another example of a title that evolved it's gameplay to new heights.
>>
>
> Hang on, have you played Unreal2?
>
>

Maybe that was considerd a lateral evolution ;-)

I hear some MP modes are quite good.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

Please re-read the last line of my post. The FUNDAMENTALS are the same. Did
you think I meant they should just churn out games with the same technology
as the original Doom well into 2005 and so on? Again, re-read the last line.
I'll try to make this real simple: in ALL the Doom games, you SHOOT THINGS.
Remarkable eh? The title 'Doom' was made synonomous with SHOOTING THINGS and
all titles attached to it thereafter. Yes, technology progresses.. but the
core of the game - the soul of the game - the damn point of the game - is to
SHOOT THINGS. That is all. Sure, you collect stuff along your way, you open
inaccessible corridors to unexplored areas, you switch switches and pull
knobs... for what reason? To further your likelyhood of SHOOTING THINGS. My
God in heaven. Thats easy to understand.

"Michael-NC" <NoAddress@desolate.com> wrote in message
news:TGC5d.38827$ci3.1675498@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
> "Blaedmon" <ass@hell.com> wrote in message
> news:cj63at$2q59$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
>> Wierd. Its a game which has been known for over 15 years or something to
> be
>> exactly and ONLY this: YOU SHOOT THINGS. Now, please demonstrate what you
>> expected it to be. If it AT ALL diverges from the world-wide consensus of
>> sentient lifeforms' idea of what the game should hold, THEN you can
> whinge.
>> Until then, please PLEASE show an IQ at least equal to that of room
>> temperature in an igloo.
>
>
> If you follow your logic than _ALL_ sequels would be _exactly_ like the
> original and that's just not the case. Look at Max Payne 2 compared to the
> original, Q2 and Q3 compared to their original form. The Unreal franchise
> in
> yet another example of a title that evolved it's gameplay to new heights.
>
> Your argument that a new game produced in 2004 should play like a game
> that
> was exciting on 486 class PC's is ludicrous.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

"Blaedmon" <ass@hell.com> wrote in message
news:cj8ooa$f5f$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
> Please re-read the last line of my post. The FUNDAMENTALS are the same.
Did
> you think I meant they should just churn out games with the same
technology
> as the original Doom well into 2005 and so on? Again, re-read the last
line.
> I'll try to make this real simple: in ALL the Doom games, you SHOOT
THINGS.
> Remarkable eh? The title 'Doom' was made synonomous with SHOOTING THINGS
and
> all titles attached to it thereafter. Yes, technology progresses.. but the
> core of the game - the soul of the game - the damn point of the game - is
to
> SHOOT THINGS. That is all. Sure, you collect stuff along your way, you
open
> inaccessible corridors to unexplored areas, you switch switches and pull
> knobs... for what reason? To further your likelyhood of SHOOTING THINGS.
My
> God in heaven. Thats easy to understand.


Look, obviously a vast amount of people are simply under-whelmed by the
game. Their opinion is no less valid than yours. If you like the game,
that's great but you can't "explain" or rationalize away the fact that a lot
of people have the same complaints; dark, repetitious, bad AI, non-linear
boring game-play. IMHO, this game doesn't come close to Painkiller or
Farcry, both of which had enjoyable, engaging game-play. D3 just doesn't get
it done. It is what it is, a showcase for the game engine. To be honest, I'm
horribly disappointed with D3, as I have been a huge fan of Id Software
offerings prior to this title. I am still _stunned_ that they would put out
a product like this.

BTW, _All_ First Person Shooters involve "SHOOTING THINGS." Do you know any
FPS that does not involve "SHOOTING THINGS?"



> "Michael-NC" <NoAddress@desolate.com> wrote in message
> news:TGC5d.38827$ci3.1675498@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> >
> > "Blaedmon" <ass@hell.com> wrote in message
> > news:cj63at$2q59$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
> >> Wierd. Its a game which has been known for over 15 years or something
to
> > be
> >> exactly and ONLY this: YOU SHOOT THINGS. Now, please demonstrate what
you
> >> expected it to be. If it AT ALL diverges from the world-wide consensus
of
> >> sentient lifeforms' idea of what the game should hold, THEN you can
> > whinge.
> >> Until then, please PLEASE show an IQ at least equal to that of room
> >> temperature in an igloo.
> >
> >
> > If you follow your logic than _ALL_ sequels would be _exactly_ like the
> > original and that's just not the case. Look at Max Payne 2 compared to
the
> > original, Q2 and Q3 compared to their original form. The Unreal
franchise
> > in
> > yet another example of a title that evolved it's gameplay to new
heights.
> >
> > Your argument that a new game produced in 2004 should play like a game
> > that
> > was exciting on 486 class PC's is ludicrous.
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.doom (More info?)

> I think id set out to re-tell the story of the original Doom.

Of course they did. They've been saying that for quite a long time.

steve