which part of blowing up monsters in hell does not remind you of a video game and makes sense and is logical?

Also, what JneeraZ said. Immersion is much more than 'realistic'. In fact most the 'realistic' games actually end up breaking immersion more because they go out of their way to try and be realistic and yet the inherent gamey stuff in the game always stops it from being so. 

I think what Kona is driving at is the conveyance. The universe the game asks you to play within has such depth and imagination that you can suspend your disbelief enough to buy into the game much more.

Which is a great thing.

But. In the late 90's it was termed realism, and many people took the word at face value, trying to make sorry arse simulations and call them games.

The past few syearssince, where games hadevelopment s come within the reach of common man, have seen a Renaissance of sorts, all those who grew up on games like doom trying to recapture that simple fun the old games had, avoiding the death of fun in games design called realism.

Now that the collective gamer culture is getting free of that fad, we see beleaguered old id coming up with a reboot which actually seems like it's not a petty cash grab.

From what I can tell, it seems like they're genuinely trying to bring the ideals of Doom2 to 2016. God help them, they're even listening to the fans.

It's a bold move, (billions of $ at stake) and yet I don't think there's anyone who genuinely wants to see it fail.

But then again, you need an awesome filter to talk to fans. They talk shite for the most part... 

Yeah ijed conveyance might be a better word for it.

"I seriously disagree with that. When I first played Doom, I was totally consumed and into the game world. The world melted away and all I saw was the level I was playing ... if that's not immersion, I don't know what is."

But when did you first play Doom JneeraZ? Was it before Quake, Unreal, HalfLife (which all massively improved immersion, in that order)? The same could probably be said for Pong when it first came out in the 70s, but it couldn't be considered immersive now. Just as Doom couldn't be considered as immersive as, say, Skyrim. 

I still find doom immersive, I could argue more so than skyrim.

Doom is its own little microcosm with laws and predictable behavior resulting from those laws. To me, this little world is very immersive; everything simply clicks which makes it easier to 'get in the game'. I think doom's unrealistic aesthetics helps it to be immersive.

In my experience, skyrim's mechanics were not nearly as engaging. The game was much more realistic looking, sure, but the closer you get to looking 'real' the more glaring and 'immersion breaking' the things inconsistent with reality become.

immersion =/= reality simulator

I don't believe there is a set of rules or formula that makes things immersive, It's unique to each game.

I count system shock 2, riven and morrowind as some of the most immersive games I've ever played and they all achieved this immersion in different ways. Games don't have to be consistent with reality, just consistent with themselves.

Fuck, I'm tired and rambling and saying a whole lot of nothing... 

Music, lighting, artstyle, those 3 when put together correctly produces immersion.
Doom is immersive by putting us into a world that makes no architectural sense, but the musics (more effective when ambient, like E1M8, E2M2 and so on), lighting depth and said unrealistic architecture (which works in a way because you could say the architecture reflect the demons' twisted beings) makes for immersion.
Unreal is better at being an immersive game than Quake 2 because of its big open spaces, more ambient music (which goes to combat mode whenever you fight an important enemy), varied colored lighting, its skyboxes and varied locations, which consist of multitudes of caves, temples, villages and spaceships. Quake 2 has orange at its dominant lighting, blasts metal music 24/7, and we just have bases, warehouses, prisons and sometimes outdoor areas for environment: cold and dull environment. Sure, it's a more realistic setting (Sure it's an alien world but if it took place on earth no one would notice the difference). 

immersive. 

For sure, I suppose many people have trouble getting immersed in non reality-logic environments and designs, that would explain many trends in game design/gfx.

Disclaimer : that's not a dig at people, it just is, different brains and all. 

was much more immersive for me than Half Life.

Also plenty of modern day quake levels are more immersive than a number of modern games. 

Make my levels longer so that they're more immersive.

Quake's gameplay is engaging, so if you have a well executed theme that is immersive then you get the conveyance. 

is a great example of what I was referring to. 

so it does come back down to gameplay and atmosphere no?

I mean quake has pickups etc, gameplay mechanics arent always realistic or logical but does it really matter. 

story, character upgrade/progress, it's all faff if you dont have the basics. 

But there will always be a personal taste element to it as well, which is where I think a lot of the disagreements in this thread come from.

Some people like jazz, others metal, others techno etc etc. One piece of music can be objectively as good as another of a completely different type, but won't be liked as much by different people because of their individual tastes.

Its a safe bet that anyone commenting here likes FPS games, but even within that genre, there is a massive breadth of variety. 

And the glowing icons actually make total sense from a game design perspective.

Remember that other thread about "is modern game development doomed?". Remember the replies about the ammo boxes in Quake being huge because the player must notice them at any costs?

In Doom 4, the ammo pickup models have a more realistic size, which means they would be harder to see. The floating icon over the ammo solves that.

Sure, the floating icon don't match the style of the game's objects, but it does match the style of the helmet visor/HUD, so it's actually perfectly consistent in terms of game design & art design.

The inconsistency is not within Doom 4 itself, but with the atmosphere of the classic Doom games. Classic Doom didn't have a Half-Life style glowing HUD or Metroid Prime style glowing visor.

It seems that the only Doom game they got some HUD inspiration from for the Doom 4 visor is Doom 3, and then they expanded upon it.

Making the floating icons optional or being able to select a more subtle set of icons could solve that, at the cost of gameplay awareness or artistic style consistency, respectively. 

Where pickups in the player's vision materializes a high-tech-style arrow that highlights the item's silhouette and at the end of the arrow make a small text that describes what it is (Health + 20, Bullets + 10...) 

"Questions from the community" video:
https://youtu.be/NrIMb-ro-UI

My first reaction was to feel sorry for Marty. He seems to be going through hell to get this game done.

Anyway, my fears about the map puzzles were confirmed: They're focusing on not letting the players get lost, so the layout style of the maps should be like the style of the maps in the 2013 Shadow Warrior: everything but the secrets is straightforward, and each map should be just a semi-linear series of battle arenas.

A satisfying combat system can make the game fun, alright. But it won't be enough to honor the legacy of the gameplay of the classics. 

The way from the first ambush up to the bloody half-opened door is effectively a circle. 

I wonder if he's resigning but has a deal with zeni to not announce it until after doom is released.

Also, im sure the pressure on straton is unreal. The guy needs a hug. 

http://pastebin.com/FB66Bs4k

In terms of level-design, id goes back to the roots. Tubes like in Call of Duty are frowned upon, the levels in the reboot span multiple floors, contain hidden secrets and old-fashioned keycards. After over a decade of presumed casual-shooters, it's not that easy (even with two- and three-dimensional automap) to get an overview.

Snapmap gives you access to all objects, enemies and environments, that id Software made for Doom (2016). The editor is mainly set up for pre-made rooms, which you can easily stick together. However, you can then change everything in detail: Sound effects, lighting, decorations, the amount and strength of enemies, door-placement, consoles, stairs and keycards. Yes, even the HUD can be changed to fit the mapper's needs.

On top of that, there's the scripting language, that allows complex algorithms by simple connection of logic chains. Imagine it like this: You place an enemy and tell the game, that a door is supposed to open when it dies. Or you connect a switch with a weapon and arrange it that the weapon is only supposed to appear when the player hits the switch - and on the side, a different music track should play and a couple of hell knights should spawn in the room. 

Marty actually said that bosses won't be available in SnapMap, because their size and code would overcomplicate things. Not a big loss, though.

What I liked the most in that article: Upgrades aren't bought, they're collected like regular items. There seems to be no grinding then.

The talk of "upgrade points" in the maps sounds like the Dr. Light spots in MegaMan X, which is a great thing.

The jetpack sounds cool, and the item drops from the executions seems to depend on the equipped upgrades; I'm actually neutral about this last bit, will only be able to judge this after playing the game. 

http://www.gamesradar.com/doom-most-cerebral-slaughterhouse-youve-ever-seen/

Apparently, it's cerebral because health packs.

Also, SnapMap is an amazing editor ... as amazing as Little Big Planet was.

So ... hype? :-/ 

Fuck whatever scrawny bearded low test fuck wrote this garbage. 

Shut up you filthy anti-CoD, �old school�-worshipping curmudgeons. 

hilarious article. 

Game devs and AAA gamers think they're too complicated? Jesus
And how the guy wrote the 90s FPS era, it seems like he passes this off as an obsolete thing, even though it was pretty much the golden era of PC Gaming, which went on until the mid 2000s.

Because of that, I don't think I'll take his word as SnapMap being as complex as Little Big Planet. Maybe as complex as FPS Creator's, lol.