 News | Forum | People | FAQ | Links | Search | Register |
Log in |
|
|
The "tiles" they're referring to are for customizing your levelshot on the snapmap browser pages. You know, like the q3a or d3 loading screens. They're not the actual level content, that's all available from the start.
Alright, the SnapMap thing is cool. Hopefully the single player campaign will use all those features in a good way.
And that leaked video was great. I thought the single player stream was pretty cool, definitely not regretting my pre-order. I'm ready to play!!
the official bethesda stream on twitch. I'll be watching this next.
on that note, both stratton and martin came of as much more personable and sincere as compared to all the e3 stuff. IMO, these guys really seemed to be tapped into doom and did a good job of bringing that niche thing to modern tech, presentation and accessibility. doom wont be perfect, but really, it could never be. I'm sure there will be things that will drive me up the wall, but hey, welcome to gaming in 2016. his body language even says "i dont want to be here, i need to check 666 bugs right now".
Poor guy :) Kinda revitalized my excitement for the single player. With the acceptance of 2016 AAA Design and decisions this looks pretty decent!
Was when they entered a nice, big, multi leveled arena and then had no vertical combat at all, despite the area having been clearly built with it in mind. Executive meddling at its finest.
Fact: vertical aiming is highly inaccurate with analog sticks. Horizontal aiming is fine because the player can strafe to compensate. So, console FPSs does have a technical reason to favor horizontal combat.
By the way, that's likely the same reason why Quake only had vertical autoaim � it was designed primarily for keyboards only. In a general sense, I agree. But classic Doom & Doom 64 were designed for horizontal combat mostly, so a tendency towards horizontal combat in Doom 4 will help to make it feel more like the classics, which is a good thing.
Even some of the new gameplay features like double jump and mantling will contribute to that, helping the player to get on the same height as the monsters. So, for a Doom game, that's fine. Btw, I haven't watched the single player stream yet. It's on YouTube now, so I've started watching it.
The thing is Doom/2 had generous autoaim for handling vertical engagements. They wanted you to be looking vertically, even if you don't physically aim up or down - that was likely a limitation on the processing power of the average machine (which I think was a 386 at the time). If I remember correctly, outside of the screen space, there is essentially no precision on the data to render - it's part of the speed it accomplished on those machines, it played quick and dirty with data that wasn't essential. So intermediate solutions like Build's extending the vertical resolution and panning the frame wouldn't have worked because they would've lost those gains. Anyways, Doom does indeed focus on a 2d input scheme, but they regularly introduced vertical attacks - e1m1 armor room to the side on higher difficulties has former humans on top of the stairs, and I think on every difficulty the first imp is sniping you in the slime room. e1m2 concludes with the pit fight with three alcoves above you where imps attack, but a secret will let you into the left alcove and ambush the normal fighters. e1m3 communicates the secret exit with an imp sniping over the donut bridge, and has multiple points where you get a vertical advantage over enemies. e1m4 opens with a tall room with multiple vertical points of interest, and the right most area has enemies wandering around a high up inset. e1m5 is regularly moving up and down with small engagements between the spaces. e1m6 is probably the least vertical with just the exit, and the overlook of the slime area. e1m7 has the raised computer stations with slits where former humans roam, and you can fight through those lines of sight... Doom 2 has a lot more verticality because they were even more used to the engine at that point - and I wonder if that one targeted 486s more. Just about every level has at least a few vertical bits, and some have a lot. Sure, your engagement was to move around horizontally to get them on screen for the autoaim to kick in, but it still had you thinking three dimensionally. The combat I've seen thus far (still early in the stream) has everything coming to your level, or being docile (mostly threat posturing) until you reach their horizontal level. Maybe later on enemies will engage you from different heights? Until then, no, it's not quite as 3d in gameplay components as Doom/2 is. Humorous easter egg, in a document he briefly looked at I see "If you have new suggestions to improve the work environment while working your tenure in Res Ops, please submit suggestion form WAD-E1M4 to your Command Controller."
e1m4's title is Command Control. Which is a clue that least one person there played Doom... Oh and "new advocates must submit a Delta-Q Delta form" dqd. iddqd.
Since this is all so very early on, it looks like we can expect Doom 4 to be just as, if not even more, id self-referential as Rage was. is that bethesda stream the same footage as this? https://youtu.be/i92rgRDT0lI
Yes, but in such cases where the enemies are at a different height, the aiming angle is almost always below 45 degrees, which is more horizontal than vertical.
That comes down entirely to the room, and entry method - shy of teleporting, you're going to be bound by the 2d limitations there.
My point is that Doom/2 is more 3d in gameplay concerns than we give it credit for. Now the flying monsters do all trend toward your level... but so does the Scrag. But ranged monsters in different areas still provides more 3d concerns than I'm seeing here (or do see in most games).
|
|
| This thread has been closed by a moderator. |
|
| Website copyright © 2002-2025 John Fitzgibbons. All posts are copyright their respective authors. |