It's hard not to be excited for a new id game, but I completely agree with Willem et al's disappointment.

I'm 80% sure i had read some id employee assertion that they were getting away from the dark corridor generic realism vibe and towards something more stylised, capturing the old Doom magic.

Well, it looks like they didn't. I'm sure they're in dire straits, but I wish they could have taken a risk.

This could have been a great chance to go completely OTT, into Blood Dragon or Bulletstorm territory. Stylistically they could have taken the Doom heavy metal poster style and run with it, or it could have been cheesy and colourful and brash. I'd even love to have seen a TF2 meets Doom aesthetic, with hundreds of imps and demons to mow down.

Obviously it's just a teaser, but teasers set the mood, and in this case it's put me in a bad mood. 

Slow moving projectiles and enemies
Fast Player Movement
Maze like levels with multiple keys
Demons in the future

All we saw from the last game is focus on 25% of the above.

It's fine that graphics are getting better - you need to spend that AAA budget on something to justify the price tag, but I wouldn't buy a table with only one leg.

I remember turning off the world rendering and the map options on so that I was basically playing a maze type version of asteroids. It teaches you a lot about the deeper game design.

Years later I read something similar, in the Masters of Doom book I think, that compared the game to a top down 2D shooter. 

http://vectorpoem.com/news/?p=74

That article has got it down to a tee. Unfortunately, the author was not immediately scooped up by id when Irrational Games got shut down. 

 

I agree on what a teaser SHOULD do, but how often is that really the case?

To put my statement in question into other words: Because of the deceptive nature of modern teasers, trailers and advertisement in general, using them as the basis of an expectation or opinion is imprudent.

I'd like to see some gameplay, I bought the new Wolf just for the beta... 

but uber-realistic does always look good

There's also the pipeline... everyone doing realism makes for an industry-wide homogenized pipeline, which has economic benefits.
It also makes the games look very similar to each other visually I think. Esp with a lot of scifi and fantasy designs these days which all look like they could have been done by the same studio. I do agree that most NPR games end up trying to capitalize too much on their look. I also agree that photorealism usually does look good... at the time it's released. I recently played the first Crysis again and it looks pretty dated. That's the bane of realism, you never get realistic enough to be considered realistic.

I prefer the old mindset of Doom and Quake, realism wasn't an option so they didn't even try. It's long since been an option now, but does that mean it would be sacrilegious to instead just consider the tech a blank canvas on which anything goes?

Also, with regards to games looking like games, I feel that the ones mentioned, such as Sunset Overdrive just go the other way around, they try to incorporate so much clich�s that it turns on itself. It looks like a synthesis of 'oldskool' derivatives to form a superficial antithesis. It ends up falling in the same trap as the uber-realism games, which is to use it's visual style as a tool to set itself apart in the marketplace, rather than to serve the bigger design. It tries to look like a videogame for the same reasons other games are trying to not look like videogames. Granted, Sunset Overdrive is over the top and it uses it's graphics which allow it to do that, so in that sense it fits, but the design itself is more of a reaction to current trends rather than a genuine effort to do something new, condemning the game to be a child of it's time. The methodology seems to be; being like old games insofar not being like other contemporary games, equalling being 'arcady' vs 'simulationy'. But it's design seems to be more to cherry pick of arcade conventions rather than going through the thought process those arcade games went trough. (which is not to say it will be a bad game!).

That circles back to Doom... an interesting approach to it's design would be to consider the way the FPS *could* have evolved extrapolating from Doom's conventions (which is nicely described in OTP's link), rather than becoming more of a simulation. Why do we need reloading or aim down sights? Why do we need locational damage? Why not simply respawn after you've been killed in single player? Why do we need jumping and crouching? etc. I think Doom could be the perfect candidate for such an approach, the previous games differ radically from contemporary shooters and with it's name it'll sell well regardless of it's quality (D3 was a very pretty and imho very boring game, and it sold amazingly well, though the revolutionary renderer might have played a part).

(wall of text, doh!) 

My hope is that after the big shakeups at ID, the level designers from Rage got the promotion they deserve and are now leading Doom in the right direction.

If it's still set on Earth (remember, Bethesda demanded ID do a u-turn on Doom4 well after it was announced to take place on Earth) I'm hoping for a sort of Earth/hell/space-station mashup, where towers of flesh and bone have erupted from the ground under major cities and derelict space-stations have crashed to the ground, all of which creates twisted labyrinths that the hellions have overrun, building their own uniquely hellish strongholds amongst the rubble.

The good thing about hyper-realism is that it doesn't have to be "realistic" in the literal sense of the word, even if people blinded by COD/BF/etc will try telling you different.

Ask me next week and I may be less optimistic though. 

To be honest, I'd rather have liked to see a new Quake, going back to the medieval setting of the original game just like Carmack had stated one or two years ago. However, after Carmack left id, I dunno if they are still considering the idea.

About Doom 4: It can only be successful if they are departing from the settings of Doom 3 (and also Quake 4, which looked similar IMO). We've had enough horror, I believe, so it's time for brighter levels with more straight-forward action - and without monsters teleporting into your back all the time.

I am still hoping it's gonna be a remake/reimagination of Doom II with a scenario on Earth overrun by demons. If done properly, I'd gladly play it. They just shouldn't stick to id tech 5 any longer - it's just a guarantee for insanely large game installations of several dozen GBs with blurry and laggy texturing. 

Seriously I dont know why they would think another scary oohhh its dark oooooh its booooootifoullll standard piece of boring on rails crap is any lower risk than a proper over the top ultra fun and loud remake of real Doom ?

As suggested by others if following the real spirit and style of doom with some modern tech, eg some of unrealistic/"cartoony" but good looking progressive 60fps constant graphics loaded with neat particle effects and physics for more wow... Allowing hordes of beasts etc.
Going back to that thrash metal demonic aesthetic...it would be a massive success, simply because there is NOTHINg ELSE LIKE IT !!!In over 20 years it is still loved to bits by people and there is fuckall else like it, I mean simply WTF ??
It would be fresh, it would be Doom is fucking back!!!

I mean come on what the fuck is wrong with their brains, do they want money or not?!?!
It would get so fucking hyped by the legions of people with golden memories of doom it would be silly and guaranteed financial success...

I despair.... 

Isn't made for that. It works best for the type of game they're now making. Everything they do is structured to work well for their business model, including their team sizes and skill levels. 

They should stick to new franchises ala Rage to sell their ID Tech 5 and split/recruit another studio to do Doom with their support on another engine or one of their older engines modified. Wouldnt Carmack wanna work something more experimental for a change rather than this realishtik stuff constantly ?

I get the point, the busiess model they have its fine...but it really does not change anything to the possibilities of massive success and profits with a proper Doom sequel instead of driving it into the ground to demonstrate the engine 

Does their business model work? Did Rage ever get into the black? I can't recall now ... I know it was 6+ years in development that's a LOT of cost to recoup. 

Question is not did Rage recoup the money but did the engine licenses right ? Thats what they make their money on no ? Cant be their mediocre games.... 

But id stopped licensing out their engine, right? Other than letting internal Zenimax studios use it. 

Then I really dont understand wtf they are doing.

If they would then just let Doom RIP instead of digging it out of its crypt and dollying it up as a carnival of suck tranny over and over 

Unless i missed something, all we got so far is a CG trailer. We'll see what the game is like soon enough - and if it turns out to indeed "suck" as feared, there's still plenty of time get worked up about it.

idTech5 seemed to have been designed with high FPS rates in mind, so the hope would be that they optimized it even more singe Rage ( which ran quite fast .. when the drivers weren't glitching ;) ) and can afford to throw some proper demon hordes at the player.

In the meantime, play some Pirate DOOM :E 

"To be honest, I'd rather have liked to see a new Quake, going back to the medieval setting of the original game just like Carmack had stated one or two years ago."

I agree with this 100% It would be much more interesting than another sci-fi themed game. 

Yeah fucking earth/sci-fi has been done to death. Even space and mars has been done a lot, although I'd much rather see doom4 in space than on earth. maybe they thought if it's on mars (or the moons wherever the fuck doom was based) it would end up looking a bit too much like rage?

but yeah I'd much rather see a reboot of quake. seriously, has any other game ever done a theme you could classify as "metal" since?

whatever they do though I'll enjoy. doom3 might have got a lot of hate, but it's still the one game from the early/mid 2000s that I'd go back and play again - it's aged very well I think. 

...stripping it of the ultraboring-straight-ahead-each-room-locks-until-you-clear-it level design, of course.
And giving the monsters some kind of actual AI and animation. 

That's another spot where I'm torn ... I found the heavily animated dudes in Rage to be annoying to fight. While they're flipping and rolling and bouncing off the walls, I'm getting frustrated during shot after shot into thin air. Maybe I suck, but I didn't have that problem in other id games. :P 

I feel much more at ease shooting monsters.
And that's really what I had in mind, so I did not think too much flips and rolls.
But Painkiller ones have little more than running straight at you. 

Boah! why bring Painkiller into this ??
Just stick to Doom as Doom is very very very well described by the article linked above by JP Breton http://vectorpoem.com/news/?p=74

Its still perfectly fun today, that type of gameplay is will never get old. Again WTF is so hard to grasp here as to the fun factor. Splash it up with fun graphics and effects all over the place adding a layer of hectic a la Brutal Doom.

No reason either not to expand or mix in a couple "meta" layers on top such as a take on Doom 1's progress through the bases overview map - maybe some dynamic / open fronted approach to beat back the demonic hordes by choosing which base/area to check out or whatever, fellow marines to rescue for added equipment/support further on...plenty of chances for creativity there as long as gameplay is left to its roots there is no problem with it. Might avoid the oh so (I dont know the fuck why but) feared comment "they just remade doom with a gfx update"

As to setting well the setting is the settings its in the franchise. Hell Tech Earth Mars Space thats what it is. As you know its more about doing it right than where it is set. 

I found the heavily animated dudes in Rage to be annoying to fight. While they're flipping and rolling and bouncing off the walls

I guess I'm the opposite... I really really like the way the mutants were animated, I wish every game had such responsive animations. It really made the game flow as opposed to pop-and-stop.
Bit like fighting a duo of fiends now I think of it. 

...stripping it of the ultraboring-straight-ahead-each-room-locks-until-you-clear-it level design, of course.

...but, that's not what doom was... 

Doom was made up of some very complex labyrinthine level design. Shits all over the corridor shooter blueprint that has been adopted by the low end of the console FPS brigade.