If you make the falling damage realistic, it would screw that right up. 

* onetruepurple proceeds to not watch the errant signal video at all
<@scar3crow> onetruepurple; you have chosen, wisely 

I enjoyed him making his points, even though I disagreed with a lot of them. He approached the thing from a different angle than most.
He's borderline art-critique-ish which might turn off people (pretentious etc, I went to art college so I'm used to a lot worse, hah).

One good point he made, which I never thought much about is how Doom flows more while Quake is more pop and stop. I never thought about that, but I realize it's indeed the case.

I completely disagree with his notion that Doom had a better gameplay design though, Doom is a seminal game with gameplay that holds up well today, but I really prefer Quake. Although admittedly a lot of that is due to the true 3D layout of Quake maps.

Carmack said in a recent interview Doom 4 went difficult because the in-house legion of Doom fans all had a different opinion on what the essense of Doom is, you don't have to look far in the Quake community to reach similar conclusions.

Opinions opinions... 

Carmack said in a recent interview Doom 4 went difficult because the in-house legion of Doom fans all had a different opinion on what the essense of Doom is, you don't have to look far in the Quake community to reach similar conclusions.

That's bullshit PR smokescreen. Doom 4 is going nowhere because id is mismanaged and directionless. 

the essence of Doom is essentially that it's a first-person robotron inside of a maze. And it's really fast. Doom 3 is closer in pacing to Quake, don't believe me? Watch the video for Shamblers Castle for Doom 3. Only Doom 3 forgoes a lot of the maze puzzle elements that made Quake fun.

I think there will be a resurge of old school FPS type games, this has started with Shadow Warrior and the new Wolfenstein. I'd love to see a modern but pseudo-retro take on the genre, like how we get a lot of indie 2d platform metroidvania type games. 

Doom 4 is going nowhere because id is mismanaged and directionless.

Sure you can imply that, but it wasn't the point. The point is that people with very similar backgrounds working in the same environment can still disagree about key directions, regardless of the success of development etc.

the essence of Doom is essentially that it's a first-person robotron inside of a maze. And it's really fast.

Function wise, sure. Identity wise, I'm inclined to agree but I'm not so sure. I don't really have any strong opinion on it. I think tech also played a big role into it, Doom's tech really expanded level design possibilities over Wolvenstein etc. Also the violence and visceral and provocative art direction have given it a certain staying power. After all this time no one has glued disparate clich�s together in such an iconic way as Doom I think. If it were gunmetal gray robots shooting eachother in a parking lot I don't think would remember it as much as they do nor exploded into pop culture as much. 

I think there will be a resurge of old school FPS type games, this has started with Shadow Warrior and the new Wolfenstein. I'd love to see a modern but pseudo-retro take on the genre, like how we get a lot of indie 2d platform metroidvania type games.

A Metroidvania-like Quake would be fps bliss I think. I'm still waiting for someone to do that actually. I would certainly like a return to more projectile/dodging based gameplay, but I think it should be more than just a rehash of the past. There's still plenty of uncharted territory in the FPS space, look at some of the 7DFPS stuff for instance. Or Portal, insofar as you can consider it an 'fps'. Or look at something like Tribes with it's movement mechanics, I'm sure you can expand in all kinds of directions that are more interesting than the typical CoD template of today. 

The monster design is much better in Doom. Some fly, some walk, some run, some melee, some scan hit, some shoot, some lob ... it's all a wonderful ballet that got a little lost in the transition to Quake.

Quake is fun, no doubt, but with 1 flying monster it didn't really have the variety that Doom had. In Doom you never knew what you were going to find in the next room and you just had to run in and make snap judgements about who had to be taken out and in what order - or who you could get into the crossfire quickly to get some in-fighting on your side.

In Quake, you just ... kill everything in the room. There's no real incentive to get things to fight each other (unless it's a mob or arena room) and it's generally just a matter of running backwards with the mouse button held down. :) 

 

Doom monsters didn't suffer from being split between themes as much. Agree Quake lacks variety of flying badies. Quoth fixes most holes in the palette i think. Both Doom and Quake have great ballets, dodging is bit easier in Doom, Quake maps tend to be more claustrofobic and less open? 

Predictably, I enjoyed the video and agree with a number of observations.

I'm not going into detail, but before you criticize him for a skewed point of view, consider that the viewpoint in this community tends to be skewed the other way, even if some won't like to admit it.

Quake's gameplay is incredibly simplistic and incredibly aggressive, the only interaction available to you being moving and shooting, and its level design often consists of "pepper it with monsters and ammo and call it a day" (not always, but often.)

I don't hate Quake. Hey, I still play it from time to time. I even still have a minor quake mapping itch. I think it's a classic, no doubt, which the guy also admits IIRC.

I played through Episode 3 just recently and thought how well made it was and how dense the atmosphere is. Especially the angled corridor at the start of e3m3 where the ogre's grenade will bounce just right... but I can only play this once in a while because it gets repetitive fast (which to some, is probably part of the charm, a trancelike experience of moving and killing.)

What I admire about Quake is the 3D-ness and all the moving and exploding things. And the dynamic lights. These things are timeless, but "kill them all" as the sole gameplay principle, while 1990s NIN runs in the background, is only acceptable in small doeses to me these days. 

I felt that he was saying that quake is just a bad version of doom and should never be plated. that's bullshit. 

"Some fly, some walk, some run, some melee, some scan hit, some shoot, some lob"
More specifically 3 fly, one of which is melee only, another of which spawns the first. The other fires a slow moving projectile. 1 runs, the demon/specter. Since you say "scan hit", "shoot", and then "lob" well then I will have to say no, none of them lob. Projectiles in Doom do not arc, they simply travel. Doom has no equivalent to Quake's Ogre with the grenades, or the Fiend with the jumping. Cacodemons also just list forward and downward toward the player, with no side to side motion to get you tracking. Doom also lacks monsters with different health dynamics such as the regeneration of the Zombie, or the explosion resistance of the Shambler, or special death states like the explosion of the Spawn.

"There's no real incentive to get things to fight each other"
Except for the very same incentive that you have in Doom, enemies occupied with one another, saving you ammo and reducing the likelihood of you taking damage. If you've not found Quake good for in-fighting next to Doom, I question your awareness of Ogres, Death Knights, Fiends, or Vores in your playing.

"it's generally just a matter of running backwards with the mouse button held down."
That will work great, unless the enemy attacking you is a Grunt, Enforcer, Scrag, Death Knight, Fiend (if you started once it was close), Spawn, or Shambler.

Doom has a good bestiary in terms of damage output and damage taking, but they are all two-dimensional enemies. I love Doom, it is my second favorite game, and my three favorites are in a whole other tier next to the rest, but it is a literally flatter gameplay experience than Quake. Doom was my first love, Quake was the true one though, because of that literal and metaphorical depth. It is not flawless, it isn't even Great, but it is Good, varied, and interesting. 

My biggest gripe with Quake isn't a flaw at all. It's the atmosphere; the dark lighting, the colors, the sky, the sound, it's really brooding and intense, I love it, but it's not something I can stick into for prolonged periods, it's what makes Quake tick, but I also find it rather exhausting. (Especially with the droning soundtrack, it makes The Downward Spiral etc sound like theme park music). Doom otoh despite it's theme, has a much 'happier' look and sound that's more easy listening by comparison. It's similar with a game like Stalker, it's beautiful in it's rust stained uglyness, but after playing it for a week I need a change of scenery, hah.

There's still nothing like it, it's almost like some avant garde work of art at times (I don't think it's teen angst in the slightest). 

> the only interaction available to you being moving and shooting

Hey, its not _just_ moving, its dancing! Shambler dance anyone?
In comparison to other games, quake is at least more than simply point+click+hunt. 

When I said "lob" I was trying to convey that some monsters have slow projectiles and some have fast ones. Imps, for example, have slow fireballs while the Mancubus just hammers those rockets at you.

I'm well aware that there aren't any lobbing projectiles in Doom. :) 

I wasn't sure which angle you were going for there, but that is a substantial difference in terms of player movement. I only need to concern my footing in Doom if there are damaging floors - which you can step into and out of without being hurt often. Ogres above me in a battle however makes for a more interesting situation.

Spiney - I can get that, I love Quake's atmosphere and it enlivens me, but I see where you are coming from. I recently started playing New Vegas and it has been to me, a happier STALKER. You might want to try it if you liked STALKER well enough but found the mood too oppressive. 

"Carmack said in a recent interview Doom 4 went difficult because the in-house legion of Doom fans all had a different opinion on what the essense of Doom is"

they really should have focused on simply making the most action packed, sci fi shooter with demons enemies they could instead of making the definitive DooM experience imho.

They had to approach it honestly... "look fans, we don't know if we can recapture doom or whatever, but we are doing a fast paced ACTION game where you fight demons- lots of them- with graphics- lots of them". By following this approach they could have done no wrong. Instead they are wasting years trying to do the perfect doom game- eventually they will just start from scratch and rush out a game that will have nothing to do with the prototypes. I can only hope it will be decent 

It has every ear mark of 'design by committee', which almost never results in a good game. 

yeah spiney, obviously I love quake but I liked for example how colorful serious sam is. It still has a theme of monsters from another dimension killing everything except for the super heroic main character, but the colors and the not-so-serious approach makes the world more tolerable for prolonged gaming binges. 

Rarely results in a game at all, which seems to be the case so far here as well. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/Blind_monks_examining_an_elephant.jpg/800px-Blind_monks_examining_an_elephant.jpg

What is Doom?

What is Quake? 

"Instead they are wasting years trying to do the perfect doom game- eventually they will just start from scratch and rush out a game that will have nothing to do with the prototypes"

Hey it worked for Quake! :P

I don't really get what the fuck is so difficult about it, Doom is purely a scifi action shooter. So do that.

Perhaps they're trying to scratch the assholes of all the critics who will rip it apart if it's JUST a great action shooter, because that's apparently not good enough anymore you need all sorts of other shit like non-linearity and rpg'ness. But fuck them, I'd just make it a wicked action game, awesome visuals, and at least tell a good damn story with characters you care about. And of course a good multiplayer. It won't sell like COD, but it doesn't need to.

id tried to cater to the audiences' needs in Rage and it backfired. They tried to make doom3 a different game to doom1/2, and it backfired. 

but that worked out pretty well... They also did something very different with Orcs and Elves and that was really good too IMO.

The problem with Doom3 was that the neat horror stuff at the beginning devolved into just a backspawning every-room-looks-the-same pile of garbage. Rage was pretty good for the first half of the game, the game felt like it should have kept ramping up in action but it seem to plateau after the big boss in the middle and then get steadily worse. It also has the worst final level in any game in recent memory. 

I cannot figure out what they were thinking there.