Huh, it does not count. You accused me of "So, in one sentence you present us with an example of a game that doesn't by any means push the envelope and tries new stuff"

Rise of the Triad was amazing. Where do you think id got jump pads from? The game play was just confusing till you figured it out. You don't think a game with dog mode as well as god mode does not push the envelope?

http://www.hardcoegaming101.net/rott/rott.htm
"if you really are 66, have some dignity for Christ's sake. That post with ROTT (and I give you credit for almost making me hate ROTT just because you mentioned it) was so damn petty."
Whatever you say.
I very much doubt you know better but so it goes.

You really need to go play some original ROTT. I'll be right here waiting for you to apologize for saying ROTT did not push the envelope. I won't be holding my breath.

ROTT was amazing. The end monster was kind of weird; carrion crawler-like in a way IIRC. Fiendish jumps in that game; and secrets.

** First game [that I know of] that had the executions (Sort of like in DNF).

I'm having a bit of trouble with this. You say you are 20 years old and there was a ten year hiatus between the second and third. So when did you first play Fallout, when you were ten?

But it could have been recent... GoG sells FO1, 2, and Tactics; they also sell RoTT.

Yeah. Rise of the Triad was amazing. Old Rise of the Triad. Twenty years ago. Not the new one you linked to. Do not pretend you don't understand what I mean.
Yeah. Where's the insult? Accusing you of being petty? Well, I'm sorry if you find that insulting. I find your pettiness insulting.
Well, in that case, you're going to be here forever, since I don't apologize for things I didn't say, for I said NEW ROTT isn't pushing anything. Not the old one. Go back through the posts and read it again. Go ahead, I'll wait 'till you do that and apologize.
In 2008? People don't have to play games only when they launched. Back in '07 Fallout finally got an official legit Russian release complete with good localization, next year I found that in the store, picked it up because I heard a lot of good things about it from RPG fans I hang around with and played it. Dead simple.

I don't want a Fallout game from id, even if it is skinned like Doom.

various armor and outfits; hats, and foot gear - Nope

Instead of keycards, we'd get NPC's telling us they can't access the hydraulic door controls unless somebody goes down to maintenance level and brings back an access tool and a cutting torch... - Have a think about it and really think how is that different to keycards except spending extra resources on more models, sounds and animations. At least with keycards you can tell in one quick glance if a door needs one and you know to always be on the lookout for them anyway. Even in doom 3 with the red and green lighting around the different doors and on the panels.

And once back, and past the door, the group of techs you're escorting - Don't even joke about that

can't decide which route is better to take, and they ask you ~and siding with one ticks off the other two... - I'm a demon skull crushing space marine, why do I care if tech support don't like me, as for the path conundrum I'll go down one path kill everything and then to check for more ammo, health and secrets I'll be going back down the other path

Would this make for a better DOOM game? - Absolutely not, it'd be a buggy Bethesda RPG wearing a Doom face and I won't buy it

The new one is amazing. What part bores you? I did imply it was the return so I was referencing the original as well. For you to say either does not 'push the envelope' is ludicrous. FayCry 3 Blood Dragon is kinda down that same road too, crazy gunplay and wild retro music and humor.

Maybe it's the humor you don't like, it's probably just me.

Here's the thing. Sometimes one may like to play a game that has immersion, tactics, stuff in it. Sometimes one may like to play a simple (and simplistic) romp. It's a big world and there's room for both types of game in it. Liking, hell, even preferring, one type does not mean that you have to hate the other. You're allowed to like both.

So, if you're in the mood for, or have an overall preference for, a more immersive/etc gameplay experience, what do you do? You play that more immersive game, that's what. You don't play the simplistic romp and then go on the internet and whinge about it endlessly. That's your own fault. It's not the fault of the developers for making a simplistic romp, it's your fault because you picked the wrong game to play.

This is relevant to Doom because Doom is nothing more than a simplistic romp. The reasons why it was revolutionary and immersive have nothing whatsoever to do with the gameplay; the gameplay was and is just about as basic as it gets: kill things, take their stuff, move on to the next area. The reasons why it was revolutionary and immersive are because there was nothing else like it at the time. The speed of the game, the 3D (that was really just 2D) view, the full texture mapping, the feeling of tension and release when you make it through a map. All of these may have been individually done before, but Doom was the one that brought them together.

So, by definition any follow-on to Doom that is true to "what Doom is" is inevitably going to disappoint in the "new gameplay" stakes, because by being true to "what doom is" it must of necessity just repeat stuff that's already been done before.

That's part of the fix id are in with Doom 4. How do you recreate that feeling you got when you first ran Doom without just giving you something you've already played before, but yet still have it being true to "what Doom is"?

Easy... An Xbox/PC addon that works like a shock collar, and zaps every time you get shot.
[Make it part of a DOOM brandedOculus Rift.]

New one? Yeah, I liked the trailers. Doesn't make it innovative though, no envelope pushing at all.

Okay turning Doom anything like Fallout would be a disaster... let's never go there, please.

There's nothing wrong with the core of the game being "here's a shotgun, go kill things." At least what I've meant by something "new" is that they have to add some features to the table. I've had their pizza, I don't want another pizza if it doesn't have a great new topping.
Any little new thing can end up being a pretty big deal.
Just look at how Portal made people go crazy about... well, portals! They were around since forever, but Portal gave people a new way to look at them.

Doom4 can be at its core a classic shooter, but we need something, something new added, something to make it stand out. New features never have to take away from the core gameplay, just compliment it.

It should also have old features that id never bothered to look at. Like looking around the edge of walls, which has been around since at least FEAR1. I'd love to be able to sneak up to a group of imps feasting on a poor dead animal, watch them for a while, then grind them down to dust with a chaingun.

I'm all for it... I just don't necessarily believe it. I thought FO3 could be at its core a classic RPG ~even using the Gamebryo engine; it was actually rather well suited to it. Market interests caused a commercially viable/ unrelated product IMO, that took over the name. I'd love a DOOM4 done with the attitude shown by Interceptor with Rott2 or Croteam's SS3; I just doubt we'll get it.


Farther back than that.

There's nothing "unrelated" about F3. All the core elements of the setting are there, so is SPECIAL.
Deus Ex 1 did it.

Did we play different FO3 games? The one I played was a traditional RPG in a 3D wrapper. With the same exploration and levelling focus and even the same art style, world design and feel to the originals

I don't think I'd like a full on Doom sequel like it, but as a small project for say a ￡20/￡30 downloadable title it'd be cool as a holdover project until Doom 4 finally ships, especially if it was as easily mod-able as the ROTT remake is supposed to be. I mean to make a game in that style it wouldn't really take ids full force a great deal of time.

Well you could ignore the RPG combat and go full shooter if you wanted. I always thought VATS was cheating and never used it. Too bad the shooter part was so poor but hey I used to play Quake and Doom over a 28.8 modem and adjusting for lag became second nature. Hmmm, that fool will come out that door soon, fills door with rockets and hopes.

but it was still RPG questing and levelling, I mean you can run around Skyrim with a Bow if you want, it's still an RPG

If memory serves Half Life 1 did it. Or maybe something else around that time; memory is fuzzy.


The counter-argument goes: "that pizza was nice, I'd like to have it again".

Yes, but this isn't just about what I want. If Doom4 brings nothing new to the table whatsoever I will still buy it, and still probably enjoy the hell out of it.
This is about what's also best for id. I think id need to re-establish themselves again, and looking to increase their fanbase would be a much better idea than to cater to their smaller hardcoe fanbase. With a larger fanbase they would sell more, and thus have more for their projects, not to mention a new and good reputation.

They need to make a game that's epic, that's better than all their previous games in every way. The way Doom was over Wolf3d. Otherwise they reached their peak years ago, and there's nothing great to expect anymore.

Not to the hardcoe fanbase though... This is [yet again] the argument that they use the original fans as a stepping stone to a more lucrative fanbase; and that creating a lesser (but more popular) product is the de facto way to go, and insanity not to.

This is why I prefer companies like InXile. (At least so long as they behave the way they have this past year.)

Oh I do, the combat is what I like and RPGs with first person direct combat are a whole pile of fun for me. Stalker is kinda a hybrid of RPG and FPS, with leveling done by progressing to better guns and armor.

Instead of choosing lines you ought to understand the big picture. Adding a few things like narrative (Doom3 had it) would only make it better, and I can't see any logical reason for anyone to complain about it.

Making a 1993 game with just new graphics slapped on is what would be a lesser product :T

Let's say Doom4 optionally let you drive vehicles, since it's on Earth. Would you really complain about that?
Adding narrative, at least like Doom3's. You'd complain about that?
What about shooting off demons' limbs and seeing them drag themselves across the floor. Would you complain about that too?

I'm guessing that when you think "new fans" you just automatically think CoD fans and the like. Well sir, new fans just means new fans
There are people out there who are picky about the games they buy, and little things like better story and better combat make a big difference, and a better game.

No, HL1 didn't.

Please explain your reasons why; [jest] would you demand that all chess sets in 2013 be made with arduino animatronic pieces or full motion holograms? Chess is best when it's stripped down to essentials and free of distraction ~~Point being, it's not bad for a game to focus on one thing, and do it very well. Is 'pistachio/butterscotch/orange creme' Ice cream really better than either of those flavors by itself?

This is a curious argument that pops up more than you might think. The issue is not change ~never has been [nobody wants a 1:1 DOOM clone ~it's not needed].

The issue is suitable change. You have selected one or two very suitable changes and posited them as proofs that change is good, because it would damage anyone's argument to disagree.

IMO any change that furthers the core gameplay without cluttering the experience with tangents is probably a welcome addition to the game. Adding a few Imps or a Cacodemon that says, 'No kill! Have favor to ask...' is not a suitable change IMO; and would bring the pace to a jarring halt, and many players would shoot on sight ~what if they made the NPC immortal to ensure that the content was not passed over.



Narrative could work in the beginning as a setup. Maybe during some sort of intermission levels, but in general the game should be all fire-fight IMO; taking ground, entering areas [via key or frontal attack]. Stealth gameplay would not be a suitable change or addition IMO... DOOM is not Thief and Thief is not DOOM. IMO the overall story should simply be "I need to get out of here", and later, "I got out of there"; and in the end, "WTH!?".

Who plays DOOM to feel accomplishment for the team completing the mission, or for reaching the top of the hill; or repairing the elevator? Everything in DOOM is annoyance and ambush, and you solve your problems with the barrel of a gun. Tinkering with that... adding a more cerebral aspect changes the way the player thinks while playing the game... This is not guaranteed good IMO.

DOOM2 and System Shock were contemporaries... There is no argument that DOOM was the way it was due to limitation alone, and that modern advancements allowing for greater narrative and/or interactivity are inherently necessary or desirable.

What I mean is more akin to... new neighbors that visit the local restaurant, try the local house special, and complain of cayenne pepper allergy such that the house special [a big pot of stew] stops getting any; changed to accommodate the new-comer's taste.

It's fine you have your own opinion of what the game should be.
We'll just have to see what happens.

Either way I'll play it, as I said, but I'd rather id be back on the spotlight with an amazing game than just make their hardcoe fans happy.

GoldenEye for the N64 had it - 1997!