[HulkNukem]

icecoldduke, on 17 June 2016 - 05:44 AM, said:

I'm actually curious, what do you guys think makes a good modern "retro" game.

Honestly, if the raw gameplay is the backbone and main focus and it is fast, fun, and challenging, it makes it like the older games.
No reloading guns, keys, non-linear levels, etc etc isn't necessarily needed, but they definitely help in arguing when a game is more retro.

When the game tries hard to tell a story and be 'cinematic' and has lots and lots of bottlenecks and scripted sequences, it is considerably less retro.

[PikaCommando]

Say, does Half-Life and its sequel count as retros, since it's (among) the first of its kind yet also different enough from the games that followed its footsteps?

[Hendricks266]

Half-Life invented the linear level design trend and setpiece rollercoaster bullfuck that has taken over today. So, no.

[icecoldduke]

Inspector Lagomorf, on 17 June 2016 - 06:22 AM, said:

You can list off all the qualities that retro first person shooters have and pull from there, but I don't think it does Doom justice. Doom is greater than the sum of its parts. It just feels retro.

I played Doom all the way through, and I completely agree with you, but I can't seem to put that thought into bullet points; I'm wondering if you guys can help me define why Doom feels retro.

[Jblade]

Hendricks266, on 17 June 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

Half-Life invented the linear level design trend and setpiece rollercoaster bullfuck that has taken over today. So, no.

No it didn't - bad/lazy level designers and developers invented those trends; Half-life was a landmark in FPS development but the majority of other developers took the wrong lessons from the game. Halo and CoD's popularity only inspired even more lazy rip-offs and FPS eventually turned into what the majority of them are today. I don't believe for a second that if Valve didn't release Half-life than we'd still be getting intricate level design in games. It's like blaming the Beatles for setting the way for Taylor Swift or Beiber.

[Daedolon]

Hendricks266, on 17 June 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

Half-Life invented the linear level design trend and setpiece rollercoaster bullfuck that has taken over today. So, no.

1998 marked the downfall of the FPS genre.

[MetHy]

I just beat the game, after 12 hours.

There is one thing I have to say, and I don't know if others agree with me but.... The enemy design in this game in badass, except that any completely new enemy (not based on Doom or Doom II enemy) is very subpar in comparison with the others.

Anyway I still have a lot of secrets to find and quite a bit to upgrade, but I hate that if I want to 100% my file I have to use the current difficulty or lower... I can't replay stuff with my current profile in Nightmare, I'd have to start everything over to play that difficulty.
I was hoping I could 100% this file while replaying levels on Nightmare but nope... I'll have to start over.

This is especially stupid because with all the upgrades the first levels would feel too easy now on the current difficulty.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

icecoldduke, on 17 June 2016 - 08:30 AM, said:

I played Doom all the way through, and I completely agree with you, but I can't seem to put that thought into bullet points; I'm wondering if you guys can help me define why Doom feels retro.

Picture this. You're alone on a planetary installation with bodies of your comrades strewn around you. You're armed to the teeth - you have a shotgun, a chaingun, a rocket launcher, and a plasma gun, and you're firing them all in quick succession at scores of Demons, whilst maneuvering and circle strafing around tight corners and obstacles, sometimes getting up close and personal to a Pinky to gut them with your chainsaw. Every now and then you double back and strategically retreat to a health pack or armor suit in near proximity. You've got metal music blaring into your ears, punctuated by the exaggerated roaring sounds of gunfire and the shrieks of fallen demons. When you finish off the encounter, there's an unnerving quiet and you find yourself wondering what the next encounter will be, and whether you'll be prepared - hopefully you can find some secrets to even the odds.

That describes the original DooM. But it could just as easily describe DooM 4.

MetHy, on 17 June 2016 - 08:42 AM, said:

I was hoping I could 100% this file while replaying levels on Nightmare but nope... I'll have to start over.

This is especially stupid because with all the upgrades the first levels would feel too easy now on the current difficulty.

Have to agree with this.

[deuxsonic]

Half-Life pioneered the ultra-linear FPS. It did some awesome things but there seems to be this tendency where the more story they try to throw in, the more they script things and that requires a very linear game where things happen basically the same way every time. You always knew when a load screen was coming because everything would narrow down to a hallway with a bend you couldn't see around. Half-Life 2 does the exact same thing, where you might have the narrow path expand out for a battle with an antlion queen for example, only to then have it narrow down again so it can load the next piece of train track. Even areas that feel somewhat free like when you're fighting the helicopter dropping mines all over the place in the canals or when you're up on the cliffside, you can "explore" but really outside of where they want you to go, there's little of interest. There were some pretty insignificant choices like placement of turrets, but there's still only one path that you have to follow from beginning to end. What I thought was great was at E3 2003 showing the fighting alongside you and them saying "now we want to emphesize that these are not scripted events" and then a build of the game was leaked by the person who hacked Gabe's computer with that content in it that you can play through where you can find that yes, it was all scripted. That's what FPS has turned into more and more as the years have passed.

[MusicallyInspired]

It certainly makes no bones about being just a shooter and not caring about anything else. Almost as a self-parody.

MetHy, on 17 June 2016 - 06:00 AM, said:

I wouldn't even qualify those games are retro at all. They have become a new standard now, they are the modern FPS. It's just that one point in time devs realized that FPS had become terrible so they took some loose inspiration from a time when they were not, and that's how they claim to be "retro", so they gave back to the player freedom of movement during combat, got rid of health regen, and the weapon limit; but that's about the only link these games have with the Doom era.

I'm loving this new genre of FPS honestly, although if they keep making them it might get state fast.

Also turns out I was at least 2-3 levels away from the end boss

I'm curious, what do you classify as retro? Labyrinthine levels? In that case Half-Life, which is as linear as they come, isn't retro (even though it is).

Heck, Halo is retro now, though. I think the problem we have here is semantics. We use the term "retro" loosely to describe what reminds us of the days of yore and "modern" to describe what we didn't like when it changed. At least I do. We need new terms. I'd almost call one "good" and one "not good," but that's not very objective.

[Jblade]

Half-life isn't ultra-linear, you don't play many FPS games if you can make that claim with a straight face. Go and play a bunch more FPS, I mean a lot more including the objectively shit ones, than come back and try and say that. I've been playing them for the vast majority of my life including modern ones and this trend of younger gamers trying to pin blame on Half-life without understand why it was such a massive revolution is dumb.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

MusicallyInspired, on 17 June 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

I'm curious, what do you classify as retro? Labyrinthine levels? In that case Half-Life, which is as linear as they come, isn't retro (even though it is).

I wouldn't even endeavor to characterize DooM as labyrinthine. Many of the custom map packs like Plutonia 2 are heavily labyrinthine, but let's not forget the original DooM had levels like these:

E3M1



MAP07:


It's at times unfair to characterize a game simply by comparing one or two levels. You have to look at the entire body of work.

[Daedolon]

Inspector Lagomorf, on 17 June 2016 - 09:05 AM, said:

E3M1

DOOM's levels beyond the first episode can be very weak most of the time, almost makes me feel bad for getting a copy of the game.

[Fantinaikos]

Daedolon, on 17 June 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

DOOM's levels beyond the first episode can be very weak most of the time, almost makes me feel bad for getting a copy of the game.

Well, if E3M9 its just E3M1 extended someone hated that map.

[deuxsonic]

I thought Warrens was interesting because of it being a trick: you have deja vu because until you walk over the exit you think "I already played this map" and then the walls drop and you're facing a Cyberdemon and then you're fighting your way backwards through much harder monsters.

[MusicallyInspired]

Jblade, on 17 June 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

Half-life isn't ultra-linear, you don't play many FPS games if you can make that claim with a straight face. Go and play a bunch more FPS, I mean a lot more including the objectively shit ones, than come back and try and say that. I've been playing them for the vast majority of my life including modern ones and this trend of younger gamers trying to pin blame on Half-life without understand why it was such a massive revolution is dumb.

I'm not a "young gamer" and I actually adore Half-Life. My favourite shooter of all time. But show me some significant backtracking in that game beyond Anomolous Materials and Blast Pit (that was a good one, actually). Maybe Surface Tention a bit too. Ok, fine. It's not as "linear as they come." I never said anything about it being "ultra-linear," though. I've been playing shooters since Catacomb 3D and games like 3-Demon before that. HL is highly linear in comparison to everything else that came before it. Linearity wasn't what it revolutionized, but it is the game many look to as starting the "downward spiral" into linearity. I don't believe linearity/non-linearity is the primary gauge of whether a game is good or not either. Many morons do, however.

I don't pin blame on Half-Life. I don't think it deserves any blame.

[Fantinaikos]

deuxsonic, on 17 June 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

I thought Warrens was interesting because of it being a trick: you have deja vu because until you walk over the exit you think "I already played this map" and then the walls drop and you're facing a Cyberdemon and then you're fighting your way backwards through much harder monsters.

Surprise the player was the exact purpose of the level, but I suspect that the idea of using it like that is come after this conversation:

"I finished E3M1"

"Too short"

"Ok, 2nd version. How it is now?"

"Better"

"Now we must do the secret level"

"I run out of ideas. Use the 2nd version as E3M9. And add Cyberdemon"

"Okie dokie"

[deuxsonic]

I think E4M1 and E4M2 should have been later in the episode or toned down because they're actually harder than the rest of the episode so E4 suffers from the schizophrenic difficulty trope.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Episode 4 lacked decent "opener" levels. All of the levels were the same difficulty, but in the beginning levels you do not start out with any decent weapons, so it feels more difficult than it should be. It would be like being dropped into E1M7 with only a pistol.

[MusicallyInspired]

I must have missed the secret level on E3 because I don't remember repeating anything. I guess I'll have to go back.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

MusicallyInspired, on 17 June 2016 - 11:36 AM, said:

I must have missed the secret level on E3 because I don't remember repeating anything. I guess I'll have to go back.

The secret level is accessible from E3M6. I don't remember it being particularly easy to find.

[deuxsonic]

Inspector Lagomorf, on 17 June 2016 - 11:34 AM, said:

Episode 4 lacked decent "opener" levels. All of the levels were the same difficulty, but in the beginning levels you do not start out with any decent weapons, so it feels more difficult than it should be. It would be like being dropped into E1M7 with only a pistol.

It doesn't help that there is just barely enough stuff to clear out E4M1 if you can find the secrets and then you usually escape by the skin of your teeth. The 3 barons that spawn in in the NIN room are brutal with what weapons and ammo you have. Then it's a double whammy because the beginning of E4M2 is loaded with monsters so starting low on health and ammo, you're struggling to fend off that first room full of enemies and the floor will kill you fast without a suit. Having to save your game every couple shots is kind of a drag.

[deuxsonic]

Inspector Lagomorf, on 17 June 2016 - 11:40 AM, said:

The secret level is accessible from E3M6. I don't remember it being particularly easy to find.

It's very easy to find actually. An easily accessable teleporter that's in the room with the 2 staircases ascending in opposite directions will put you on the ledge you need to be on, and then you use the rocket blast against the wall while moving backwards to land inside the exit switch area. The hard part is doing this successfully as the switch is easy to see, just out of reach.

[Jblade]

MusicallyInspired, on 17 June 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

I'm not a "young gamer" and I actually adore Half-Life. My favourite shooter of all time. But show me some significant backtracking in that game beyond Anomolous Materials and Blast Pit (that was a good one, actually). Maybe Surface Tention a bit too. Ok, fine. It's not as "linear as they come." I never said anything about it being "ultra-linear," though.

I wasn't addressing you, it was deuxsonic who actually used the phrase 'ultra-linear'

Ultra-linear is CoD and such where you literally rocket through areas and aren't even allowed the chance to stop and look at the scenery. Linear is like Half-life, which is a case of good linearity. I think the linear aspect is a bit over-stated when talking about FPS both older and newer and even the term itself is open to so much interpretation.

[Daedolon]

I don't see the correlation between disliking the direction Half-Life guided generations of game developers and the age of the complainant.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

deuxsonic, on 17 June 2016 - 11:45 AM, said:

and then you use the rocket blast against the wall while moving backwards to land inside the exit switch area.

Until Quake, I think the idea of a rocket jump was completely foreign in 1993.

[Jblade]

Daedolon, on 17 June 2016 - 11:55 AM, said:

I don't see the correlation between disliking the direction Half-Life guided generations of game developers and the age of the complainant.

Half-life didn't guide anything; as I already said, it's not on HL or Valve's shoulders that mediocre developers took the wrong lessons and tried to copy the game without really understanding what made it good.

Age has a factor when talking about the impact of a game; I wasn't alive when many of the big film makers and musicians were making masterpieces so I feel I have zero qualification to decide if say the Beatles or the Stones are over-rated. Video games are different and I've seen people who only just recently played Half-life and decide that it's over-rated, which to me is like watching Citizen Kane for the first time recently and criticizing it for being over-rated (replace Kane with whatever older classic film you like that was revolutionary in some way)

That is not to say you can't have faults with the game, but if you grew up with the newer generation of FPS that poorly imitated it than your opinion of HL doesn't have as much weight as somebody who played it near when it first came out and saw just how amazing it was compared to other titles of the era. The same holds true of any genre - I don't feel entitled to have an opinion on Daggerfall because my first Elder Scrolls was Morrowind and it would be difficult for me to be able to grasp what innovations Daggerfall brought to the table.

[Micky C]

Inspector Lagomorf, on 17 June 2016 - 04:12 AM, said:

Much of the reason it's difficult to have a maze-style FPS with a modern engine is due to the heavy graphic and CPU requirements that the game imposes. We saw this with Rise Of The Triad; although the game was at that time the closest a modern FPS came to having a retro style, they still had a checkpoint-style system and areas where you would be locked away from the rest of the level, prevented from backtracking.

Are you implying that computers aren't powerful enough to have intricate level layouts? If so that's hilariously out of touch.

Are you also implying that ROTT had bad performance for anything other than it being Interceptor's first game and they had little experience in optimizing games?
The checkpoint system was also because they didn't have the coding ability to put in glitch-free manual saves at the time so that was the chosen compromise. They may have since implemented manual saves, I can't remember.

ROTT is simply a bad analogy to use here.

[MetHy]

Inspector Lagomorf, on 17 June 2016 - 09:05 AM, said:

I wouldn't even endeavor to characterize DooM as labyrinthine. Many of the custom map packs like Plutonia 2 are heavily labyrinthine, but let's not forget the original DooM had levels like these:

E3M1

http://www.classicdo...d1maps/e3m1.gif

MAP07:
http://www.classicdo...s/d2maps/07.gif

It's at times unfair to characterize a game simply by comparing one or two levels. You have to look at the entire body of work.

I didn't qualify Dooml evels as "labyrinths" (that would fit Wolf3D era more), and even my description I said was a generalization.
You are also taking the worst examples on purpose. If you want to look at the "entire body of work", like you said, it's still generally closer to the description I gave, while new Doom is closer to "one arena after the next", overall.

I'm replaying the game over on Nightmare difficulty. I think the Foundry level is the closest the game has to classic Doom, and it may be the best level too. But sadly it is an exception, as even the other levels with some degree of exploration and keycard use aren't close to that; and even then you'd still need to get rid of all the small arenas inside those levels and replace the waves of enemies by set enemy placement throughout.

The biggest offender of the arena design is probably the last level, which is 3 gigantic arenas, one after the other, with only 2 steps between each arena. While this is the most obvious case, it still is this kind of design that comes out the most of new Doom.

As for the "retro" question, the word has no set limit, you can call something 5 years old "retro". The meaning of the word itself, and the way it evolves, show how much the boundaries of the word can be bended at will, as at first the word only described "new things which try to seem old" but can now also describe "actual old things" and that 2nd definition has become the main one.
So for me the real question was "is this anything like the old Doom?" rather than "is it retro". That's how I viewed the subject. Now of course, if you set your limit of retro to pre-Halo/CoD, then yes all these new FPS somewhat are because they've brought back some pre-Halo mechanics. However, I think these new FPS have become so widespread and numerous that they are their own sub genre now, taking whatever elements they like from any period to make something new. Calling them "retro", period, would either be only looking at a small percentage of what they are, or be a shallow view of it.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Boy, did I ruffle some feathers. I guess I should expect it since I tend to be a bullshitter. Good thing I don't care about rep.

Micky C, on 17 June 2016 - 10:32 PM, said:

Are you implying that computers aren't powerful enough to have intricate level layouts? If so that's hilariously out of touch.

Considering the extremely high-resolution textures and post-processing effects designers now use in games, it would be a massive technological feat to make extremely intricate levels without heavy use of caching and disallowing backtracking.

There's only one other explanation I can think of as to why, and that's that most first-person shooters are now developed primarily for the console and games have been dumbed down to their standard, then ported to the PC (if they are ported at all).

Quote

Are you also implying that ROTT had bad performance for anything other than it being Interceptor's first game and they had little experience in optimizing games?
The checkpoint system was also because they didn't have the coding ability to put in glitch-free manual saves at the time so that was the chosen compromise. They may have since implemented manual saves, I can't remember.

ROTT is simply a bad analogy to use here.

That it was Interceptor's first game is an inconsequential point; I'm not quite sure what you're arguing here. There has to be some reason why they didn't allow the player to backtrack if it wasn't a technical reason.

MetHy, on 18 June 2016 - 03:29 AM, said:

I didn't qualify Dooml evels as "labyrinths" (that would fit Wolf3D era more), and even my description I said was a generalization.

I know you didn't.

Quote

You are also taking the worst examples on purpose. If you want to look at the "entire body of work", like you said, it's still generally closer to the description I gave, while new Doom is closer to "one arena after the next", overall.

I was deliberately being obtuse. Of course Doom Prime on the whole has widely non-linear levels, but I think you're overreaching a tad by claiming that EVERY level in Doom is basically non-stop arenas. The UAC isn't. Resource Ops doesn't feel that way. The Foundry definitely isn't. Argent Facility is very wide-open. I think to characterize them as arenas is somewhat short-sighted. Perhaps there's another term that can be used to describe them.

Quote

I'm replaying the game over on Nightmare difficulty. I think the Foundry level is the closest the game has to classic Doom, and it may be the best level too. But sadly it is an exception, as even the other levels with some degree of exploration and keycard use aren't close to that; and even then you'd still need to get rid of all the small arenas inside those levels and replace the waves of enemies by set enemy placement throughout.

The biggest offender of the arena design is probably the last level, which is 3 gigantic arenas, one after the other, with only 2 steps between each arena. While this is the most obvious case, it still is this kind of design that comes out the most of new Doom.

Again, I think the term "arena" just doesn't fit to describe that level. Certainly not on the level of Serious Sam arena-based combat.

Quote

As for the "retro" question, the word has no set limit, you can call something 5 years old "retro". The meaning of the word itself, and the way it evolves, show how much the boundaries of the word can be bended at will, as at first the word only described "new things which try to seem old" but can now also describe "actual old things" and that 2nd definition has become the main one.
So for me the real question was "is this anything like the old Doom?" rather than "is it retro". That's how I viewed the subject. Now of course, if you set your limit of retro to pre-Halo/CoD, then yes all these new FPS somewhat are because they've brought back some pre-Halo mechanics. However, I think these new FPS have become so widespread and numerous that they are their own sub genre now, taking whatever elements they like from any period to make something new. Calling them "retro", period, would either be only looking at a small percentage of what they are, or be a shallow view of it.

Agree with you here; I think "retro" is an emotionally charged buzzword, but for reasons I outlined in previous posts, there's no reason to deny that this game does have levels of comparison to the original Doom - if not strictly in gameplay then at least in feel.