Doom 4 E3 reveal.

I'm in the beta, playing at 4k res, and the graphics look surprisingly poor, low res textures, not very detailed. Is this MP Beta purposely water down graphics wise or something ?

I've been playing a lot of Skyrim again, due to my new 4k monitor, and wow Skyrim looks super detailed, and tons more texture detail, very life like graphics. Whereas this Doom BETA looks much worse than the 5 year old Skyrim.
 
Zorachus said:
I'm in the beta, playing at 4k res, and the graphics look surprisingly poor, low res textures, not very detailed. Is this MP Beta purposely water down graphics wise or something ?
Click to expand...

I'm playing at 1440p and the game does indeed look like butt cheeks.
 
Don't care about the graphics. If the game is good, count me in.
 
Key binding changes don't stick, so that's very frustrating. And the rail gun snipers unfortunately seem to rule and kill me within 1 second of spawning in.
 
It doesn't seem to remember resolution setting for me. I set 1440p, apply, after restarting, it's back to 1080p. My only real issue with the multiplayer is that it just doesn't feel smooth. I'm getting 60FPS solid at 1080p, but something feels rough about the movement.
 
Then maybe it's not playing at my 4k res ? it does seems stretch out and very blurry, could be forced to low res 1080p ?
 
Won't even keep my settings I change so I cannot even play the game as is. I like a different keyboard layout, and those changes don't stick. Now the game is playing in small box on my big 40" monitor, the graphics settings changes don't work. Seems like an alpha not a beta.
 
Blade-Runner said:
It doesn't compare at all....just imagine a Doom themed mod for Halo or CoD, topped off with matchmaking and no server browser.

Movement is slow and floaty, especially with the double jump mechanic.
You gain experience and level up, and unlock perks.
You automatically mantle at ledges.
There are class load outs with no weapon pickups, except for supers.
Player cap is limited to 6v6, at least for team death match.
Graphics looks significantly worse than all the official screenshots.
Graphic options are very limited, no FOV slider or support for widescreens.
As usual, the matchmaking is shit.

I don't expect MP to have any longevity on PC.
Click to expand...


I knew it. What a turd. Definitely going to wait on this until they patch some kind of improvements into it for PC players or the price drops significantly.

I wish these developers would stop puting "RPG" mechanics in their FPS games, the whole leveling up and perks thing is getting really old.
 
Krenum said:
I wish these developers would stop puting "RPG" mechanics in their FPS games, the whole leveling up and perks thing is getting really old.
Click to expand...

Probably will be a $4.99 booster DLC that skips that ...
 
They just released an update, looks like it at least remembers you resolution now and it even seems to run better; I would initially drop down around 40FPS at 2560×1440, but it appeared to run smoothly at around 60FPS and the game felt smoother in general.
 
Blade-Runner said:
It doesn't compare at all....just imagine a Doom themed mod for Halo or CoD, topped off with matchmaking and no server browser.

Movement is slow and floaty, especially with the double jump mechanic.
You gain experience and level up, and unlock perks.
You automatically mantle at ledges.
There are class load outs with no weapon pickups, except for supers.
Player cap is limited to 6v6, at least for team death match.
Graphics looks significantly worse than all the official screenshots.
Graphic options are very limited, no FOV slider or support for widescreens.
As usual, the matchmaking is shit.

I don't expect MP to have any longevity on PC.
Click to expand...
That is terrible to hear. My one buddy who doesn't play much fps said it was good and like q3a but I was skeptical from watching some streams.
 
I had no expectations for the new Doom to live up to the pedigree of classic Doom and Quake deathmatches. Hell, Doom 3 was a major disappointment for me in that regard as well so fool me once.

All that said, I am saddened to hear that this game is suffering from consolitis. I'm sure I'll still buy it because I am a sucker for nostalgia and it is Doom after all but I was really hoping for something that was a good improvement over the graphics we saw in Wolfenstein TNO. Simply put I am a graphics whore and iD used to be my pimp daddy. Now I am left to wander the PC gaming landscape like some disillusioned street urchin
 
After playing the beta all weekend, I completely agree with the reviewer, multiplayer is garbage.
 
Ryan7968 said:
Simply put I am a graphics whore and iD used to be my pimp daddy. Now I am left to wander the PC gaming landscape like some disillusioned street urchin
Click to expand...

And many of the games with the best graphics (Crysis 3, Star Wars Battlefront) ended up being mediocre or shitty, so yeah...I'm right there with you.
 
Unfortunately I don't think this can any longer be called "consolitis". It's just the way SHOOTERS in general are going. This is of course sad to us older guys/girls as we prefer things a certain way, but we are in the VAST minority. Just look at how well all of the attempts at resurrecting the arena shooter have sold so far. Abysmally! It's sad, and I HATE it, but that's the way it is. They've been creeping this shit into our games for years now, and any attempt at bringing back the old style has resulted in low sales. If anything it's probably our fault (as a shooting community at least) for not buying into these other attempts, and making them more popular again. I bet for every ten of us hardcore players from the "good ol' days" six of us is a closet CoD/BF lover, and doesn't give the games we claim to love the time of day.

Personally, I still play all of my old id favorites FREQUENTLY. On the other hand, I'm willing to give new styles a chance, and have been pleasantly surprised on many occasions. I'm not a BF/CoD fan purely because I'm not really a military style player, but I've enjoyed some hybrids like Quake Wars, etc. I guess at this point, we can't really expect devs to cater to us fully.

This Doom game has some things that I'm not a big fan of (ESPECIALLY EFFING LOADOUTS!) but it still looks like fun, and I'll still be picking it up. Honestly, I'll only be playing the MP with friends casually, so it'll just be another flavor to anything we'd play now (Borderlands, Q3A, etc.) I see plenty of good things mixed in too though. I see people complaining about the visuals, but it looks pretty fucking good to me. I honestly don't see where these people are coming from.

Anyway, I won't be writing it off due to a few features that I'm not into. I'll play it, adapt, and enjoy it. I can still play Q3A if I want that, even though I definitely would have liked to see more of its influence.

It's just the way things are going good or bad.

I bet if a million or two of us had bought Toxikk (sp?) or a million or two of us logged in and set up UT4 accounts, or a few less of us complained to no end about UT3, or a few hundred thousand played Nexuiz, or the like instead of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS buying CoD all the while shouting that we hate CoD, then maybe the landscape would be different.

Not saying it's as simple as that. Because obviously there were some changes to UT3 (as an example) that very obviously turned off some of the older fans. I get that, but looking back now, and looking what the future appears to be bringing us, was it really that bad? Maybe, maybe not. Just kinda speculating right now. Devs make decisions that seem to have been made in a bubble. Devs ignore player input. Sure. But the most vocal players also often lack tact. The majority generally overrides the core fan-base, especially during an industry transition to the mainstream. The core fans stop buying franchises, and these things get eaten away from both sides. Another example was Quake 4. The multiplayer (bots-notwithstanding) was nearly identical to Q3A but with much nicer graphics. It was a lot of fun, if you could get enough people into a game. Nobody played it though. (except my friends and I it seems...) The single player campaign was decent, not amazing, but fun. Again, it was adapted a bit to the times story/play-wise. So Q2/Q3 players wouldn't play it. It was actually a good game all around. Just not what some people were expecting. People wanted something more modern from id/Raven, so they gave it to them. Then they got dinged on it not being more like Q2/Q3. Bleh...

However, Doom looks like it definitely has a shift to what's popular and what will sell, but still retains a lot of the look and feel of an id game. IMO at least. It could be a bit better, but it could also be a hell of a lot worse. If it doesn't sell well, I can't see much motivation for anyone to make more games like it. I guess one has to weigh this against the "updates" that have been made to what we remember as already being great.

If a dev tries to make something new, nobody buys it. If the dev sticks to the old, nobody buys it. (unless its Madden :p ) Fucked either way. Make some bastardized middle of the road, a little of everyone will buy it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J3RK said:
I see people complaining about the visuals, but it looks pretty fucking good to me. I honestly don't see where these people are coming from.
Click to expand...

If it weren't iD I would not hold their games to a higher stander in terms of graphics. I'm completely living in the past.

Good post, I think consolitis being a made up word could probably mean different things to different people, and could even change depending on genre. Shooters all have to be ADS now which drives me a bit crazy.
 
wow the game looks worse then what I was anticipating...sad to see a once great franchise reduced to this
 
I hold them to a pretty high standard as well. However, I disagree fairly often with people about their games. Rage is the biggest example. I think it's absolutely gorgeous, spot on play mechanics, just cut short a bit early at the end, and yes, a few atrocious textures here or there on indoor environments. Still though, in motion, they get it right. Plenty of geometry, higher res textures where they matter (in most cases) silky smooth frame rate, decent if not terribly innovative story, and some pretty memorable IMO characters. I bet if it didn't have so many launch problems, especially on the ATI/AMD side, it would have been viewed a bit more positively. I have a feeling that some of the hate on Doom is similar. It's just a residual taste for some. A bit of a dumbing down in others. Actually I can't even call it dumbing down. Just a shift in paradigm I guess. I mean, it doesn't get much more simple than the original games (which is what this game is being compared to.) Everyone remembers them so fondly, and they were spectacular for their time (and still hold up well now.) However, running through hallways collecting keys with more guns than a human could look at strapped to them, is dead, stupid, simple. This game looks a little more in depth to me, and the visual look really nice. However, things like small weapon loadouts do change the dynamic, and since these types of things are hallmarks of the classically speaking "console shooter" I can see why people resist. It's not dumber, just different, and if it's not your thing, I can see why you'd dislike it.

I don't like the small loadouts much, but they're not going to KILL me at least. I'm more interested in a decent overall variety of weapons generally speaking. It looks like a Doom game to me. Modernized, adapted to what the vast majority of people play like these days, etc. but still a Doom game. They brought back favorite characters, picked up the pace a bit from Doom 3 (which many people didn't liked, myself NOT included,) added some twists like playing as enemy characters, allowing more freedom of movement that people enjoyed in some non-id shooters (double jumps etc.) an engine that despite what some are saying looks a lot better than Tech 5, and people are still complaining. Like I said before, no matter what they do, SOMEONE is going to hate it. They can't really win with everyone, but it looks like they are listening in a lot of ways while still trying to appeal to the new style of shooter player that's emerged (and largely taken over the landscape.)

A similar thing happened with Doom 3, which is now looked at a bit more fondly it seems. At the time, it was just one of many silent protagonist sci-fi-horror games. It borrowed heavily from elements of System Shock with crew logs and emails. The pacing was slow and deliberate, lighting was the new big thing. People didn't like it either, because it wasn't fast and action-packed like Doom and Doom 2. Now people seem to remember it in a better light, and are now complaining about the new Doom. I think people will eventually like it. At least, that's my hope. I think I will. Different but ok.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The graphics don't look THAT bad to me but the main issue is that this is 2016 and we need to be moving forward graphically, not just maintaining the status quo. It's even more disappointing given that this is id Software and not EA or Ubi or some other AAA shovelware dev. I guess id Software is a shell of its former self in this day and age.

RAGE was kind of the same way...graphically it looked okay, but it wasn't really progress so much as treading water, not to mention there were a ton of issues with texture popping and other nonsense that never did get fully resolved. Even worse is that I just frankly got bored with the game several hours in. The gunplay was alright but for an "open world" it just felt meh, and actually rather linear. It was kind of like how Borderlands was "open world" but you essentially just went across a vast emptiness to the same few points of interest over and over.

In any case, what I've seen of the Doom SP so far seems decent so there is hope there.
 
I wonder what John Carmack thinks of this new version of Doom...disappointed?...did he have any role at all in developing any of the ideas for the new game?
 
Arena based fps shooters are dead on arrival, especially on PC. They'll have maybe 2 months of life (if so lucky) before the playerbase nosedives into nothingness. Objective based shooters (eg CS, BF, TF etc) can maintain a large consistent userbase for years. This not a critique but are simple facts based on gaming trends of the past decade.

They should have focused their efforts and marketing on the single player and the mod toolset, like Half Life 2 on release more than a decade ago. Not on the MP part of the game. Don't get me wrong I would like there to be a successful Arena based shooter as they are great for passing the time now and then, and for getting that nostalgia on, but the market has spoken. I can't speak for D4's gameplay but the visuals in this game look great imo, you guys who think this looks like garbage really need to lower your graphics expectations, especially since consoles are the primary target platform for triple A titles these days.
 
J3RK said:
Unfortunately I don't think this can any longer be called "consolitis". It's just the way SHOOTERS in general are going. This is of course sad to us older guys/girls as we prefer things a certain way, but we are in the VAST minority. Just look at how well all of the attempts at resurrecting the arena shooter have sold so far. Abysmally! It's sad, and I HATE it, but that's the way it is. They've been creeping this shit into our games for years now, and any attempt at bringing back the old style has resulted in low sales. If anything it's probably our fault (as a shooting community at least) for not buying into these other attempts, and making them more popular again. I bet for every ten of us hardcore players from the "good ol' days" six of us is a closet CoD/BF lover, and doesn't give the games we claim to love the time of day.

Personally, I still play all of my old id favorites FREQUENTLY. On the other hand, I'm willing to give new styles a chance, and have been pleasantly surprised on many occasions. I'm not a BF/CoD fan purely because I'm not really a military style player, but I've enjoyed some hybrids like Quake Wars, etc. I guess at this point, we can't really expect devs to cater to us fully.

This Doom game has some things that I'm not a big fan of (ESPECIALLY EFFING LOADOUTS!) but it still looks like fun, and I'll still be picking it up. Honestly, I'll only be playing the MP with friends casually, so it'll just be another flavor to anything we'd play now (Borderlands, Q3A, etc.) I see plenty of good things mixed in too though. I see people complaining about the visuals, but it looks pretty fucking good to me. I honestly don't see where these people are coming from.

Anyway, I won't be writing it off due to a few features that I'm not into. I'll play it, adapt, and enjoy it. I can still play Q3A if I want that, even though I definitely would have liked to see more of its influence.

It's just the way things are going good or bad.

I bet if a million or two of us had bought Toxikk (sp?) or a million or two of us logged in and set up UT4 accounts, or a few less of us complained to no end about UT3, or a few hundred thousand played Nexuiz, or the like instead of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS buying CoD all the while shouting that we hate CoD, then maybe the landscape would be different.

Not saying it's as simple as that. Because obviously there were some changes to UT3 (as an example) that very obviously turned off some of the older fans. I get that, but looking back now, and looking what the future appears to be bringing us, was it really that bad? Maybe, maybe not. Just kinda speculating right now. Devs make decisions that seem to have been made in a bubble. Devs ignore player input. Sure. But the most vocal players also often lack tact. The majority generally overrides the core fan-base, especially during an industry transition to the mainstream. The core fans stop buying franchises, and these things get eaten away from both sides. Another example was Quake 4. The multiplayer (bots-notwithstanding) was nearly identical to Q3A but with much nicer graphics. It was a lot of fun, if you could get enough people into a game. Nobody played it though. (except my friends and I it seems...) The single player campaign was decent, not amazing, but fun. Again, it was adapted a bit to the times story/play-wise. So Q2/Q3 players wouldn't play it. It was actually a good game all around. Just not what some people were expecting. People wanted something more modern from id/Raven, so they gave it to them. Then they got dinged on it not being more like Q2/Q3. Bleh...

However, Doom looks like it definitely has a shift to what's popular and what will sell, but still retains a lot of the look and feel of an id game. IMO at least. It could be a bit better, but it could also be a hell of a lot worse. If it doesn't sell well, I can't see much motivation for anyone to make more games like it. I guess one has to weigh this against the "updates" that have been made to what we remember as already being great.

If a dev tries to make something new, nobody buys it. If the dev sticks to the old, nobody buys it. (unless its Madden :p ) Fucked either way. Make some bastardized middle of the road, a little of everyone will buy it.
Click to expand...

J3RK said:
I hold them to a pretty high standard as well. However, I disagree fairly often with people about their games. Rage is the biggest example. I think it's absolutely gorgeous, spot on play mechanics, just cut short a bit early at the end, and yes, a few atrocious textures here or there on indoor environments. Still though, in motion, they get it right. Plenty of geometry, higher res textures where they matter (in most cases) silky smooth frame rate, decent if not terribly innovative story, and some pretty memorable IMO characters. I bet if it didn't have so many launch problems, especially on the ATI/AMD side, it would have been viewed a bit more positively. I have a feeling that some of the hate on Doom is similar. It's just a residual taste for some. A bit of a dumbing down in others. Actually I can't even call it dumbing down. Just a shift in paradigm I guess. I mean, it doesn't get much more simple than the original games (which is what this game is being compared to.) Everyone remembers them so fondly, and they were spectacular for their time (and still hold up well now.) However, running through hallways collecting keys with more guns than a human could look at strapped to them, is dead, stupid, simple. This game looks a little more in depth to me, and the visual look really nice. However, things like small weapon loadouts do change the dynamic, and since these types of things are hallmarks of the classically speaking "console shooter" I can see why people resist. It's not dumber, just different, and if it's not your thing, I can see why you'd dislike it.

I don't like the small loadouts much, but they're not going to KILL me at least. I'm more interested in a decent overall variety of weapons generally speaking. It looks like a Doom game to me. Modernized, adapted to what the vast majority of people play like these days, etc. but still a Doom game. They brought back favorite characters, picked up the pace a bit from Doom 3 (which many people didn't liked, myself NOT included,) added some twists like playing as enemy characters, allowing more freedom of movement that people enjoyed in some non-id shooters (double jumps etc.) an engine that despite what some are saying looks a lot better than Tech 5, and people are still complaining. Like I said before, no matter what they do, SOMEONE is going to hate it. They can't really win with everyone, but it looks like they are listening in a lot of ways while still trying to appeal to the new style of shooter player that's emerged (and largely taken over the landscape.)

A similar thing happened with Doom 3, which is now looked at a bit more fondly it seems. At the time, it was just one of many silent protagonist sci-fi-horror games. It borrowed heavily from elements of System Shock with crew logs and emails. The pacing was slow and deliberate, lighting was the new big thing. People didn't like it either, because it wasn't fast and action-packed like Doom and Doom 2. Now people seem to remember it in a better light, and are now complaining about the new Doom. I think people will eventually like it. At least, that's my hope. I think I will. Different but ok.
Click to expand...
Get off my damn lawn!
 
polonyc2 said:
I wonder what John Carmack thinks of this new version of Doom...disappointed?...did he have any role at all in developing any of the ideas for the new game?
Click to expand...
He encouraged designers to go back to a more old-school route, scraping the initially more modern call-of-duty style. So in that case he may be pleased.

Technically it's hard to say. He wished to stay on as an adviser, probably so he could spend more time on VR.
 
Armenius said:
Get off my damn lawn!
Click to expand...

Hehehe. Yeah, I fall into both camps. I can easily be a grumpy old man, and pine for the good ol' days, but I can just as easily adapt, and enjoy something new for what it is. I'm actually pretty flexible with this type of thing. I'll complain about things I don't like, but unless something is a total pile of shit, I can generally get some use/fun out of it. This in no way looks even close to "pile-o-shit TM" status, so I think I'll get along just fine with it. Who knows, it's still a couple months out. It could devolve into a big steaming pile by then, but in my mind, the likelihood of that is nil. I think I'm going to love it honestly, and I can't wait for 5/13.
 
I just like to play video games regardless of platform. Don't care about all the other bullshit.
 
Following last weekend’s closed beta weekend Bethesda has announced the date for the DOOM open beta...the open beta will run from April 15-18 and is open to all...players will be able to simply login and start playing the team Deathmatch and Warpath modes on the Heatwave and Infernal maps...Bethesda has also revealed some of the DLC details with three premium DLC packs planned after launch...

DOOM open beta announced; DLC detailed | PC Gamer
 
I see they're taking the Activision route of charging $5 USD per map...
 
Putting new maps, weapons, demons into little DLC chunks has completely killed any desire for me to play this game.
 
Last edited:
SeymourGore said:
Putting new maps, weapons, demons into little DLC chunks has completely killed any desire for me to play this game.
Click to expand...

It is pretty irritating. I hate that they have it all planned out ahead of time too. If you have content for 3 DLC packs, couldn't you do a little more and release an expansion pack or something?
 
I loved Doom and Doom 2. Played Doom 3, didn't love it but it was still a decent game. Been looking forward to the new Doom...but seriously, fuck them and their DLC. I was on the fence after hearing reviews on the closed beta, and now they're announcing DLC before its even released, this just went to a complete PASS for me.
 
Never buy the DLC unless the game is super popular or on console I got screwed twice now with COD AW and COD BLOPS 3 nobody plays the new maps.
Duke Nukem Forever was the same except for a handfull of rednecks.
 
J3RK said:
The Activision route? Bethesda INVENTED the nickel-n-dime! :D
Click to expand...

So true, Bethesda opened the flood gates to pithy overpriced DLC.

Killa_2327 said:
It is pretty irritating. I hate that they have it all planned out ahead of time too. If you have content for 3 DLC packs, couldn't you do a little more and release an expansion pack or something?
Click to expand...

Makes it harder for them to rip you off, although it seems odd given that with its open world games Bethesda seems to be very receptive to the idea of providing a huge amount content in its expansions whilst also encouraging the community to create its own free content. You would think they would have been open to the same strategy with Doom, considering there are still over 28,000 people playing Skyrim everyday almost 5 years after release.

Comixbooks said:
Never buy the DLC unless the game is super popular or on console I got screwed twice now with COD AW and COD BLOPS 3 nobody plays the new maps.
Duke Nukem Forever was the same except for a handfull of rednecks.
Click to expand...

That goes without saying, and is often repeated in this forum. MP focused $DLC even with the most popular games fragments the online player pool, and with less popular games is always a complete waste of money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top