The prospect of reimagining Doom left id Software stuck between a rock and a hard place. From the departure of notable principals like John Romero and John Carmack, to the tepid reception of Doom 3, this modern reboot was rife with design challenges. Despite everything working against it, though, id somehow wriggled out of the corner it was backed into and did an admirable job blending new and classic design paradigms, creating one of the most exhilarating shooters in years.
Hell on Mars
Doom's campaign begins in media res, without lengthy cutscenes or wordy dialogue to steep you in its premise. Your nameless protagonist begins strapped to a stone slab, breaks free of his bonds, and lets you get down to business bashing heads and busting caps, all in an effort to stem a deluge of Hellspawn spilling onto Mars.
Doom puts the pedal to the metal right away for a reason: every action at your disposal is designed to propel you forward. "Doomguy" smoothly hoists himself up walls and ledges. Deal enough damage to enemies and they'll begin to flash, signaling that they're susceptible to Glory Kills, gruesome executions that break open monsters to shower you in health power-ups like candy spewing from a piñata.
Glory Kills feed into momentum in other ways. You're invulnerable while performing them, buying precious seconds to catch your breath, and Glory Kills bequeath more power-ups depending on your health: the sorrier your condition, the more health you receive. It's a clever trick to incentivize playing aggressively rather than running away and cowering behind cover.
Doom's gunplay is just as varied. You find guns in a rough sequential order, but each serves a unique function in combat. The shotgun is fast and punchy, the rocket launcher is good for spreading damage around, and the Gauss cannon fires focused blasts of energy that will feel familiar to anyone homesick for the railgun from Quake 2 and 3.
Reloading? Not in this game. Reloading slows the pace, and Doom won't tolerate that.
The chainsaw, only useful against a select few monsters in older games, is one of Doom's most versatile armaments. Wielding it assures an instant and grisly kill, but bigger demons require more fuel than fodder like zombies and Imps. It's a cool twist that adds an extra layer of strategy to encounters by letting you keep the chainsaw in your back pocket (so to speak) for heavy hitters like Barons of Hell.
As an added bonus, enemies chewed up by your chainsaw dispense copious amounts of ammo—yet another way Doom facilitates nonstop action. Every individual gear and crank in this machine is built to accelerate the others, and when working in tandem the game itself becomes an unparalleled rush.
Hell's Coming With Me
Progressive upgrades are Doom's one concession to new-school shooters. Weapons have modifications you have to unlock by searching out drones (and punching them in the face), and every mod comes with perks you open up by earning weapon points in combat. Challenges scattered throughout missions reward you with runes that augment passive abilities like expanding your pick-up radius for health and ammo drops; other items boost your maximum ammo, health, and armor, and still others let you tweak your suit to mitigate environment damage, switch guns faster, and shrug off blasts from explosive barrels.
All of these elements come together in Doom's classic level design. Environments are sprawling and multi-tiered, full of ledges, tunnels, and wide-open spaces. Such a huge variety in architecture means that you dictate the pace of encounters: what guns to use, and when, and where. On top of that, maps are riddled with optional side areas and secrets, and the game does an excellent job of breaking up the action just long enough to let you soak up each area's ambience and poke around.
Doom's story, given no more than a cursory paragraph in the original game's instruction manual, deserves a nod this time around. Although the beats are fairly standard, the presence of your character, the fear and awe he inspires amid Hell's ranks and the way his proclivity for violence informs his character arc, coalesces into the ultimate power fantasy--one that split my face in a big dopey grin every second I played.
Hit and Miss
Deathmatch circa Doom and Quake centered on learning a map's weapon layout and guarding coveted firearms. Territory control coupled with pixel-precision aiming separated great players from merely good. Unfortunately, Doom's multiplayer doesn't hold a candle to that brand of white-knuckled play. You choose a loadout of two weapons before a match, and while you can change loadouts each time you die, you're stuck with your chosen two. Only health and armor populate maps, and they're plentiful enough that there's no reason to plant your flag in any one spot to defend it.
As a result, maps boil down to two teams of players starting on opposite ends and hurtling toward one another like trains speeding along the same track, destined to collide in the middle over and over with little variation in how things play out. This problem is compounded by most weapons feeling weak: fan favorites like the rocket launcher don't pack enough of a punch, while others are vastly superior. Unless you're packing a Gauss rifle and a chaingun, you'll get shredded.
Doom's multiplayer is not terrible. It is insipid, an arrangement of modes and mechanics that feel copy-and-pasted from other multiplayer games. It doesn't feel like Doom, and comes across as derivative in the face of the perfectly balanced blend of new- and old-school of the campaign.
SnapMap is multiplayer's saving grace. Intuitive and powerful, SnapMap lets you build maps from scratch by dragging and dropping elements. A few keypresses cycles between blueprint-style layouts, shaded rectangles signifying rooms, and a first-person view where you can float around to see what your players will see, and more precisely plant items, rooms, and instruction sets. If building levels from scratch seems daunting, you can build on top of preset rooms, snapping new wings into place and installing your own monsters, weapons, power-ups, AI, and scripted events.
The sheer amount of gameplay possibilities SnapMap puts at your fingertips is staggering. I've played Horde-style modes, raced other players to collect rings and cross a finish line in a map reminiscent of Sonic 2's bonus stages, fought in an arena based on WWE's Elimination Chamber match, where opponents enter the fray at timed intervals, and play a memory game by walking through doors signifying right and wrong answers.
From memory games to classic-style deathmatch, SnapMap is a bottomless well of creative content. It remains to be seen how far down to Doom's roots it will let the community tear, however, given that the tool is steeped in the base game's conceits. Its longevity hinges on how deeply the community invests in spicing up ways to play.
Big Freakin' Game
That a first-person shooter like Doom exists in 2016 is shocking. Its levels are vast and intricately designed, its gameplay diverse and joyful, its toolset robust. Multiplayer is its weak link, but the adaptability of SnapMap is more than enough to offset that.
While other first-person shooters have stepped forward to challenge convention in recent years, none carry the clout and cachet of Doom. For id Software to overcome the challenges specific to its history and craft a shooter that flies in the face of convention marks Doom as nothing short of a triumph—and, one hopes, a sign that change is in the air for a genre in desperate need of it.
This review is based on a PC download code provided by the publisher. Doom is available in retail and digital stores for $59.99. The game is rated M.
Doom 2016
- Dynamic combat scenarios
- Wide range of strategic and balanced weapons
- Progression systems that enhance rather than inhibit momentum
- Complex level design
- SnapMap tool is robust and easy to use
- Derivative multiplayer
- SnapMap may be limited by how much community invests in it
-
David Craddock posted a new article, Doom Review: Like Hell You Will
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It's not ideal, but the fact that you can logic your way around the 2 weapon limit suggests that snapmap isn't nearly as simplistic and limited as you're claiming.
https://www.doomworld.com/vb/snapmap/87972-you-can-have-more-than-2-weapons-in-snapmap/
I'm willing to bet rocket jumping wouldn't be all that difficult to add as well if you really wanted to.-
Also, the first snapmap I played was a singleplayer farming simulator with a merchant, demon raising, crop harvesting, and a dungeon crawl. So you can absolutely do interesting weird things with it and I also hope a community grows around it. Would I prefer more proper modding? Of course, but snapmap is an interesting approach and I'm curious to see where it ends up.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stay strong. This game clearly falls in the get it on sale for $15 next year during a sale (or in two years for $10 with DLC included) category from what I am reading. It doesn't matter how good SP is if it is just SP. It will go on sale eventually and you'll have the benefit of patches to stop crashing.
Only miss out on raving about it in threads.-
-
-
-
I am down on nostalgia games being this messianic thing about how games are meant to be when it is clearly targeted at 30 somethings. Craddocks review here made me believe there is something more here than a really shiny version of the same thing again.
That doesn’t change my usual way of buying these games. I bought Bioshock this way and I adore that game. Then I proceeded to buy the next two Bioshocks the same way.-
My original intro was longer, and went into how id was in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situation: they couldn't make a carbon copy of the original Doom because that design doesn't have legs in 2016, but long-time fans wouldn't let them get away with cloning a COD or Battlefield campaign, either. What they came up with struck a perfect balance between the two paradigms, and is really a unique beast.
I think it's worth $60, but as someone who also tends to wait for sales due to budgetary reasons, even for games I really want, I get where you're coming from.-
As someone who reads about DOOM but hasn't played it, I would say that your review also convinced me that this was more than DOOM 3 again. I wouldn’t have been interested if it was that sort of thing. But, being a person who doesn't play DOOM, it still falls pretty low on my priorities. (I mean I am still hoping to someday get both new wolfensteins as a package in the $10 range.) I support developers at full price, just for games I am more passionate about that have an MP component.
-
-
That's fine...not everyone buys on release day. I do generally (or soon afterwards) and have a shit load of games on Steam (1572 according to the little games tab under my library)...but games are pretty much my big hobby (I preordered both an Oculus and a Vive and I own a consolized Neo Geo MVS along with all the current consoles...and I'm probably going to pick up a 1080 GTX to replace my 980 GTX if one of the cards out there come with a DVI port that supports analog so I can plug my CRT into it with a DVI to VGA adapter). That said, most people aren't crazy like me and its not a problem to make the choice to wait...I know a lot of people who do that and I do it with stuff that I don't need or want to play *right now* (the most recent Cities Skylines was an example of that because I knew it would be a while before I got around to playing it...and I still haven't touched it).
-
-
-
-
-
Very true. That's probably my plan because when I play for the first time I'll probably want to go nuts and put in some several-hour days like in times of old.
I guess breaking it up doesn't bother me as much with brutal doom since I'm replaying something familiar.
Like I think i want to play DOOM before Witcher 3 or fallout 4 (which admittedly will take way more time). -
-
-
-
I think the clarification needed here is that the game clearly falls in YOUR get it on sale for $15 next year during a sale category. I assume you are not ascribing a prescriptive value to it, but your own personal estimation. In such a case, you are free to wait for the sale, but I'm sure you can understand why it's worth full price for many other people.
Like you, I'm going to wait for a sale, probably $30, only because I have a number of other games I'm playing right now, and I simply don't have time to play Doom at the moment. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I imagine you'll see plenty of remade levels, but consider two points. First, early attempts will probably be subpar; the game is less than a week old, so map makers need more time to delve deeper into SnapMap to nail fine details. I played a version of E1M8 earlier that was E1M8 in name only.
Second, for as great as Snap is, it lacks certain capabilities, at least as far as I can tell, that make releasing a packaged remake impossible. There's currently no way to make or distribute full campaigns, for instance. You'd have to track down and play levels individually, and that poses a problem because you obviously couldn't carry your weapons and health with you between levels. The onus of making sure players are armed appropriately for each level would be on map makers, and even then, being given the supplies you need isn't as fun as collecting them yourself and feeling the fear and tension that comes from just barely surviving one level and knowing you're starting the next with 10% health.-
-
That might work, actually. I believe SnapMap imposes a limit on how many rooms and items you can insert into a map, similar to Super Mario Maker, but I'm not positive.
CrustaR would be a good person to weigh in on the work involved in remaking Doom maps, and just how big they can get. He remade the game's first episode in Doom 3.
-
-
-
-
-
-
no SLI no buy. dumbest shit ever. it could be the best thing since slice bread but, no sli support they can fuck off. never again will i buy a game day 1 unless it has support for things that should be included by default. refunded this stupid game through steam once i learned it wasn't using both my cards(3 minutes in the menu and it was uninstalled).
-
-
-
-
Consider me boneheaded for thinking you are being a bit unreasonable then. SLI is hardly a standard hardware setup by any means. I'm so sorry the latest interesting AAA title doesn't cater to your particular hardware setup and the barrier to your enjoyment ends at one video card. I tried SLI years ago when it was still fairly new and gave it up because it wasn't worth the extra money versus performance gain.. Perhaps you can take some peace with that knowledge and be happier in the future?
-
SLI is not problematic by any means today(it was in the past when you had it). you get significant gains in performance that make more than worth it. especially when a development team hasn't bitched out and spends time to incorporate appropriate sli profiling. on top of this the pinnacle of a gaming rig today is quad-sli. so to dismiss sli as some one-off setup is silly.
if anything the reason they didn't incorporate sli day 1 is because of consolization like most games that compromise when launched on PC and console platforms simultaneously.-
What percentage of gamers run SLI, and what percentage of that run quad SLI? A tiny, tiny fraction, if even a percentage point or two.
They didn't support it because it would have been dev time wasted on a feature that almost no one would have or could have used. It's in terms of development time and dollars versus return. Why focus (for launch) on a feature that a tiny fraction of the possible user base might have when you could spend that time working on things everyone will enjoy.
Doom'll have SLI patched in shortly, so settle down man. It'll be okay. It has nothing to do with consoles, but the tiny fraction of SLI users.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Back in my day, we would play 1 game for 6 months. And that game could be 1/10 as good as the new Doom, and we LIKED it.
Dang kids today won't play an amazing game just because it doesn't support their particular, special idea of what a game "should" be. Wouldn't know a good game even if it released to both critical and community acclaim. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- If you don't have 6+GB cards it won't play in "fucking epic ultra wtf mode" anyway. Because textures.
- They're adding SLI in a future patch.
- The number of people who actually run SLI is minuscule. Even if every one of you boycotted the game it would be a tiny, tiny fraction of just PC sales, much less all sales total. As long as SLI is something that requires meaningful extra effort to make work, it's not going to be a high priority for developers. -
-
when the 1080's drop...then i think you'll be correct. with 4k and 100+hz AND ultra-wide displays(which mine is all of these things), right now, i don't think this holds true. and this hate(misunderstanding) of SLI is odd to me. my experience, thus far, has been really great. i have had no problems with any games so far. it's only now that two games i have wanted to play do not have SLI support in them on day 1. therefore, i will criticize them for it and be perfectly right in doing so. FORZA doesn't have SLI either and that game will not get played until it does....i want maximum eye sex and zero compromise. DOOM will someday have SLI as well and when that day comes i will buy it at a discount.
-
-
It is significantly less hassle these days, but gains are still pretty slim considering the amount of extra electricity and heat, and you still deal with many games that don't actually support it or support it in a flawed/inefficient manner.
Yeah, it's cool when it works and you get an extra 35% performance or whatever, but... Ehhhhh.
-
-
-
-
-
-
i am rockin' 2x evga 970 ftw's hooked up to my X34 predator. only other card right now that would improve the situation would be a single 980ti...otherwise i got the next best thing. and since i have had this setup only one game had a legit SLI problem for me...battlefront...but, that was nvidia's fuck up with the drivers and were promptly fixed 2 days later.
-
-
-
-
-
-
i feel like the peak of SLI was during the wave of triple screen gaming. same time as the 3D vision glasses were popular. ati's crossfire + eyefinity and was really cool. nvidia had 3d surround and was also amazing....dead space 2 was crazy awesome with triple screen + 3d.
then the advent of the g-sync and freesync happened. this is where the future tech lies as they have indicated with the new "fast sync" they've got in the 1080.
all that being said...SLI should be maintained until the new tech is matured more...games that don't include it at launch just equate to laziness. but, that's like just my opinion mannnnnn.-
lol, laziness? You're out of your fucking mind. There's no market to sell games that support SLI as some sort of flagship feature. The only reason SLI exists is because video card manufacturers wanted to sell you another video card. No AAA dev on the planet is targeting an SLI system for anything other than some weird non-commercial tech-demo.
-
-
Dopefish isn't wrong. Unless the rendering tech being used already supports multi-card setups or they're being paid by AMD/Nvidia to support it amongst other features, there's little reason for a developer to mess with it.
The install base for multi-card setups is miniscule and it makes testing even more of a nightmare than usual.
-
-
-
-
-
-
As games start doing more and more things on the GPU (compute, offscreen render targets, etc) managing that data across cards just gets harder and harder. Alternate frames are handled by each card, so you can imagine how generating data on one frame on the GPU for use in the next frame on the other GPU can be problematic, and it's something that developers don't really have much control over. We can mitigate it, but it's not really a solved problem. It should get "easier" with stuff like Vulkan allowing developers to manage multiple GPU's themselves rather than hoping against hope that the driver does things the way they want it to.
-
this is not 100% accurate any longer. that is one mode of SLI processing, yes. however, there are many methods to skin this cat. the technology has been improved greatly since the first/most popular idea of it(which, is what you described).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalable_Link_Interface
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/sli
http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/guides/introduction-to-sli-technology-guide#1
it all depends on how someone goes about using the GPU scaling.-
-
-
i am confused. does the website display job titles in some unknown dark corner i have not discovered? maybe i am blind. i don't know. but, i never assume anything on the internet nor am i clairvoyant in that i know what a random username on a webpage does for a living. i mean really dude?
at any rate. if these developers are correct then ok. it is more difficult. spend more time on it and make it work. not going to sit here and have the excuse be "it's more difficult now" be the reason it doesn't get implemented. like i said. lazy.-
-
-
spend more time on it so less than 1% of your 12 million player base can get 30% greater framerate, on top of the 100+fps they were already pushing? or so they can run your game in 4K? seriously dude, no. at no point does that make any economic sense at all. You are already in the top 1% of the 1% of users, and the game already runs magnificently on your machine. You don't get more dev time.
-
Besides which, spending more time on his pet issue means you spend less time on other, known bugs that your game is likely shipping with and those bugs are likely to affect lots more people in lots more significant ways. Then, if you follow his advice, he'll hit one of those otherwise fixed bugs and bitch about how lazy you are as a developer for not fixing this obvious bug.
-
-
The reality of making games is that it's messy, there's no point at which everything is perfect, and you have to triage the issues you have until you arrive at a mostly acceptable launch. That means some things that frankly aren't very important, like SLI support, might slip into a post-release patch.
-
-
Supporting SLI isn't really "fixing bugs", though. It's working around stupid shit not working like you would expect with ridiculous hacks. Like I said, game devs really don't have much control over how things work under SLI. There is no API for ensuring resources are in sync between cards, so we just fiddle with the things that aren't working like they should until you get something resembling what your desired output would be.
Realistically, SLI at this point is mostly a marketing ploy to get people to purchase two cards instead of just one. Like dopefish said, the SLI market is tiny and getting things to work with it can be a huge pain in the ass. For the most part, it's just not worth the development cost if things are broken. You can spend weeks trying to re-architect things to mask the problems and the "fixes" are usually to the detriment of performance and maintainable code.
-
-
-
-
-
-
SLI was vastly simpler to handle when it was still D3D9. With the advent of D3D11 you have things where you can use compute to generate pretty much anything on the GPU and the CPU side of things really doesn't need to know about it. It only gets worse for SLI with D3D12, too.
Things just get ridiculously hard to manage at the driver level when you can have multiple threads generate commands for the GPU and populating resources via compute (don't forget to mix in async compute as well). So you're asynchronously populating resources while also trying to manage more than one frame in flight on both GPU's that are working with those same resources. SLI is a fucking nightmare the way it's set up right now.
I really like the way Vulkan is set up, where it lets you enumerate multiple GPU's and use them however you want (I can't remember if D3D12 is the same). It's just a matter of time before someone comes out with some middleware that treats multiple GPU's like we treat multiple CPU's right now and you just create a bunch of GPU jobs that get distributed across the available hardware.
But alternate frame rendering (AFR) is just a mess given the direction the API's have taken. It made sense at one point but not so much anymore.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"Riff raff"
Two frequent posters. One suggesting people hold off the current hype if they are cash strapped buy it later on sale since the MP is nothing special and it will certainly come down in price. Another saying he wouldn't buy it without SLI support.
Riff raff!!!!!
Or the echo chamber having their way with whatever they could possibly find to pile on. One of those.-
-
You mean it isn't just a super douchey comment that should be moderated on these forums because it shows zero respect for people with autism or autism related disabilities? That kind of honest?
Or do you just want to continue to be someone who trolls me with abandon because no one really cares in this circlejerk of enabling? -
-
-
-
-
-
-
As David's debut review (at least for several years) I wanted to chime in and say I'm really happy with how this turned out. David is a great writer and this was a tough assignment, given the legacy of the series and the connection it has to a lot of our audience. But I think he really got across both the evocative feeling of playing it and how its gameplay systems complement each other.
I know I already complimented you privately, David, but I thought I'd give you an extra pat on the back publicly. GG. -
-
What a strange review. "Insipid, derivative" DM, yet the game is a reimagined "triumph." Um, yeah: you don't get to be triumphantly, insipidly derivative while reimagining as you loot other games for ideas. Oh, and cut-and-paste generic instalevels are its saving grace? Everyone's a designer now, is he?
What's left of id is Bethesda's red-headed stepchild from hell. RIP.
-