Doom and Wolf were crasy popular in the day because they were nearly literally the ONLY game in 3D. it was either that or side scrolls and text based games. So context of its popularity needs to be understood
They weren't technically 3D.
yes I know that.
lets not do this please, that fact which I have known for a year already doesnt change the point I was making.
There is no need to go that route
I was playing games then and I agree 100% of good old Mack. we played it because the technology itself was amazing and ground breaking and because we didnt have other options, not because the game play was compelling by todays standards
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I watched it and I have the game and am playing it. Do you? Have you bought the game and played it?
I do not.
sorry I need to be clear 'I agree 100% with the video where it discusses why Doom 1 was so popular at its time' I thought that part was clear given that is what I was talking about in the first place. thus me owning the game is not relevant to what I am talking about.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I watched it and I have the game and am playing it. Do you? Have you bought the game and played it?
I do not.
sorry I need to be clear 'I agree 100% with the video where it discusses why Doom 1 was so popular at its time' I thought that part was clear given that is what I was talking about in the first place. thus me owning the game is not relevant to what I am talking about.
The reason people liked Doom back in the day was because it was fun. Period. Wolfenstein came before it but Doom is what kicked off the love for many people with not only the FPS genre but also PC games in general. If the game was terrible back then none of us would have played it. Regardless of the options we did not have. Ask Gabe at Valve about that.
I agree with the video 100% in regards to what he said about Doom1 and the transition into HL3 and Medal of Honor and I was about 21 during the time playing the shit out of that game both Doom and later Medal of Honor
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Also, they didn’t exactly spend 16 years learning how to
make a new and improved Thief game. Looking
Glass Studios shut down and the Thief franchise was eventually passed on to
Eidos. Had the original LGS team been in
control for this reboot, I honestly believe we would have a much better game. It would include some modern advances, but
still maintain the spirit of the originals.
Hopefully this is what Brad and the team will be able to do with
Pantheon.
You have to show what worked then can still work today for an AAA game. The video you posted and your comments heavily suggest to me it can't.
From your OP:
Specifically this video talks about maps, gps mini-maps,
quest markers, and linear level design.
It also discusses the importance of player strength vs. the environment,
difficulty of gameplay vs. feeling empowered, and a general feeling of
challenge (death penalties, anyone?)
I don't think those things can be popular in an AAA game without being watered down. End resuilt is the only way to find it is in indie games or non-commercial. I think to believe otherwise is to drink the kool-aid.
My opinion only. I'm not disagreeing with your preferences. I wholeheartedly agree with them. I just am not optimistic AAA's will change to suit these things. Personaly I don't care about AAA's anyway--at all. Frankly, I think the biggest draws for AAA's are graphics and voiceovers and other sexy tech. I just don't care about those things near as much as I do about the things you mention. I can get what I want from 20+ year old games--and frequently do. Although increasingly there're newer indie games which appel to me--like Balrum or Dwarf Fortres or others. Indies are where the magic is.
Comments
lets not do this please, that fact which I have known for a year already doesnt change the point I was making.
There is no need to go that route
I was playing games then and I agree 100% of good old Mack. we played it because the technology itself was amazing and ground breaking and because we didnt have other options, not because the game play was compelling by todays standards
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
sorry I need to be clear 'I agree 100% with the video where it discusses why Doom 1 was so popular at its time' I thought that part was clear given that is what I was talking about in the first place. thus me owning the game is not relevant to what I am talking about.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
From your OP:
I don't think those things can be popular in an AAA game without being watered down. End resuilt is the only way to find it is in indie games or non-commercial. I think to believe otherwise is to drink the kool-aid.
My opinion only. I'm not disagreeing with your preferences. I wholeheartedly agree with them. I just am not optimistic AAA's will change to suit these things. Personaly I don't care about AAA's anyway--at all. Frankly, I think the biggest draws for AAA's are graphics and voiceovers and other sexy tech. I just don't care about those things near as much as I do about the things you mention. I can get what I want from 20+ year old games--and frequently do. Although increasingly there're newer indie games which appel to me--like Balrum or Dwarf Fortres or others. Indies are where the magic is.