summary:
-aiming up and down is hard
-3d is less realistic than 2d
-some shit about weapon sway

that article is terrible even for 1997

"and you can drop down from above, hence quake will be all about camping"

:D

old

Wat?

summary:
the old stuff I have already learned is better than the new stuff I still have to learn, so I can stay with the old stuff and enjoy lounging around instead of having to work hard learning new stuff, because the old stuff is better anyway.

this sounds familiar...

Reminds me of vq3 players

ZING!!!

Really, Doom 2 has the best movement system of any game. While SR40 is fairly easy to do, it still requires skill to use well. SR50 takes a while to use properly, even for a veteran of SR40. The concept behind both is fairly easy for even a brand new player to understand and execute, but still has the learning curve that you would want in a deep deathmatch game. The only other game to mix depth/ease of use so well is Painkiller.

3D doesn't have anything to do with this, as almost every doom map played at high level now has 3D gameplay. E1M1 doesn't, but it's also campy, and boring as fuck - which is what he was trying to argue that 3D combat caused. This has nothing to do with 2D/3D combat, though, and everything to do with the map itself.

SR40/SR50?

They are the movement techniques in Doom 2. SR40 is very easy to do, and allows the most maneuverability. For SR40, you hold forward+strafe left/right, and simply move diagonally. This makes you move much faster than normal. Very easy to learn/use, but takes time to be able to use it properly while jousting, or without smashing into walls. =P

SR50 is a combination of the above, while at the same time holding a turn left/right key. This offers a bit more speed than SR40, works the same way fundamentally, but you can't change your direction with the mouse while doing it. It's good for long straight lines, and if you get good enough with it, it can be used in place of SR40 in a lot of situations. There is some controversy over some clients being able to automate SR50 using binds, which reduces the skill involved.

SR40 sounds like the same zig-zaging you can do in quakeworld

Nope. strafe+forward won't make you go over 320 in qw. In doom 2 it makes you run faster.

forward+alternating between left/right(without jumping) gives you speed in qw afaik

Yes you're right but this is a different technique. You simply hold left or right strafe + forward and you run faster. Watch some doom 2 speed runs. They all use this trick like 99% of the time.

http://speeddemosarchive.com/quake/qdq/articles/ZigZag/

Perhaps something like that, but much, much, faster.

I didnt know that things I made right away on psx version with pad were so hard to master and had such scientific looking names :P

Try using SR40 or SR50 on some of the real maps played in DM. =P

What maps are played currently? Maybe I will check some. Back in the day on PCs connected by rs232 and later on linked psx consoles we basicaly used like 2 maybe 3 maps, usualy the first one I think and the square one with inner arena and outer ring. No idea about more complicated or custom maps.

Still even with perfect maps I cant imagine going back to it and leaving QL, UT and others.

The map list for ZDDL is:

DooM2 Map1
Dwango5.wad Map1
Judas23_.wad Map23
Dwango5.wad Map7
King1.wad Map1

which should give you some idea what is being used for higher level Doom 2 play. You can also get a feel for more complex maps with just the ones included in Skulltag.

Nice to see people are still playing the same maps as 15 years ago, just a bit revamped :P Dwango5 dm1 seems like the only worthwhile of them.

Regarding instant killing, there are other FPP games that make it possible too. Its nice to see D2 still played, its nice to refresh memories, but as far as current competitive gaming is concerned it just lacks depth.

The depth is there, but it all revolves around positioning. There is no item running, so you just have to bait the opponent around the map and try to get the drop on him. The only map that I think really sucks is E1M1, as it's boring as fuck.

Even still, I'm not a fan duel at all anymore, and you'll find that the most fun in current doom is usually from CTF/FFA/etc...

Thats what I mean as lack of depth. In other games you can run items in many ways, you can bait, basicaly there is a lot of diversity depending on style and preferences. There is some variety in D2, I wont deny this, however compared to newer games, be it QL or UT, it is very limited.

Well I will try playing it a bit for fun anyway :P

The "depth" of quake is attributed to positioning, not item timing. In the form of positioning, Doom and Quake work much the same, though Doom requires exponentially faster reflexes. Each time you go for an item in Quake, the item will always be there at the proper time. The only change in item control comes from combat (positioning), or luck (enemy was late). Timing itself is not a talent-controlled skill, and especially shallow with a clock.

Item running puts more importance on the map than on the players/combat. An example of a map in Doom 2 that works like Quake would be E1M1 with the BFG room. This ends in a fight between the players and the map, instead of between players. This is also why Doom 2 uses a fraglimit instead of a timelimit. Timelimit puts the focus on merely gaining a lead and running the map, rather than interacting.

The leads in quake are generally gained as a side result of the forced participation in a need for control, or by taking advantage of extreme imbalance during spawn frags, rather than incentive for beating your opponent on level ground.

Timing is all about map control, in reality you dont need to use clock at all. You need to keep in mind what will be up next, the time difference between them, and set times in a way items wont spawn at the same time. Timing or rather item control is so much fun cause you can do a lot with it. Use it as bait, delay, distrupt opponent, if you have lead you can even ignore it which would be impossible with frag limit. What you call forced participation in most cases is just player mistake, rest is up to map. There is no such thing as "being forced to" on ztn in QL or Turbine in UT.
There was also argument of importance of aim, you can beat aim based opponent with superior control over items and weapons (one of the reasons why weapon stay and short respawn times are wrong). It is obvious that some players in certain aspects may be better than me, so I need to cover for it. This is where real depth starts.

For me simple jousting, fighting it out, a direct combat between players is what I call shallow. It may be fun, but in long run it is not enough to make me sweat. You can say D2 is all about prediction, that it is of utmost importance, but the point is that in the flat game with less aspects to it, there is actualy less prediction than in more complex competitive games.

Not to mention that ultimate pleasure of jousting lies in vertical action :P

Timing is all about map control, in reality you dont need to use clock at all. You need to keep in mind what will be up next, the time difference between them, and set times in a way items wont spawn at the same time.

I know that you don't need the clock, but it makes the process even more controlled and dumbed down. No matter what order you pick items up, the item itself will always respawn when it's supposed to. No matter how good you are, items are a static form of gameplay.

Timing or rather item control is so much fun cause you can do a lot with it. Use it as bait, delay, distrupt opponent, if you have lead you can even ignore it which would be impossible with frag limit.

A frag limit would not change the way that item timing works, but removes incentive for strictly playing the map. You give examples that all have the possibility of resulting in combat to resolve, but do not require it. The player IS forced to run items, however.

What you call forced participation in most cases is just player mistake, rest is up to map. There is no such thing as "being forced to" on ztn in QL or Turbine in UT.

If you aren't getting armor/health/weapons/ammo, you lose. This is not an option. If I get a kill on ZTN, I can run armors/MH, run away, and likely win the map. Any player who does anything but run away when they have control/lead is doing it wrong. Of course, it's also boring to do it the statistically most safe way, so everyone ends up getting greedy.

There was also argument of importance of aim, you can beat aim based opponent with superior control over items and weapons (one of the reasons why weapon stay and short respawn times are wrong). It is obvious that some players in certain aspects may be better than me, so I need to cover for it. This is where real depth starts.

Were you actually playing someone you should be (someone of equal skill), what does it matter? Balancing a game around an unbalance playing field (like how people complain that Q3 was balanced around poor mice/connections), will never work. It takes a few days/weeks to learn to time items in your head, and all the rest is execution. Depth is in the execution, and where it should be emphasized.

For me simple jousting, fighting it out, a direct combat between players is what I call shallow. It may be fun, but in long run it is not enough to make me sweat. You can say D2 is all about prediction, that it is of utmost importance, but the point is that in the flat game with less aspects to it, there is actualy less prediction than in more complex competitive games.

Having more aspects to a game does not equate to it having more depth.

Quake 1? As in Quakeworld?

I'm sorry, no.

reminds me:

"Why quake 3 is superior to quake 4 ?

cuz crouch-slide & sounds are retarded"

or

"Why quake 3 is superior to cpm ?

cuz air-control is retarded"

or

"Why quake 3 is superior to painkiller ?

cuz air-control is retarded & zomg there's no circle jump"

ps: yes i hate vq3

reminds me of "why ANY GAME is superior to ANY OTHER GAME"

reminds me of "why ANY GAME is superior to QUAKE 4"

Love it how on one hand quake is too campy but on the other hand you have too much life negating the need to dodge or play defensively.

Reminds me of this.

Reminds me of the internet

lol this is great

doom2 singleplayer > quake 1 singleplayer

quake multiplayer > *

(based purely on lanning with my buddies)

no

finished them both, a LOOOONG time ago, and quake was really good, being the first REAL 3d, but it never had the atmosphere of doom.

for me at least.

Quake1 atmosphere is unmatched by any other fps ever. Call me fanboy!

as far as single player is concerned:

ultimate doom > quake > doom2 > doom3 > quake 2 > wolfenstein 3D > quake 3 > quake 4 (playing against bots is still more fun than q4 sp)

How could you possibly have fun with Doom 3 singleplayer? After the first 3 rooms, you could just start throwing grenades into obvious spawn points, run into a room, and move on as they get spawnfragged. Worst case of monster-in-a-closet ever.

tbh. the games besides doom 1 & 2, quake 1 from id are not really worth playing in single player, it's just that doom3 is a little less worse than the others :-)

Reminds me of good ol' times

some things he is right, some not, at some point he contradict himself, but you have to consider the quake game he used on that time to compare
esr comments are a litle bit too harsh imo
from artistical point of view -and I'm counting the concept as much as the final implementation -doom2 is far superior to anything I've seen after, on the other hand its fast and furious deathmatch is pretty different that q3 dm, with adepts on both sides, problem with doom compared to quake is it was not new and at the moment professional competition appeared, they had to popularize newer games, they could not get the attention of something they did not even know how will evolve, by chosing a game that did not even use client/server protocols
I've had a lot of great moments on playing doom2
because you instant kill your opponent, the level of anticipation is pretty much higher on the game; on doom2 if you anticipate you opponent movement every time, you win without any doubt, on quake games you may perfectly anticipate and still loose especially because lower aiming skills
dunno who's the absolute winner, but in terms of art doom2 is a masterpiece -and this mean it might not treat regular players very well -when quake is "just" a great game

Doom 2 is a masterpiece in almost every regard :) still probably my all-time favourite.

Still, the only reason I posted this article is to show constant player mentality has been since 1997 - it's always "My game is better than the new one, now I'm gonna think of some reasons why" rather than "lets look at the differences between the new game and my game then decide which is better" or "well the games differ, I'm sure each will have its charm, lets see which is better in which aspect"...

eh, it's not that I did not understand the point
imo comparing things is not an infamous habit. this is one thing critics and ratings are based on
the guy there might be true on more aspects than relevant ones, thing is we'll never know because doom2 genre games did not evolve anymore, in the direction it was beginning, let's take for example 2d player models compared to 3d models, at this time you see still the difference between a character from a movie and a character from a game, even if you pick up crysis for this, with its maximum settings. Player animations especially is shit still on games. How realistic would have been looking 2d player models, up to date, rendered with newest technologies, and developed for newer technologies -or forcing the appearence of new technologies -if made by professional teams, and would it have been more realistic -in visual terms -than their 3d mates? we'll never know

They would simply used digitalized photos and I think they actualy did in some games, just in low resolution. Who knows maybe they would switch to 3D anyway when cell shading would become available.

However I dont really think you can say that Quake wasnt in direction they began.

and that's why I did mention the 2d model issue
you must misunderstood my point, I did not say that creators had in mind to go in the future to another direction when they made doom2, so I was not talking about their vision, but I was saying about their temporary solutions, like for instance 2d player models
to be more specific, first off they made wolf 3d (not really first but whatever) with 2d player models, then doom2, with improved 2d models -I think they even increased the number of images of a model, depending the angles you was watching it, too -and when they were creating quake they moved to polygonal models, it sure was a different approach (and it sure looked like shit, and look still pretty ugly by modern graphics, but this is not the main point here)

high definition photos sure would have work in the beginning, but at this moment I think it would be possible to have animations (not maya imported animation, but 3d animation of real life persons running, walking, etc), which from visual point of view would sure look 100x times better than standard player models, the only claimed problem would be the limited possibility of interaction (like when the game interact with standard models, the options are not to be very limited too, lol)

however I think it is kinda pointless to discuss something that did not happen :)

It is pointless to discuss because in the end there would be green robots anyway :P

and chesscake

Great article :P

he's a nub

remi..uh what?