Hurt Me Plenty - Remembering Doom

Thanks to TotalGames.net for reprinting a GamesTM article remembering the genius of id Software's seminal PC FPS, Doom. The article starts with the question: "How many of the lodestones of modern gaming do we owe to Doom?", and continues by arguing: "Without Doom conceiving the multiplayer deathmatch, it could be radically touted that the PC today would be an abandoned platform insofar as gaming is concerned." The piece finishes with comments on Doom 3: "While tradition alone will endear Doom 3 to many, the long-anticipated game may yet fail to make the evolving grade it was fundamental in establishing. Let it be said that the gaming world is nothing if not perverse."

Comments

Hyperbole to the Nth Degree

[Txiasaeia]

"Without Doom conceiving the multiplayer deathmatch, it could be radically touted that the PC today would be an abandoned platform insofar as gaming is concerned."

Yeah, right. Wolfie 3D was also a seminal moment in PC gaming, and made a *huge* impact on the entire industry. Doom was a major improvement, yes, but Doom couldn't have been made without Wolfenstein 3D. Multiplayer? No, W3D didn't have it, but all this means is that, had Doom not been made, all FPSs on the computer would be single player - maybe.

The development of the FPS on the comp has been linear, not arriving with Doom and being incrementally improved with subsequent iteration. Wolf 3d was the first major FPS (if not first in the first place; anyone remember when Marathon for the Mac was published?). Doom added better graphics and height (stairs!) as well as multiplayer. Duke 3d added shooting on the Y plane and not just X and Z, not to mention weapons that were more interesting than plain miniguns or rocket launchers (shrink ray, land mine, etc.) Quake I, II, UT... each had significant changes in gameplay, graphics, and capabilities - the shift from Quake 2 to 3 was huge, turning what was once a SP genre with a multi addon to a primarily multi game. If *any* game(s) cemented the shift from SP to MP, and help keep PC gaming alive today, I'd say it was UT and/or Q3, *not* Doom.

Re:Hyperbole to the Nth Degree

[(trb001)]

I'd have to disagree with you, and another post further up said why. Before Doom, you didn't have...

1) The hardware rush. Computer games were designed to the hardware available, not vice versa.

2) A need for sound cards. Wolfenstein wouldn't have been the same, granted, but it was playable without a sound card, just like most other games. Doom practically required one just for the ambiance.

3) Game editors. No other game before Doom had even close to the amount of player created content. Maps, skins, hacks, you name it, Doom players built it.

--trb

Re:Hyperbole to the Nth Degree

[default luser]

If *any* game(s) cemented the shift from SP to MP, and help keep PC gaming alive today, I'd say it was UT and/or Q3, *not* Doom.

Wrong. There are two "games" that helped cement the multiplayer culture, and you're wrong on both counts. One came before UT and Q3 and one was developed concurrently.

First of all, Quake was an evolution in multiplayer gaming. the community-supported Quakeworld was a revolution. It is one of the earliest multiplayer games to feature client-side prediction, and the experience was fluid even on 32-player internet servers...something that would bring a Quake server to it's knees.

Combine this with incredibly popular free mods and total conversions like Team Fortress that revolutionized gameplay, and you had a multiplayer platform that eclipsed even the popularity of Quake II at it's peak.

Half-Life is the second game on the list, not because the original HL multiplayer was anything special, but because it served as a platform for...

Counterstrike.

I know a lot of you bag on this game, but you just don't seem to understand how popular it is. The game is not even at it's peak anymore, and there are still over 100 THOUSAND active players at peak during the week. That's more players than every other current multiplayer FPS COMBINED.

Why?

It was free, well polished, and adapted gameplay styles from other genres. No rocket launchers plus the equipment purchase system made for a fresh look, and people ate it up.

Not quite true

[obeythefist]

It was the gameplay in general that made DooM so revolutionary, from the 2D map/3D game environment, primitive but effective lighting, and the other evolutions and revolutions in the engine.

Then we have the way that the game was designed artistically - the quality of audio, textures, monster designs was superior to anything on the market.

Then we have the gameplay - not just multiplayer, but with a wide array of weapons including the almighty BFG that all other megaweapons follow meekly after, and the chainsaw for hacking up evil monsters. What's not to like?

But these things have all been done before. DooM3 will carry none of these revolutions - Far Cry has already hit the market before DooM3 and HL2 are even "ready". DooM will have a hard time improving on the state-of-the-art graphics of Far Cry. Physics engine, audio... Will DooM3 even let you drive vehicles as you can in Far Cry? I can't imagine boats or buggies or even the awesome hanglider having a place in DooM3.

DooM3 will sell well, of course, because of the hype, and because of the brand name. But I think it has become too little, too late. Fary Cry does all of the "revolutionary" things that DooM3 has been claiming it will do for years. And DooM3 has one handicap that Far Cry doesn't... DooM3 has been engineered to run on XBox, with all the weaknesses of the underpowered console pedigree to carry like a chain around its neck.

If it doesn't make the grade...

[Have Blue]

If it doesn't "make the grade", it will be because engine technology is no longer important. A large part of Doom's success was due to the fact that there was really nothing else like it at the time; this won't be true of Doom 3. id's content department is nothing to sneeze at, but they've been outdone before (Unreal Tournament vs Quake 3, for instance), and they won't be leagues ahead of everyone else like they were with, say, 3D models in Quake.

Re:If it doesn't make the grade...

[dasunt]

A large part of Doom's success was due to the fact that there was really nothing else like it at the time.

I just finished playing both Doom I and Doom II through Doom Legacy, and I want to say -- there still isn't anything like Doom I.

Doom I is brilliantly balanced.

Its interesting, its scary, and it encourages brains, not mindless shooting. [Mindless shooting will get you through Doom I, but tactics will make the job a lot easier.]

The lighting is superb, the level designs are smart, the hidden areas well done.[0]. 10 years later, its still a hell of a good game.

Quake doesn't have it, Half-Life doesn't have it, and even Doom II doesn't have it, but there's something about Doom that makes it worth replaying.

I wish there were more games like Doom I.

[0] Compare this to Doom II, which had a tendency to throw monsters at you in large groups just to increase "difficulty". Even with the double-barrel shotgun, secret Wolfenstein levels, and elder sign, I still prefer Doom I.

Re:Poor choice of words

[torpor]

By that first line it sounds as if Doom 1 was REVOLUTIONARY (and it was to be honest).

Yeah. I distinctly remember there being other multiplayer deathmatch games around at that time... such as SpectreVR, for example ...

DOOM was a great game, for sure, but it was more an evolutionary step, which everyone wanted and had a demand for, than it was a Revolutionary jump. What made DOOM 'special' in those days was that it was legal and expected that you could download it and copy it with your friends; in those days, Shareware Floppies was all the Internet a lot of people had ...