Doom Eternal. I don’t usually enjoy FPS games and I’m not very good at them but I absolutely loved Doom (2016) as it took out most of the things I hate about FPS games. But in Eternal I just felt like I was constantly out of ammo, and there was too much focus on using specific weapons against specific weak points on enemies which I couldn’t get the hang of
Yeah I also couldn’t get the hang on Doom Eternal. Loved the first one but the second one cramped so many unnecessary elements into it and made it too complicated. The first one was a simple but highly effective shooter, but the second one was just bloated with stuff nobody asked for.
I quite enjoy Doom Eternal, but it's true it's a very different game from Doom (2016). You either vibe with the combat flow the game enforces or you don't. There is exactly one way to play it, by rotating between all the abilities as they go off their cooldowns, so you can keep restoring your ammo, HP and armor respectively.
I agree, when I first picked it up I couldn’t get into the rhythm of the game and hated it, but once it clicked it was a lot of fun. You can’t really go in expecting to play exactly like Doom (2016).
I didn’t even like Doom (2016). It was ugly, dull and I hated the finisher system. Really disappointed because I’m old enough to have played the other Doom games as a kid and I mostly enjoyed the new wave of boomer shooters. Great soundtrack though.
The only thing I really hated about Eternal was the Marauder. As a mini boss it was fine, but as a recurring enemy it absolutely kills the pace. I tried the DLC and as soon as I encountered another Marauder early on I turned it off and haven’t gone back.
It’s a shame because I really enjoy the lore, and contrary to yourself I liked most of the other changes Eternal made to nu-Doom. Fewer rooms where you get locked in until you defeat all enemies, mainly.
I agree with the Marauder bit. As a boss it was fine, but as a recurring enemy it just killed the pace of the game.
As for ammo, the game gives you so much chainsaw fuel that if ever you run out of ammo, you just chainsaw the next enemy and you’re back to shooting with your preferred weapon.
The problem I had was that their way of making the game harder was just to throw more enemies at you. Some of the battles were just way too long, fighting dozens of the same enemies that spawned in as you killed the previous ones. It just got so tedious at some point, and rather than being excited for what was coming next, I was just hoping the fight would end so I could move on.
Doom hit the right balance, but Eternal just overdid it.
From memory it respawns the low level enemies constantly, since they’re just ammo/health/armour pinatas. You needed to kill the big enemies to complete an arena.
Not really a fan of the design choice, but I had a decent amount of fun when I clicked with how the Devs wanted you to play.
Funnily enough, the Marauder is one of the only things I kind of liked about Eternal.
And the grapple hook on the super shotgun was fantastic, especially in that boss fight where you grapple and then punch the boss.
Other than that, I find 2016 so much better. Some of the things in Eternal were just not fun at all, like the enemies that are invulnerable except for 3 seconds while charging their super attack AND EVEN THEN ONLY THE HEAD TAKES DAMAGE. Felt just unfair rather than difficult.
Yeah, Doom 2016 is easily one of my favorite singleplayer fps games. Doom Eternal is just worse in every way, and I couldn't get through more than a few hours.
It completely breaks the combat flow state that made the original great
Instead of having the freedom to prioritize enemies and weapons, it wants you to do things a very specific way
Instead of the minimal but interesting story from the 2016, we get a convoluted mess, with random characters that we have no reason to care about.
Also, despite 2016 looking quite good, they decided to make Eternal garish and cartoony for some reason??
I could go on, but anyway I hope we get a proper 2016 sequel some day.
I’m replaying Doom Eternal right now and I feel this so hard. Even with ammo upgrades and judicious chainsaw use I’m constantly out of ammo. Really makes me wish for a melee weapon that doesn’t have limited fuel or whatever.
This is a few days old but I might be able to help. Are you switching weapons or just sticking to a single one?
A single chainsaw gives you something like 20 shotgun slugs and a bunch of ammo for every single other weapon, you shouldn’t have ammo problems unless you are trying to kill a heavy demon with the assault rifle primary fire.
A complete downgrade from Doom 2016 in every way. Combat was complete madness, there’s no such thing as planning ahead. You can only endlessly dash away while insta-swapping weapons ad infinitum.
Doom 2016 made you think. Is this glory kill to risky? Is the gap wide enough to make it through, who do I have to kill first? Doom Eternal reduced that to a single repetitive four button loop.
Can’t stand media that thrusts you into a zany, fantastical world where completely insane shit happens constantly, nothing makes sense, there’s no consistency and you’re supposed to somehow keep going through the fever dream of a setting for however many hours before you can piece together what’s actually going on and become invested
Needless to say I bounced off Nier: Automata really hard
Yeah, I never once felt that any scenes in Near A Tomato actually connected to one another. In a good mystery game, you make a discovery rife with questions, and then slowly answer more questions that lead to other questions. Nier is just about constant random shit involving attacks from the machine life forms - which are all promptly forgotten.
I don’t know how we’re supposed to care and worry so much about 2B and 9S dying when it literally happens once in the prologue, and the very first lines of the game are about how annoying it is to keep dying and being reborn.
I know a lot of nier automata fans irl and sometimes it’s hard to argue with them about the game
I think that the worst part about nier automata is that it tries to be all philosophical and deep while saying absolutely nothing. By being so mysterious about its world, the whole game builds up to some kind of reveal that creates a gigantic twist… But then you realize that the twist doesn’t really exist and that yeah all the shit is just random stuff.
Such a huge disappointment. And the combat is terrible imo
Suprisingly, while Omori had much MUCH more of a “random shit happening” feeling because of its setting, it had an extremely good story and I had never been that attached to characters before. So I don’t even think Nier’s problem is the fever dream feeling
Pokemon is about the universe it was created in. It was the perfect on the go game when we were children and it even had a great anime to go with it. When you were home, you watched Ash and Pikachu take on the world of pokemon. Everything looked so vibrant and cool. Then when it was time for you to go with your parents to a house party, you could play Pokemon on your Gameboy.
It’s just a nostalgia franchise now, but that’s okay. Most people are unhappy with how Game Freak is handling the role of building these games, but maybe one day they’ll make a turn.
I agree, but I also think kids nowadays find it interesting too, but hell, they find Fortnite interesting too, so maybe Palworld is gonna be the next big thing for them now (if it survives the hype and the pass of time).
A bit more about nostalgia, I remember I played Pokémon Red and obviously watched the anime too, but then I saw a magazine advertising Pokémon yellow and showing Jesse, James and Meow, I was like WTF I need to have this, plot twist never did (not physically at least) but at least I continued with Fire Red, Ruby (never finished it) Diamond and Platinum, Soul Silver and I kinda stopped there, currently playing Omega Ruby because yeah, nostalgia, oh and yeah I finished Pokémon yellow recently in Anbernic RG351V, so a very good way to achieve it if you ask me.
It would have been interesting if they released more games like Pokémon yellow (making it easier to feel we are in the anime).
I don’t play Pokemon expecting a good turn-based RPG, I just like collecting cool little monsters and making them grow. Similar games like Cassette Beasts, Monster Sanctuary, and now Palworld appeal to me for the same reason.
Elden Ring for me. The kids have all played the shit out of it and killed literally everything in the game. I hopped on for about two hours, wandered around aimlessly, died a few times, avoided everything to prevent dying, died a few more times and decided I never needed to do that again.
Elden ring is the hardest of the soulslikes imo. A company that treasures not telling you shit and loves to kill you for mistakes also giving you too much freedom to make them imo.
Not really a critique on it, just ruminating on why i think it’s the toughest one of the souls games I’ve played.
I found it to be the easiest. If you’re having trouble with a boss, you can just go somewhere else and level up or upgrade your weapon before coming back. Unless you’re at the very end and explored nearly everything, there should be plenty of other bosses you could be fighting instead. Other soulslike games tend not to have as many options and I would often end up stuck on a particular boss that I had to best because there were no other areas available.
Also spirit ashes. I know a lot of people refuse to use them, but if the game gives you something that makes the game easier and you choose not to use it then that’s on you.
It’s funny cuz you think it’s easy and i think it’s hard for the same reason haha. Dark souls games being what they are, I could never decide if i should move on or keep trying to git gud. A few times i gave up on a challenge only to find another challenge just as difficult, causing me to wonder if i could have given up on that first challenge, etc.
The comparitive lack of options in DS1 for example made it easier for me to decide how to move forward.
Anyway, just two ways of looking at the same thing. :D
Same exact experience. Then someone from Reddit messaged me some non spoiler wary game tips and I went back in and played 130 hours. It was my first souls game since PS3 Demon’s Souls. I ended up loving it. But I fucking hated it at first, and I don’t blame anyone for being turned off.
Oh gawd I wish I still had access to my Reddit account. The biggest things were how to do stats—just pumpIG to like 30 after getting enough STR and DEX to use what ya want.
Another huge thing for me was getting a weapon I actually liked. The twinblade is obtainable super early on and carried me through a loooot of the game.
Another hint was for when I felt really weak but didn’t want to grind forever, there’s a portal to a place where you can just run up and down the map, sneaking and backstabbing dudes for 1k runes each. It’s behind the Third Church of Marika, in the bushes.
I think what blocks me is doing a strength build like I always used to and not trying out things. It seems that things can be tried out a lot easier due to the many ways of buffing
With you on BotW. Love the dungeons, but in terms of the open world I never felt the oooh, the aaah, the escapism that everyone cooed about etc. Gliding was fun!
Maybe this is because I’ve never played a Zelda game before so I have no nostalgia attached to it?
Maybe this is because I’ve never played a Zelda game before so I have no nostalgia attached to it?
Don’t know about that, because I very much grew up with Zelda for the Gameboy, SNES and of course N64 and I loved them all. Maybe it’s just Breath of the Wild…
Yes but poorly. There are no real dungeons and the open world has maybe 5-6 enemies total, everything else is just a variation on color and strength. That’s a far cry from the original game.
So I was curious about this and looked it up and there are technically 8 regular enemy types (bokoblins, moblins, lizalfos, chuchu, keese, octoroks, wizzrobes, pebblits, lynel). There are then also the different types of guardians, 2 overworld bosses (Talus and Hinox, I don’t count Molduga), and the yiga.
Depending on how you cut it there are then 8 up to 13 overworld enemy types. However, the real issue is you typically only encounter 3 maybe 5 (bokoblins, moblins, lizalfos / keese, chuchu) while running around.
I think the thing people forget when talking about variety is it matters how you use it. BOTW and TOTK basically have a few set grunt types that are what you predominantly fight, and it gets boring fast (in my opinion).
Edit/Note: I didn’t count stal/cursed enemies as they’re basically the same with slight modifications.
Look a remaster should or could have obvious upgrades, sometimes it’s visuals, videos, style, controls etc. that to me is good.
But that quote specifically tells me “the game has been changed for current day sensibilities” and I hate that. I feel it takes away from what the original had in mind, for good or bad.
I understand that many media have been racist/misogynist/ageist and accept that it was a product of its time. But I don’t think it does it any good to essentially pretend that it didn’t happen and I feel we’re just pretending it isn’t what it truly is when it’s changed.
I do think remakes are different however. I feel they are taking the idea of the original but redesigning it in a way that the new designers for see.
BUT the fact is, that quote is only ever seen on media that hides the past, not remakes the future.
It does tell you that it’s been changed, though. You can typically still go and play the original game. And it enables the people affected by -isms to enjoy it when sometimes said -isms would pull them out of it for them otherwise.
And it’s not like the original intent was for people to be distracted by what would have, to the developers, have likely seemed a small or unquestioned detail. We can never truly approach a game the way its original audience did anyway because culture changes so much, and a large part the experience you have with art is what you bring to it. Thus why graphical updates can make the game look like you remember it, even though it now looks much prettier. I think these sorts of updates can be similar to that.
Granted, it’s harder to access the original game because of hardware. But even so, a lot of original intent is always lost in the process of making a remaster. I’d argue “for modern audience” updates tend to be less of a departure than changes in visual design (the different lighting in the various Myst remasters that changes the mood, the extra foliage in Shadow of the Colossus remasters) or mechanics updates (the ability to control Resident Evil like a regular game instead of via tank controls).
Edit: I think my ideal scenario would be if remasters include “modern audience” updates of all kinds, to make the game as enjoyable for new players as possible, but also that the originals be made more easily available such as by legalizing or sanctioning emulation for old games.
Interesting but I do think things are a little different:
A lot of people seem to be commenting about how a remaster is about changing atmosphere or visual changes. And I agree with you. But OP is asking specifically about games with the quote “for modern audiences” in the game and that quote is not added for the visual or control or minor game design changes, but instead specifically to tell you it’s removed the “isms” out.
I think your point about isms makes sense, it’s just that I’m of the opposing view. That I think the “isms” have been removed out is like censoring a painting or movie. Sure it’s easier to digest, but what made the media so poignant is sometimes the rawity of it.
I guess I don’t think you’re wrong, just that I think it takes away from the original media for the only reason that “it sells more if we can widen the audience”.
For me the ideal would be you could choose between the two. How the game was originally made but with the updated graphics/control/design. Or the new one that removes any isms to placate people’s sensibilities.
I don’t think however my preference would happen because it goes against the idea of “hay we can sell more if we tell everyone we removed everything controversial about the game”. So I guess your idea solution is probably the best middle ground :)
Was it System Shock? Then yeah, it probably could use some love.
Was it Turok? Then hey, HD Dinos can be cool.
Was it Okami? Then why not, giving it some polish and getting it playable on PC is worthwhile.
Was it Ty the Tasmanian Tiger, Spyro, or Crash? Then absolutely, again for having them playable on PC at the very least.
I think all of these are examples where it makes sense to give them an update because various controls or even systems of today just don’t work with the old versions. All of these examples were also done pretty well overall.
On the other hand, I’m more conflicted on games from the last 10-12 years or sooner. Especially if it’s like The Last of US Remastered where it just isn’t supported well.
But then again, I appreciate getting Spider-Man and Horizon: Zero Dawn on PC, and I believe we only got those because of the remasters? But I would not be buying another remaster of either for PC in even 10 years from today, because what point would there be?
All in all, I think there are many examples where it “is technically fine”, but if it’s not done well then there was never a point in the first place. The Tony Hawk ones kind of fit here, as they partly feel really good and partly feel really janky - it’s nice having them on PC but they are no where near as polished as the other games I mentioned
I was excited to play the remake of my all time favourite game Mafia 1, but it only lasted for about 20 minutes. They put utterly pointless additions in and the AI was somehow way dumber despite being 20 years newer.
I think I read about that remake. Did they also change the soundtrack or am I tripping? I loved Mafia 1 back in the day, and the Django Reinhardt songs in the original were iconic.
This is exactly the game that came to my mind when reading title. I loved old Mafia, but the remake? It’s not a bad game, but it lost like 90% of atmosphere original had. Like those cop chases that are utter joke that doesn’t belong to the game.
I started playing the last of us 2 remastered. I didn’t play the original (but did play 1 remastered). I don’t know if it was modified “for modern audiences”, but it would depend a lot.
Having more characters from Asian or African descent would please me. Making it look more like the (in my opinion) excellent tv series would be less great, but understandable. Removing the whole “military is bad” arc (like they did in the tv show), would suck.
Some games are so old that the technology needs to be sorely updated for modern gamers to be able to understand the controls, and “upating (the controls) for modern audiences” can be good.
Further, older games often have some pretty awful stereotypes in them that don’t need to be preserved so we can remember them.
I know Disney’s Bambi isn’t a video game, but I’ll use it as an example that’s being re-made. Bambi was made in 1942, and a massive amount of cultural references and ideas just don’t make as much sense in the modern era. There are literally things young people today would be like “what now?” in films that old. Sometimes “updating for modern audiences” is removing stuff that just doesn’t make sense anymore, or people don’t recognize or understand.
Even further, it used to be that “getting updated for modern audiences” was the norm. Anyone remember that hokey fucking Romeo & Juliet with Leonoard DiCaprio in the 90’s? Yeah, that was “updated for modern audiences” and it was a smash fucking hit. Back then, updating for modern audiences meant setting it in Verona instead of Venice and swapping swords for guns.
Like if you’re dealing with games that were always meant to frustrate and offend like Postal 2 or Conker’s Bad Fur Day or Redneck Rampage, you’re probably not gonna have a lot of people happy to “update for modern audiences” but there’s not much to update about campy schlock humor anyway.
So yeah, sometimes its not great, but I think the worries about it are overblown.
In movies there used to be a joke about how “the black guy always dies first” in action/horror movies because it held true for a long time. Black characters were given bit-roles that were quickly written out of movies. That is no longer the case, but you don’t see movies that don’t kill off black characters right away as being advertised as “updated for modern audiences” because that’s just silly.
“updating (the controls) for modern audiences” can be good.
My only experience of that is when they removed grid based movements from New N’ Tasty and forced players to use the analog, trying to walk felt horrible.
But something like the first 2 Fallouts on the other hand can really use a controls overhaul.
But something like the first 2 Fallouts on the other hand can really use a controls overhaul.
Those were literally on my mind! I know Baldur’s Gate and Baldur’s Gate II got some updated control schemes more recently, including gamepad support, but it seems my favorite Fallouts are still stuck in the past.
God damn it what I would give for a modern Fallout in the style of Baldur’s Gate 3. It breaks me how Bethesda has ruined that series.
I think you're looking for Wasteland. They shared a lot of DNA already, and they've got different senses of humor, but Wasteland still has a black comedy angle.
As in most RPGs, having more actions was always beneficial, so I for sure always had companions in Fallout, even though they were AI controlled and often got in the way. At least Wasteland just gives you control of them.
Both updating the controls, and removing stereotypes, should be optional, at most behind a parental lock.
Some historic material is evil shit, and some people may understandably not want to get exposed to it… but it shouldn’t be some censor’s decision which scholars get access to the historical originals, while everyone else only gets the PC mush of the moment.
Everyone should have the option to see as much evil as they want, no more, no less.
Going back to your Bambi example, I learned a lot about 1942 US by watching the now censored scenes, much more than by just listening to the opinions of those who condemned them.
I agree with this sentiment in respect to the idea that you’re actually trying to learn something from what you’re looking at. I agree, because I felt the same way when I watched censored WWII cartoons. If you’re willing to learn from them, that’s great, but here’s the thing.
Not everybody is taking away the same things.
What you take away from it isn’t what everyone takes from it. While you might rightfully not be a giant piece of shit yourself, there’s a lot of people who are.
My personal example is growing up with the Grand Theft Auto series. As a youth, I thought concerns with it were more or less overblown, and I was more or less right, for the most part.
However, after the torture scene in GTA 5 and talking to a wider community about it, I started to realize a lot of people weren’t learning anything good from that scene other than how to torture people, and a perverted glee in being able to do so.
And that’s where I begin to worry, because while like, I’m in the middle of an Evil playthrough of Baldur’s Gate 3, like… It’s hard to feel real “glee” at being evil. Many of the decisions I make tend to make me go “awwww” inside, but I tell myself “I can’t get caught up in that if it’s an evil playthrough.” And in that sense is where I agree, because like, yeah, I should be allowed to play evil if I want.
But the reality also is that a lot of people don’t care about the nuance and are looking for reasons to be pieces of shit, looking for dark things to make fun of, and are generally going to take horrible justifications from what they do learn, and yes, that does worry me a bit.
while everyone else only gets the PC mush of the moment.
You realize that while there might be some hamfisted attempts at this, that not all of them are so hamfisted, right? This statement doesn’t inspire confidence that you see that.
The commentary said they wanted to do rival criminal gangs, which would have made a lot more sense than the construction magnates they went with, but my guess is they realised West Side Story already did it.
It was on PS+ while I had the service so I tried it for the brawler part but it’s like a good anime with a murder mystery plot, it has elements of GTA and Phoenix Wright mashed together with a brawler, and the story is focused on a high school so you get to beat the ever-living snot outta bratty teenagers which is really cathartic.
And despite the serious tone of the main plot, the game is very goofy and over-the-top (again, it’s like playing an anime; complete with all the tropes you’d expect from an anime) and has me laughing my ass off pretty regularly. I had to actually buy a copy because I have barely scratched the surface of it and I’m not renewing my PS+ sub any time soon. Sucks that I got it on sale and the one DLC that adds content is twice as much as what I paid for the main game, cuz I know I will end up wanting it lol
Cataclysm dark days ahead is to zombie survival what doom is to demon shooting or monster hunter is to monster hunting. Project zomboid? Can’t even play that garbage now. Cataclysm actually gives you the reigns. Out in the wild? Use the very deep crafting system to go from practically neolithic to the iron age out of a cabin you found . Not strong enough to take on dozens of zombies you’ve attracted raiding a city? Climb a drain pipe and run across the roof tops. Tired of living out of a run down cabin you found? Build an in depth base with it’s own power grid or build your own car. Or train.
Rain world is one of the best games ever, reaching the highest point in that game is an experience everyone should feel.
Lunacid is an old school dungeon crawler with vibes that are completely immaculate.
Kenshi is a genre all it’s own. Be a wuxia style master of whatever style of combat you like most (I’m partial to martial arts and punching off limbs), build up your base, create an army, and go to war against the holy nation.
Cassette Beasts is a monster tamer that is full of charm, had the best soundtrack of any game last year, and had great gameplay to boot. Comparing it to Pokemon (because duh), the type match ups matter so much more due to a reactive system that can change up gameplay instead of just altering damage. the fact that it went unnoticed last year is a crime!
bin.pol.social
Gorące