Support NeoGAF

[phil_t98]

Doom Eternal's primary focus is to increase player engagement, won't feature deathmatch to keep players "happy"

In an interview with GamesIndustry, id Software’s Hugo Martin revealed that Doom Eternal’s main focus is to increase player engagement. And while this may be a cool way to improve the game’s single-player experience, I am a bit worried about its MP mode. Oh, and let’s not forget that the game...

www.dsogaming.com

At least we won't have people moaning they don't want crossplay lol

 

[Xdrive05]

Anyone know if the Invasion mode is still in the game? They demoed it a couple years ago but I don't think they mentioned it since then, even when showing off that "versus" multiplayer mode recently...

 

[Northeastmonk]

I just want the campaign. I think the battle mode is useless. I'm not everyone, but that part of any game is boring to me. Video games are great until you see these developers follow the same steps as everyone else. Then its hard to decide if they have a classic on their hands or just some copy-pasta of another game.

 

[anthraticus]

It would be nice if they make some proper og Doom like levels....not that arena shit that was in the last game.

Don't care about mp/online.

 

[Golgo 13]

Micro transactions being announced in this game is incredibly disappointing. Bethesda has zero fucking shame.
You can bet your ass the next Elder Scrolls will be CHALK FULL of this bullshit.

 

[ymoc]

Yup keep making excuses for the companies that make millions upon millions.

Us plebs should be hapoy with the slop that is fed to us. Better keep consuming you pigs!

Dude ALL you are doing is handwaving microtransactions.

CS GO and Siege are basically f2p games, and yes inclusion of MTX HAS been detrimental to its gameplay. The only reason they exist is to make MORE money, not to keep the games afloat. Ubisoft can pay to keep siege afloat with their millions they made from AC MTX.

Sadly clowns like yourself keep making excuses because these devs are obviously going home hungry, having to feed their six kids pieces of bread while huddling together to get whatever warmth is left.

Can you please fuck off? Cynical? No bro,im realistic af.

I'm not your bro. You can take your insults somewhere else and learn some manners.

 

[Teslerum]

I'm not your bro. You can take your insults somewhere else and learn some manners.

Can you please take your arrogance and *holier than thou* attitude somewhere else.

Learn some manners yourself.

 

[The_Observer]

The more I hear/see about this game the more disappointed I become. This interview is embarassing. I liked the MP in Doom 2016, though I know I'm in the minority, there is like 1 in 100 MP games that I enjoy at least a bit.
Doom 2016 was perfect, they should have just added more maps, enemies, weapons, glory kills with weapons, improve the MP side a bit (like collectable weapons instead of loadouts) and call it a day in like 1 year ago. It feels too little too late now. Though obviously I'm a Doom fan so I will buy it anyway...

 

[iconmaster]

According to the developers, deathmatch discourages those that are not good in the game.

I mean…they're not wrong.

 

[ymoc]

Can you please take your arrogance and *holier than thou* attitude somewhere else.

Learn some manners yourself.

I don't understand what you want. That I should also "fuck off" in reply? I though this is a discussion board where we discuss different views in a mature manner. Maybe my manners are different from other countries. You can give some pointers to me if you would be so kind.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Engage the Wallets!

 

[Explosive Zombie]

 

[Teslerum]

I don't understand what you want. That I should also "fuck off" in reply? I though this is a discussion board where we discuss different views in a mature manner. Maybe my manners are different from other countries. You can give some pointers to me if you would be so kind.

If you want the short answer:

I'd rather talk to a guy who calls me a piece of shit than someone who thinks he's better than anyone else.
And that's your entire way of talking so far, belittling people for their use of language or other, portraying yourself as the *justified* and worst of all using backhanded insults a ton while pretending it's the other party who's got no manners.

So, yes. That's my problem.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

The implication there seems to be that a person who would call you a piece of shit doesn't see himself as better than you???

 

[Teslerum]

The implication there seems to be that a person who would call you a piece of shit doesn't see himself as better than you???

I've had tons of people calling me a piece of shit I've had a beer with a few hours later. Some of them are good friends of mine. Nobody's perfect, but a person isn't determined by what they are saying in the heat of the moment. (And there's a good chance you may actually have been a pos in that moment on reflection). Honesty I can always respect.

 

[BusierDonkey]

According to the developers, deathmatch discourages those that are not good in the game.

there are going to be people who aim and shoot better than you and there's pretty much nothing you can do about that. That made death a frustrating experience because it meant you were just better than me.

I'm usually encouraged to become better at a game if I suck shit. If I can't I usually appreciate the skill of the people I am trying to catch up to. This is a product of the "everyone is special" world we now inhabit. How long until every time I press a button the game congratulates me for doing so? I get it that a big part of the gaming community enjoys games where you merely have to press a corresponding button to make the character execute some wild acrobatic move so that the game can appear exciting and dynamic without needing any gameplay of any value, but there are still people around that prefer games to require actual skill.

I've never gotten into the arena shooter scene but I love racing games, which are similarly skill-based games. I love the aspect of racing other people head to head, with the more skilled player winning. Over the decades I've learned I'm just a hair over mediocre at racing games. I can hold a drift with my knee while spinning Pokestops and drinking a Slurpee in my actual car, but fuck me if I can even place in the top half of the field when playing Project Cars 2 or Assetto Corsa with high skill level players. This doesn't make me dislike the game, as when I do place well I feel a sense of accomplishment doing so. If they made it so that I get a pity boost, or they changed the mechanics of racing so that I could trick my way into winning a race against a better opponent, I would outright hate it.

I don't even know if deathmatch was good in Doom, and therefore have no idea if it's removal is actually big deal, but the reasoning given is straight from the banana factory.

 

[stickkidsam]

Can we stop with the "FUCK YOU" shitposts at least?
Everyone is tripping over themselves when it comes to shitting on Resetera for their toxic mentality, yet here we go with the same juvenile attitude.
You're being triggered by words like "make players happy" for god's sake. I'm sorry that a perceived (?) streamlining of a game will diminish your chances to own noobs or something? And we don't even know if that's the case.
You don't like something about the development of a game? Fine, but articulate it like a mentally developed adult without resorting to insults.
How can you even expect any devs to join a community like this? What for? For shitposts like this?

Look, I played the shit out of Doom 1 multiplayer with my brother when we were growing up. It was nice. Doom 2016 multiplayer didn't do anything for me though. It was really really mediocre.
Everyone is frothing at their mouth when the developer dares to think about taking the formula in another direction. Now everyone is acting personally wronged, except I bet half of you didn't even try it out, or abandoned it in a week (I'm sorry for the 3 of you guys who actually still play it and I sympathise). But let's be honest here, Doom 2016 multiplayer was DEAD ON ARRIVAL. The playerbase is tiny.
Why should a developer commit to the same thing and expect a return on their investment? Yes it would make a tiny portion of the hardcore fans happy, but it really doesn't bring in revenue. And that's really honest. People need to get paid.

The only reason for microtransactions is to milk more money out of the game; it has nothing to do with making the gameplay better. There was a time BEFORE this ridiculous business model and wouldn't ya know it, people still got paid. It's a modern trend that chases that dopamine dollar under the guise of "player engagement" and replacing game modes with new ones designed around paid power ups isn't done in the service of the game or its audience. This dev may have zero faith in the player to improve, but any game worth its salt has rewarded the player for learning and understanding the gameplay; not learning and understanding the in-game shop.

You preach civility but all you did in this post is misconstrue people's grievances and dismiss them. I mean holy shit you compare people saying "fuck you" to ResetEra's ban-happy, holier than thou, mind reading religion. Maybe check your own mentality before trying to police others dude. If a dev can't deal with sour attitudes or someone throwing around the F bomb in disappointment then they have no business being on the internet, let alone NeoGaf.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

The only reason for microtransactions is to milk more money out of the game; it has nothing to do with making the gameplay better. There was a time BEFORE this ridiculous business model and wouldn't ya know it, people still got paid. It's a modern trend that chases that dopamine dollar under the guise of "player engagement" and replacing game modes with new ones designed around paid power ups isn't done in the service of the game or its audience. This dev may have zero faith in the player to improve, but any game worth its salt has rewarded the player for learning and understanding the gameplay; not learning and understanding the in-game shop.

You preach civility but all you did in this post is misconstrue people's grievances and dismiss them. I mean holy shit you compare people saying "fuck you" to ResetEra's ban-happy, holier than thou, mind reading religion. Maybe check your own mentality before trying to police others dude. If a dev can't deal with sour attitudes or someone throwing around the F bomb in disappointment then they have no business being on the internet, let alone NeoGaf.

The time before MTX games generally cost less to make as well. Yet still sold for exorbitant prices. NES games could retail for 100 dollars.

 

[Fuz]

The only reason for microtransactions is to milk more money out of the game; it has nothing to do with making the gameplay better.

Are we at the point where we need this to be plainly stated?

MTX make the gameplay WORSE, because it gets designed around monetization.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Are we at the point where we need this to be plainly stated?

MTX make the gameplay WORSE, because it gets designed around monetization.

Did they say it would be in campaign or multiplayer only, though? I agree with your premise but as someone uninterested in MP from the get-go the MTX will affect me as much as Gears 5 did (lol @ Gears MP) or many other recent examples. I think fighting it on principle is the right thing to do but if I have zero interest in a game's MP I'm not going to boycott over how they handle that portion.

 

[Petrae]

The time before MTX games generally cost less to make as well. Yet still sold for exorbitant prices. NES games could retail for 100 dollars.

The move to disc-based media tempered this problem, dropping prices to around $50USD (before "development costs" pushed prices 20% higher at the beginning of Gen7). Now, manufacturing costs are tempered even further by the move to digital distribution.

And yet... as digital distribution accelerates toward being the preferred mode of purchase, microtransactions and other shitty money-making schemes have become standard. Instead of one Collector's Edition SKU, many releases have two or three of these under "Deluxe" and "Ultimate" editions... and, even then, there's the "I have way too much money to waste" actual Collector's Editions that cost as much as a video game console.

I'm sorry, but I have zero sympathy when people cry poor for developers and publishers— especially in the AAA sector, where money flows in like wine. They sold their souls to investors in order to get richer quickly, and are now beholden to said investors to infect all of their games with shit that constantly tries to reach into your wallet like perpetual pickpockets.

What's sad is that there's no way of escaping it now. Even Nintendo has fallen prey to the trend. Consumers are left to convince themselves that this shit is okay— that it's standard or necessary— because they don't have the collective backbone to say no and force change themselves. They accept it, while some Stockholm Syndrome-affected players take on the unnecessary duty of defending this shit because it's now in their favorite games from their favorite game-makers.

It's truly sad what video games have become in the Modern Era.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

The move to disc-based media tempered this problem, dropping prices to around $50USD (before "development costs" pushed prices 20% higher at the beginning of Gen7). Now, manufacturing costs are tempered even further by the move to digital distribution.

And yet... as digital distribution accelerates toward being the preferred mode of purchase, microtransactions and other shitty money-making schemes have become standard. Instead of one Collector's Edition SKU, many releases have two or three of these under "Deluxe" and "Ultimate" editions... and, even then, there's the "I have way too much money to waste" actual Collector's Editions that cost as much as a video game console.

I'm sorry, but I have zero sympathy when people cry poor for developers and publishers— especially in the AAA sector, where money flows in like wine. They sold their souls to investors in order to get richer quickly, and are now beholden to said investors to infect all of their games with shit that constantly tries to reach into your wallet like perpetual pickpockets.

What's sad is that there's no way of escaping it now. Even Nintendo has fallen prey to the trend. Consumers are left to convince themselves that this shit is okay— that it's standard or necessary— because they don't have the collective backbone to say no and force change themselves. They accept it, while some Stockholm Syndrome-affected players take on the unnecessary duty of defending this shit because it's now in their favorite games from their favorite game-makers.

It's truly sad what video games have become in the Modern Era.

You do realize the production costs are much higher now regardless of less discs being produced, right? And it's mostly only indie games that can go completely without physical disc copies. If you look up the most expensive games ever made they're all recently produced games.

"Say you're a massive publisher that's trying to compete with the Red Dead Redemptions and Destinys of the world. You're making a military shooter, of course. In order to hit the graphical fidelity that your fans expect, you need a staff of at least 400, and you need to give them three years (36 months). 400 * 36 * 10,000 = $144,000,000. And that's before the inevitable delay, not to mention the marketing. Those CGI commercials aren't gonna pay for themselves."

Why Video Games Cost So Much To Make

Video game publishers are notoriously secretive about the budgets behind their games, but when a number does slip out, it can be shocking. Games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, which is tough to fathom—until you do the math.

kotaku.com

 

[Tarin02543]

Wow. Just stop making videogames then.

It's over.

 

[Petrae]

You do realize the production costs are much higher now regardless of less discs being produced, right? And it's mostly only indie games that can go completely without physical disc copies. If you look up the most expensive games ever made they're all recently produced games.

"Say you're a massive publisher that's trying to compete with the Red Dead Redemptions and Destinys of the world. You're making a military shooter, of course. In order to hit the graphical fidelity that your fans expect, you need a staff of at least 400, and you need to give them three years (36 months). 400 * 36 * 10,000 = $144,000,000. And that's before the inevitable delay, not to mention the marketing. Those CGI commercials aren't gonna pay for themselves."

Why Video Games Cost So Much To Make

Video game publishers are notoriously secretive about the budgets behind their games, but when a number does slip out, it can be shocking. Games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, which is tough to fathom—until you do the math.

kotaku.com

GTA and CoD sell millions upon millions of copies at launch— and, in the case of GTA at least, long after that. They make that money back in a month, or two tops. The rest is gravy.

Let's also not forget that, even with physical copies, costs have been pared back. Instruction manuals are no longer a thing, so at least the cost of printing has gone down. Publishers have also cut way back on physical/tangible extras that we saw in the past; preorders and many special editions have gone with digital/worthless goods instead of tangible items, while only the super-expensive Collector's Editions in many cases have physical stuff (outside of steelbook cases).

Not that there isn't a cost of doing business that must be recouped, but it's often overlooked that there are far more potential consumers now to sell games to— which means far more revenue up front, before actions to make up potential shortfalls are needed. This is why the industry has become risk-averse; it cannot afford to take chances and weather potential flops when tens of millions have dollars are being sunk into these titles.

Microtransactions are unnecessary revenue overkill when you consider all of the avenues of potential revenue that already exist.

$60 USD per unit launches.
$80/$100 USD per unit special editions.
$150+ Collector's Editions.
Game-extending DLC/Season Passes.
Product endorsement deals.

If your business is still losing money despite these avenues, then you're doing it wrong. Dial back those budgets and stay within your means. You don't have to spend $150 million per game. You choose to, and do so at the peril of fleecing and fucking with the customer base when begging for money.

 

[VertigoOA]

Not a bad thing. Doom 2016's pvp was an abomination. No one played that shit so let's stop lying to ourselves. K thanks

 

[Barakov]

IF the single player is as good as the last game's then I'm in. Player engagement is just a term they throw out there to charge you for stuff you don't need. Also.....

I'm not going to pass on the DOOM laser sword just because a dev said something stupid.

 

[stickkidsam]

I feel like it's important to note that I think you can buy a game with micro-transactions without supporting the shitty business model. Don't participate in it and give feedback through whatever avenues you can so studios and publishers can see what you bought the game for. Boycotts alone won't tell the big bucks what went wrong.

You do realize the production costs are much higher now regardless of less discs being produced, right? And it's mostly only indie games that can go completely without physical disc copies. If you look up the most expensive games ever made they're all recently produced games.

"Say you're a massive publisher that's trying to compete with the Red Dead Redemptions and Destinys of the world. You're making a military shooter, of course. In order to hit the graphical fidelity that your fans expect, you need a staff of at least 400, and you need to give them three years (36 months). 400 * 36 * 10,000 = $144,000,000. And that's before the inevitable delay, not to mention the marketing. Those CGI commercials aren't gonna pay for themselves."

Why Video Games Cost So Much To Make

Video game publishers are notoriously secretive about the budgets behind their games, but when a number does slip out, it can be shocking. Games like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, which is tough to fathom—until you do the math.

kotaku.com

"Fans" are not the ones pushing these graphical standards higher and higher, nor are they making the devs shell out millions for overblown marketing strategies. That is a self fulfilling cycle on the part of the industry and they are making the gameplay, along with all of those "fans" they care so much about, pay for it.

As Petrae pointed out so well, they're doing it wrong. Development costs have artificially exploded because of a bullshit mentality that bigger is always better. If you make a good game, ESPECIALLY with a recognizable name like many AAA studios have, people will buy it.

 

[Phase]

It's too bad that arena shooters aren't really popular anymore and that devs aren't interested in investing in them without MTX bs. Besides bf2/3, arena fps are the only multiplayer games that hold my interest. And I'm talking smaller arenas, smaller player counts, power weapons/other things on the maps that are fought over. Some good recent games just never really took off.

Law Breakers (loved this one)
Nexuiz
Reflex
Quake: Champions (decent)
Unreal
Splitgate (is alright)

Shit makes me sad. I'm still waiting for the BR's to leave so maybe arena fps can make a comeback. It's obvious Doom's mp is going to continue to suck with this dev.

 

[Phase]

Also, Tribes Ascend

 

[M0G]

People didn't like the Doom 2016 multiplayer because it hogged all the season pass content. It was actually a lot of fun and would have been more so if it'd had a server browser. I can't say I like the sound of the new multiplayer in Eternal.

 

[Fake]

Its so hard to ask Quake 1 deathmatch?

 

[WhiskeyDiver]

Something new to master each level...keep players engaged from start to finish...mutiplayer...

Huh. RIP AND TEAR. MORE RIP AND TEAR EACH LEVEL TILL END OF GAME. POST CREDITS IS TEAR AND RIP. Something to master....each level....INCREASED RIP AND TEARS PER MINUTE. RIP AND TEAR BLOOD CATCHER AND THEN DRINKER CONTAINER. MORE. UH. RIP AND TEAR?

Multiplayer is tough...REVEL IN RIP AND TEAR EVEN AS ENEMIES. RIP AND TEAR WITH RESPECT. RIP AND TEAR WITH RAGE. RIP AND TEAR IF PEOPLE TRY TO HUG AND RP. RIP HUG AND TEAR RP. RIP AND TEAR MATCH. Its like deathmatch, but score is based upon how many meters of ripping and how many yards of tearing each team does.

If doom were a 50 question exam, it would be difficult to fail, since the most correct answer is always the same. RIP FOR STYLE. TEAR FOR GLORY. AND TO BRING THEM TOGETHER IN HOLY MATRIMONY. RIP AND TEAR.

Repetition never felt so good...but always right at the same time.

 

[Walledhouse]

It's too bad that arena shooters aren't really popular anymore...

You are a person of distinction; your list a bastion of fine tastes in a cold, dead world.

Quake Champions, for real though, had a small handful of things I loathed. Perhaps QC acted as a test-bed for including Deathmatch in this title?

I started playing QC for free at launch. I quickly noted how easily I dominated everyone during my first match; and noted on the post-match that my opponents had paid characters and cosmetics. "Fuck!" I cried after the match finished. "They were just a bunch of bots!"

I had such a mood whiplash then, my high gone completely when I realised I'd been tricked. I recalled that when Player Unknown's Battlegrounds launched on mobile there were 'player-like' bots inserted into matches to trick new players into thinking they were good at the game.

I went online, got vocal and tried to find any official acknowledgement of bots. I found an offical statement: Bots won't be in at launch but we might add them if we get enough community interest.

I refused to believe it. Others dismissed it as some warm-up feature that disappears after your early matches. So I played more. The same sets of names, all exotic cosmetics. Skill swinging widely match-per-match. One round the same bots I trounced destroyed me with inhuman ability. Occasionally someone playing the free characters joined and you could tell it was human, but the pervasiveness of the bots attempting to convince me that the game wasn't dead on arrival was too deep.

Wow, I'm mad and sad.

 

[TUROK]

"Fans" are not the ones pushing these graphical standards higher and higher

Gamers have been whining about bad graphics and losing their collective minds over good graphics since gaming was a thing, but feel free to believe whatever dumb shit you want.

 

[stickkidsam]

Gamers have been whining about bad graphics and losing their collective minds over good graphics since gaming was a thing, but feel free to believe whatever dumb shit you want.

lmfao way to miss the point bruh. Yeah, no shit gamers whine about graphics; gamers whine about everything. You may notice however that if the game itself is good (I.E. solid gameplay without game breaking bugs), regardless of graphical fidelity, the game is probably going to succeed. If the game fails, the likelihood that it's because it wasn't the most CUTTING EDGE of graphics is zero. The people who wouldn't buy a game merely because it doesn't match the highest standards that hardware can pull off are a small percentage of the gaming population. I mean for fucks sake look at Nintendo. They've always been behind the curb on hardware, yet they manage to succeed with their games on artistic direction and great gameplay.

 

[TUROK]

lmfao way to miss the point bruh. Yeah, no shit gamers whine about graphics; gamers whine about everything. You may notice however that if the game itself is good (I.E. solid gameplay without game breaking bugs), regardless of graphical fidelity, the game is probably going to succeed. If the game fails, the likelihood that it's because it wasn't the most CUTTING EDGE of graphics is zero. The people who wouldn't buy a game merely because it doesn't match the highest standards that hardware can pull off are a small percentage of the gaming population. I mean for fucks sake look at Nintendo. They've always been behind the curb on hardware, yet they manage to succeed with their games on artistic direction and great gameplay.

Good games fail all the time. Beyond Good and Evil, Metal Arms, Psychonauts, Oddworld Stranger's Wrath, Titanfall 2, The Evil Within 2, and so on and so on and so on.

Your Nintendo example doesn't hold up because even they continue to improve on graphical fidelity. Gamers are drawn to new tech like fireflies to light. It's why games like Doom, Quake, and Crysis captivated people's attention, and why the industry scrambled to catch up to these advancements the moment those respective games were released, because gamers LOVE shiny new shit.

 

[Shaqazooloo]

It' really getting harder and harder for me to justify a full price purchase these days when the devs "promote" mtx so agressively. Do they believe people want that? Why do they speak so open about it?

Maybe they do. Don't 2k, Activision and EA make alot of money off of microtransactions?

 

[stickkidsam]

Good games fail all the time. Beyond Good and Evil, Metal Arms, Psychonauts, Oddworld Stranger's Wrath, Titanfall 2, The Evil Within 2, and so on and so on and so on.

Your Nintendo example doesn't hold up because even they continue to improve on graphical fidelity. Gamers are drawn to new tech like fireflies to light. It's why games like Doom, Quake, and Crysis captivated people's attention, and why the industry scrambled to catch up to these advancements the moment those respective games were released, because gamers LOVE shiny new shit.

No shit Nintendo continues to improve on graphical fidelity. What kind of rebuttal is that? Again, my point is that they are succeeding despite not emphasizing CUTTING EDGE GRAPHICS on their games. So yeah my point DOES hold up.

Where did I say that good games don't fail? I specifically pointed out that they do fail, but that if they did, the reason isn't going to be because the game doesn't render individual pubic hairs.

 

[TUROK]

No shit Nintendo continues to improve on graphical fidelity. What kind of rebuttal is that? Again, my point is that they are succeeding despite not emphasizing CUTTING EDGE GRAPHICS on their games. So yeah my point DOES hold up.

They're cutting edge graphics as far as Nintendo games go.

Where did I say that good games don't fail? I specifically pointed out that they do fail, but that if they did, the reason isn't going to be because the game doesn't render individual pubic hairs.

Lots of games are lost in the shuffle because they didn't stand out from the pack in one way or another. Who are you to say that in this saturated as fuck market, things have not captured the public eye due to "shinier", better looking games that steal the spotlight?

Graphics absolutely are a piece of the puzzle. Maybe not for EVERY gamer and EVERY game, but a large portion of the industry is driven by this continuous demand for better graphical fidelity.

 

[stickkidsam]

They're cutting edge graphics as far as Nintendo games go.

Yeah sure, but that's only within the context of Nintendo products. Do you think that the people who aren't buying games because of graphic fidelity are going to give Nintendo that excuse? Nintendo has always gotten flak for their specs but that has not stopped them excelling with their art direction. THAT is what will sell people on a game; not hardcore graphics.

Lots of games are lost in the shuffle because they didn't stand out from the pack in one way or another. Who are you to say that in this saturated as fuck market, things have not captured the public eye due to "shinier", better looking games that steal the spotlight?

Graphics absolutely are a piece of the puzzle. Maybe not for EVERY gamer and EVERY game, but a large portion of the industry is driven by this continuous demand for better graphical fidelity.

Again yeah, a large portion of the industry has a drive for the best graphical prowess of the bunch. That is driven by the industry itself though. If indie games haven't already proven this I don't know what will. You can sell a game on its gameplay and personality. You don't need to have the best graphics in the industry to make a name for yourself because having great graphics isn't anything special. What matters is having good gameplay and of course, a lot of luck (or money).

I am but a single dude putting out his read on the situation. You don't have to a agree with me. I just think that most of the gaming population doesn't value hardcore graphics as much as the fat cats pushing that narrative think. I do believe, however, that if you want to have the best shot at a successful game, you should be aiming at great gameplay and a solid art direction, top of the line graphics be damned.

 

[CuteFaceJay]

I'm not your bro. You can take your insults somewhere else and learn some manners.

Not a bad thing. Doom 2016's pvp was an abomination. No one played that shit so let's stop lying to ourselves. K thanks

Lets be real though, Everyone was playing that BR crap known as PUBGEEEEE and then swiftly onto Fortnite. The folks who didn't stick with Doom MP were trash and just got shit on. It's that simple

 

[ymoc]

If you want the short answer:

I'd rather talk to a guy who calls me a piece of shit than someone who thinks he's better than anyone else.
And that's your entire way of talking so far, belittling people for their use of language or other, portraying yourself as the *justified* and worst of all using backhanded insults a ton while pretending it's the other party who's got no manners.

So, yes. That's my problem.

Yah it's your choice of course, as is mine. You felt offended by my attitude which is fair, but it goes both ways. I feel that name calling is completely pointless but hey, everyone likes to talk differently. Though you really go far with assuming my bad intentions. Not cool.

The only reason for microtransactions is to milk more money out of the game; it has nothing to do with making the gameplay better. There was a time BEFORE this ridiculous business model and wouldn't ya know it, people still got paid. It's a modern trend that chases that dopamine dollar under the guise of "player engagement" and replacing game modes with new ones designed around paid power ups isn't done in the service of the game or its audience. This dev may have zero faith in the player to improve, but any game worth its salt has rewarded the player for learning and understanding the gameplay; not learning and understanding the in-game shop.

You preach civility but all you did in this post is misconstrue people's grievances and dismiss them. I mean holy shit you compare people saying "fuck you" to ResetEra's ban-happy, holier than thou, mind reading religion. Maybe check your own mentality before trying to police others dude. If a dev can't deal with sour attitudes or someone throwing around the F bomb in disappointment then they have no business being on the internet, let alone NeoGaf.

Im sorry you feel that. I really don't try to miscontrue other's grievances. There is a place for honest critique, I just got the problem with the shitposts. I don't know why you feel so offended by that. The fuck you comment was my disappointment with the shitposting.
I agree that micotransactions are a way to "milk more money". I never said it makes gameplay better. So you're old enough to know better. You're telling me that a game cost in the 90s is equal to today? Today we're deep in corporate capitalism, it's the reality. Growth must be achieved. Scales are 100x larger than before. Before a team of 25 was considered huge. Now that's indie tier level. Game industry is a volatile place. A quality product doesn't guarantee success. Just look at Dishonored 2, Pray, Deus Ex: MD... Everyone thought it was a slam dunk. Then they bombed.
I'm sorry but the days of shareware games are over. It was awesome to get (usually the best) third of a game for free. But the market was young and really empty compared to today.

Let's be real for a minute: don't pretend like there's a uniform way to implement microtransactions. You have the absulute worst of the worst scummy tier with EA with NBA titles and such. On the other spectrum you got titles like Rainbow Six: Siege or CS:GO. You have microtransactions which DO NOTHING TO NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE GAMPLAY. Unless a weapon skin somehow makes your aim better, then I guess I'm an idiot.
Cosmetic microtransactions are as entrepreneurial as you can get without being a dick in a capitalistic society. Sure, it'd love the dev much more if it didn't have any. Who "wants" to spend money on content? But don't pretend it's in the same league as the bad practices.

I do agree that microtransactions don't belong in a Doom game but I'm not gonna whine about it like you if they're cosmetic .

 

[DGrayson]

Ok lets keep the poster vs poster out of the thread. Your points have been made.

Lets focus on the discussion of "player engagement"

 

[SweetShark]

With all honesty I am not interested at all for the multiplayer. I am more interested to the possibility of Demon cameos from other games.

However I respect they want to offer different play styles for the people to check which is suitable for each of them.
Teamwork and strategy? Demons.
Speed and reflexes? Doom Slayer

Sadly I don't quite understand the logic just because they made this change automatically means less happy players. Wtf even this means? The Devs made these changes to make more casual players happy, right?

 

[andreymagnus]

Meh. I think DOOM 2016 creators had more creative control. And there were people whose ideas made that game so good. They might have gone or being fired since DOOM Eternal doesn't seem as good as reboot. There are too much "bethesda alike elements" in sequel. And it does not sound good to me

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Meh. I think DOOM 2016 creators had more creative control. And there were people whose ideas made that game so good. They might have gone or being fired since DOOM Eternal doesn't seem as good as reboot. There are too much "bethesda alike elements" in sequel. And it does not sound good to me

Yeah, uh, no. That's total bs, the people who made Doom 2016 special are still there and by accounts from people who have played demos of the game they've bettered the game and evolved it in meaningful ways. Adding MTX or changing multiplayer is pretty separate from the stellar 2016 campaign. Though you're sort of right because Doom 2016 multiplayer wasn't done in-house and this time it is, so if you were a fan of that outsourced garbage, yes, different people made this.

 

[Gargus]

Doom deathmatch is the only thing that keeps me playing after I finish the campaign. Granted I don't play it real long but I like doom deathmatch.

 

[stickkidsam]

How does one say "Player Investment" without feeling a forearm creep up your ass?

 

[Caffeine]

my engagement is at zero with no deathmatch.