CJ_Parker wrote on May 9, 2016, 12:35:
It applies more than ever. Back in the day when id games were PC exclusive and Carmack was still on board, people bought the latest id game not just for the game but also as benchmarks for what is the visual state of the art in gaming. I was one of them. I wasn't even that interested in the Dooms or Quake 1 + 2 or Q3A as a game but I did not want to miss out on the graphical spectacle.
This new Doom? Laughable garbage. Low detail, slow pace, little variety, everything is low res, zoomed in and XXL for controller friendliness, same goes for the lack of vertical gameplay, everything happens in a narrow band in front of the player so controllers basically only need to be moved left/right and only slightly up/down.
The console compromises here are plain as day to see for anyone with an eye for the analytical detail of why a game is made as it is and I'm more than happy to share my expertise with y'all (even if most of ya don't deserve it! ).
You're complaining about a lack of vertical gameplay in a Doom game... which never had a variety of vertical gameplay (beyond a few platforms or stairs). In fact, you couldn't even mouselook up and down in classic Doom or Doom 2...
A lot of people could argue that too much vertical play is actually UN-Doomish and not something they want. And "controller friendliness"? The original Doom had how many controls exactly? Weapon swaps, strafe, shoot... not even reload! And the display... huge numbers for health and ammo and armor.
Did we play the same classic Doom?