Game developers (at least those who make FPSs) really haven't moved from the kill-everything-that-moves style of gameplay. Max Payne 2, Far Cry, etc. had their own little advancements, but overall it was still the same "you vs. the world" scenario. But "it's a sequel to Doom" is not an excuse, it's a fact. It's not GTA 5 or Civilization 4, it's about fighting Hellspawn. Of course, Id could have added bullet time, vehicles, and other features, but again, it was all about fast-paced combat.

Again, it's basically style over substance. Doom 3 has the best zombies I've seen in a game, as well as a variety of both new and classic enemies. The lighting and shadow effects worked well, and the inability to weild a flashlight and weapon was part of the tactics.

Half Life 1 was a great game, but I felt it was overrated, even back then, though I do admit I was into the Rainbow 6 series at the moment. But let's be honest here, Half Life's strength was in its mod community, not in its gameplay. If it weren't for Counterstrike and other mods, the game would have disappeared from hard drives after a few months or so.

But Half Life 2 is just a series of generic FPS cliches from start to finish with no style of its own. That's my main complaint. And yet there are people out there who are raving about it being the best game ever, and how revolutionary it is. People complain about Doom 3 being too old-fashioned yet they have no problem HL2's standard storyline and gameplay. The game gives you wide open spaces and various vehicles, but are you allowed to explore? No, just stay on the path to trigger the expected combine attacks.