Was it really that bad?

Was it really that bad?

no

I liked it

no, it is unironically one of the favourite games. im also disappointed d44m didnt go the horror route because we still got the original dooms and there was no way this new doom was going to top them in terms of action

What do you mean? It was good.

Well good thing it did.

People constantly say it was bad on Sup Forums.

half life type beginning sequence and darkness gimmick to hide scripted as fuck levels. boring as hell after the first two hours, the game doesn't take off at all.
>but muh survival gameplay
fuck you faggots, it's doom of course I expected a brutal fast paced shooter, fuck you fag ass pieces of shit

Sup Forums are contrarian faggots, the opposite is always true

>it's doom of course I expected a brutal fast paced shooter
I guess you weren't alive when Doom 3 was released.

Yes. The pistol sounds like a watery diarrhoea, shotgun sounds like a tincan and plasma rifle is literally pew-pew.
Decent graphics and spooky, though.

So why didn't more FPS games take this games sprint mechanic? For a horror based shooter I feel it could work.

Don't pretend the old Dooms were better than 4 in terms of action.
>but its klaaassik!
I know.

Characters look like clay.

>this games sprint mechanic?
what, you mean infinite sprint? mars base interiors are so small and the stamina meter depletes so slowly its practically infinite.

>The graphics on this early 2000s game isn't up to par with our modern standards

Well but also you hold the button and move faster while still being able to shoot, even strafe and shoot faster. I don't think I have ever played another shooter that does exactly that.

You can compare them to half-life 2, which came out around the same time. Doom 3 npcs really do look lifeless and clay compared to it. But thats okay because characters werent a big deal in doom 3, lighting was

The fact that you can only have several enemies on the screen at any given time already shows how much slower d44ms action is. Its still my goty of 2016 but its not better than the originals from a purely gameplay perspective

>can only have several
I don't know what you're talking about, I don't remember anything like that. Even if so, it's still definitely not slower than the original.

>the amount of enemies on screen shows you how fast the game is
Wut? I don't think that's true. Dynasty Warriors, which is a game with hundreds of enemies on screen is slower than for example Devil May Cry 3 on Turbo mode, which only has a select few ones at once.

I guess you weren't paying attention to all the people slagging the game at the time and lauding Painkiller instead

>it's still definitely not slower than the original.
lol
you should probably play the originals first before commenting on them

THE SHOTGUN SUCKED ASS

They really changed the gameplay, but at least it had a really cool engine that complemented the gameplay well.

Nu-Doom doesn't have bad graphics or bad gameplay per se, but it feels like "remember Doom?! Well here's a 2016 SO BRUtAL TM game with Doom references". Cool music though

sounds like underage opinions
Doom3 was a great game.

ending and story are garbage

>shoot enemy at point-blank range
>they're immediately vaporized

>move just a few feet away
>it takes 4 shots before they go down

Doom 3 is a good game. I'm not going to say its just not a good Doom game because that is letting the first two define what the series can be. And I say that loving Doom1/2 far more then I could ever 3.

3 was more a atmosphere/story based game but still had okay gun play just the pace was shit. I actually felt tense through most of it and hell was depicted in a very good way.

No, but got completely shadowed by HL2