/vr/ - Retro Games

What are some good enemy behaviors that can make a shooter challenging, while still being skill based and fair?

It peeves me when old school shooters only have variations on 'the enemy that launches a single slow moving projectile at your current location without leading you.' Those enemies will never, ever hit the player unless theres a ton of them surrounding you, or unless the player is terrible. Enemies that lead you or shoot homing projectiles are much more interesting, while still being fair in the sense that a sufficiently skilled player can still dodge those attacks. What are some other sorts of attacks that are actually dangerous towards moderately skilled players, without being broken in a way where they basically guarantee that the player will take damage?

As a followup question, do you believe that a game is not truly skill based unless it is possible for the player to complete it without taking a single hit (regardless of difficulty level)?

>>4901228
It's not like classic Doom very much, but it also does kind of its own thing compared to classic Doom, and that's fine, it could never compare, because it would be too different, and striving for more of its own identity was the right thing to do.
It's not a perfect game (common complaints is the locked in arena battles being kind of predictable and formulaic after a while, snapmap being a poor substitute for real free usermade content, and the multiplayer being quite lukewarm), but many here agree that it's overall pretty good, and that it could have been far, FAR worse.
As someone who had extremely low expectations, and was just cautiously hoping for "maybe it'll be like Doom 3, but better", but was ready to accept that it could easily be something subpar, I was quite pleasantly surprised.
(Mind I'm a person who think Doom 3 wasn't actually THAT bad, and in fact pretty fun, all things considered).

Also to note is that the game is wonderfully well optimized and smooth to run, you can run the game on decent settings on a mediocre laptop from 2014, and it generally just keeps itself together (the same can't be said for all AAA games these days, where some devs trip over themselves to avoid fixing problems).
So while a lot of the OG crew at iD Software have moved on, and the game isn't a shining star of excellence, there's clearly people working there who have passion, ambition and work ethics, because they did a pretty good job, and put good effort into making sure the game would run even on toasters.

For Doom 5, 'Eternal', I'm hoping they take a lot of the valid criticisms to heart, and build upon what was really good about Doom 4, to make an even better game.

>>4839460
Doom 2, despite maybe some uneven quality and a few genuinely subpar maps, had a lot of good and strong maps, Master Levels didn't have anything that I think was really good, it peaks at like 5/10 in terms of quality of gameplay and level design.

>>4840221
Yes.
Sverre Kvernmo and Dr. Sleep are great mappers, but their Master Level submissions are just not good, and the rest of the submissions aren't very strong either.
TNT Evilution, though flawed, has far higher highs than the Master Levels, and generally higher lows than the lows of the Master Levels, (though Habitat is probably the worst iwad level).
Plutonia just shits all over the Master Levels in every regard, that can't even be argued.

It's an extremely weak product in my opinion, I'd rather play like the 32X, Atari Jaguar, or Gameboy Advance ports of the original game, because at least those have good levels.