/vr/ - Retro Games

>>4587020
Alright, I'll tell him to blow it out his ass.

>>4587034
>I don't like that kind of gameplay in a shooter.
>They still take too much damage before dying.
So you're upset that a game that isn't Doom doesn't play like Doom? Yeah, Quake, Rise Of The Triad, and Wolfenstein 3D don't play like Doom either.
FWIW, taking cover is a 100% viable strategy in Doom and always was.

>There's also less room to maneuver in Duke because of the tediuos level design.
I don't agree, strafing works very reliably in all maps. Falling back briefly to avoid taking hits is an important strategy in Duke.

>A lot of the levels are bases and houses, basically the same problem the Doom guys had at first when they started out with making generic military bases which were boring as fuck.
That's you completely misunderstanding that.

They wanted to set Doom apart from Wolfenstein 3D and make it more distinct, as well as also demonstrate how much more capable the technology was in comparison. It had little to do with realism itself. That the gameplay was also much better than Wolfenstein 3D probably had to do with it being far more nuanced and complex.

Duke Nukem 3D is VERY abstract for the most of it, you have the occasional street, corridor or room which is a token play at more realistic environments, but they're just barely realistic and are just a break-up from the otherwise more abstract environments.
What makes the level design good is that takes an ostensibly realistic style but actually puts very abstract spins on it, every map is full of secrets, hidden paths, and non-linear exploration and areas. It's not like Doom or Wolf3D.

>>4587053
>I prefer to go up against a horde of weaker enemies over facing a couple of stronger enemies
Yeah, it's not Doom. It's not like you don't get plenty of explosives.

>I'm not saying Duke is a bad game
You did, actually: >>4586976
>It's such an overrated game because of the all the pop culture references.