DOOM and cover based shooters.

[Anonymous No.10650328]

I just realized something watch this gameplay
https://youtu.be/cjvU9USxniY?list=PLYZp53E4M0t9216spSxWn44Sm539pCM6L&t=782
DOOM was always a cover based shooter not some meme machine where you run around like crazy and get into the monsters faces.

No idea why I believed this meme(probably all these years playing UT2004).
Look how he plays!
1) Run a little bit to the enemies.
2)Shoot
3) Go back into cover.
And he repeats this all the time.

So DOOM was basically a cover based shooter before cover based shooters existed.
There are other ways to play DOOM however this one is the most safe and rewarded by the game itself.

[Anonymous No.10650362]

>>10650328
Yeah, one element of Doom was not taking damage and that is one way to go about it. Basically you wanted to kill all your enemies while not allowing them to kill you. You also don't want to kill yourself, in the game at least.

[Anonymous No.10650367]

>>10650328
>that brightness

[Anonymous No.10650383]

>>10650328
Yeah, pretty much.
Wait until you find out Doom actually wasn't designed to run wads with 50 redditillion revenants like some crazies insist it was. Half the PCs at the time could barely run it over 10 fps.

[Anonymous No.10650393]

This is going to be a thread

[Anonymous No.10650424]

>>10650328
I mean, it is in the sense that you can take cover by strafing in and out behind a wall. But that's not really what people mean by cover based shooter. People mean games where they have a take cover mechanic. Press A to take cover kind of shit.

[Anonymous No.10650429]

>>10650328
>No idea why I believed this meme
It was a forced meme by secondaries and newfags for a very long time.

Young people who grew bored of modern military shooters being frequently built around pressing a button to attach yourself to designated cover spots to play protracted minigames of Whack-A-Mole, and having heard something about how older shooters weren't like this, they somehow imagined that this meant that you would never ever use cover at all in games like Doom and Quake.
It's as if they came to the conclusion that the mere concept of taking cover from fire was somehow a bad and harmful idea for shooters, and the main reason why generic cover focused military shooters were bad.

While Doom was never built around using cover as the sole means of fighting, using cover should still be part of your strats, because avoiding getting shot is always a good thing in shooting games. The Arch-Vile in Doom 2 even enforces this on you, and only by a bare minimum, just the slightest bit of level geometry to break his line of sight will interrupt his otherwise undodgeable attack.

What Doom doesn't do is force you to just sit tight in one spot and just slowly pick enemies off as you go (nor is cover a mode you engage in at designated spots, you just go behind some suitable level geometry). The monsters in Doom are dumb as fuck but they are 100% aggressive and will always try to advance to your position at all times, so you can typically never stay put in cover, or you're no longer in cover.
You also don't get health regenerating for free by doing nothing, health is a limited resource to find and manage.

[Anonymous No.10650465]

>>10650362
Mobility is vital, using some pillars in a room as intermittent cover as you move is a common and viable approach.

>>10650383
Doom wasn't designed to do a lot of things (hence the existence of DeHacked), but by the virtue of machines quickly growing stronger during the 90s it would find itself a niche where it was the kind of game where you could have a very large volume of monsters which more advanced FPS could just not do.
The way enemies behaved also made various styles of combat viable, iD Software themselves didn't really realize the full potential of the full Doom 2 monster set which they created.

So called "slaughter" as a genre of Doom maps is hardly a new thing, people were already experimenting with that in 1994 and 1995. Plutonia was one half of Final Doom, and it was made by two brothers who wanted a Doom experience which escalated the challenge past Doom 2's endgame, they had made a couple few slaughter maps before because they enjoyed it, so they made the second secret map a slaughter map.

>>10650424
True, but there's been people who have had retarded kneejerk reactions to the mere word, and the mere idea. You could mention that you quickly used cover to break line of sight and interrupt fire against a group of monsters, and some retard would get upset and say you were playing the game wrong by taking cover.

[Anonymous No.10650587]

>>10650328
Like everyone else said ITT, taking cover and breaking line of sight doesn't make an FPS a cover shooter. It's also not about whether the game has hitscan or not. That'd be like saying an arena shooter like Quake 3 is a cover shooter because you use cover to avoid an enemy railgun. In the strictest definition, a cover shooter has a cover system like Killzone 2. The furthest I'd stretch the definition out to would be to include games with consolized movement where the player isn't meant to be moving around and shooting at the same time. Fluid, omnidirectional movement vs. aim-down sights behind some waist-high cover, that's the key difference for me. An easy distinction would be whether the game punishes your accuracy for moving. If it does, it's more in the cover shooter side of the dichotomy.

[Anonymous No.10650610]

>>10650328
That's doom64 retard

[Anonymous No.10650692]

Duke Nukem 3D is better than Doom in every way.

[Anonymous No.10651289]

>>10650692
Based but Duke3d has more use of cover.

[Anonymous No.10651384]

>>10651289
>meme machine where you run around like crazy and get into the monsters faces.
This is a caricature.
Both types of gameplay are possible (and enjoyable) it depends mostly on the geometry.
>>10651289
This is the best way to deal with hitscanners in both Duke3d and Doom. Duke3d having slow hitscanners makes it even more appropriate.

[Anonymous No.10651451]

>>10651289
not strictly true, you can strafe duke hitscans without needing cover because they don't have perfect tracking like they do in doom

[Anonymous No.10651479]

>>10651289
Duke3d bros... why does a simple monster need at least 2 shotgun shots to be killed? I thought guns in Duke3d was strong?

[Anonymous No.10651757]

>>10650367
It's funny that this will be how the current generation thinks DOOM 64 is supposed to look.

[Anonymous No.10651773]

I don't know.
For me, the reason I enjoy Doom are the maze-like maps as I am also a fan of dungeon crawling, as oppossed to shooting things, but I guess normalfags can't deal with the slightest bit of inconvenience when playing vidya.

[Anonymous No.10651792]

>>10650328
just because you can use walls to block enemy shots doesnt mean its a cover based shooter baka

[Anonymous No.10651795]

>>10650328
I always get confused when nostalgia-fags misremember Doom. Sure, the multiplayer was pretty fast-paced, but the actual game itself was relatively slow. It was locked at a nice crispy 30 frames per second, and you took your time moving through levels because you never knew when you were going to be ambushed. Running through levels at the speed of light came later, after you had run through the same level 50+ times. Doom Eternal plays nothing like how the original Doom played. Doom 2016 is closer, but even still, it's a little too cocaine-addled, and it's missing the atmospheric/horror elements.

[Anonymous No.10651802]

>>10651289
Is that Duke It Out in DC?

[Anonymous No.10651829]

>>10651802
thats shrapnel city

[Anonymous No.10651840]

>>10651795
>It was locked at a nice crispy 30 frames per second
35, and most people did not get to experience it running at a consistent 35fps and on max settings until a few years after release.

[Anonymous No.10651867]

>>10650328
You don't understand what "cover-based" refers to. It's not a shooting game where you can take cover, it's a game where there's a function that lets you stick to cover, like Rogue Trooper or Gears of War. Of course you can take cover by hiding behind a wall in a shooting game, what the fuck else are you going to do. You come off as really stupid and/or stoned.

[Anonymous No.10651943]

>>10650367
>>that brightness
I know.
DOOM 64 wonderfully glows!
SEE THE GLOW.

[Anonymous No.10651950]

>>10650424
>I mean, it is in the sense that
I know however it is closer to cover shooters in some areas then the meme of it being the
>run around like crazy and if you do not move from place you die.
Game, something the doom 2016 devs tried to push hard.

[Anonymous No.10651976]

>>10650429
>While Doom was never built around using cover as the sole means of fighting, using cover should still be part of your strats, because avoiding getting shot is always a good thing in shooting games
This I understand it is not a button and you use level geometry however because dooms protagonist is basically a box with no flexibility (can not peak out of the corner like a real human) the taking cover mechanic is real.

>to play protracted minigames of Whack-A-Mole
Is this not most of the time what you do in doom using level geometry?

>What Doom doesn't do is force you to just sit tight in one spot and just slowly pick enemies off as you go
in some areas it is the best strategy.

Either way I played some more and I think the most arcady enemies have to be the barons of hell. Because their shots are not hit scan a good strategy is to run around or circle strafe around them.

However in unknown areas circle strafing can be suicidal if you do not know what enemies are there and you simply run into that place.

PS:
What I like about classic doom is that it has verity (unlike modern crap or nu-DOOM) there are numerous ways to play even the same level. And this is what makes it exciting.

The biggest example of this can be monster infighting a warm surprise if it happens. And can be used as a strategy in game. There is something magical about it.

Unlike in nu-DOOM where it does not exist or is literally a fake. Like the fake infighting (doom eternal) animation the demons will stick in UNABLE TO KILL ONE ANOTHER until the player disturbs them. And then never in fight in the real game.

[Anonymous No.10651982]

>>10650587
>Like everyone else said ITT, taking cover and breaking line of sight doesn't make an FPS a cover shooter
Yea however if you translate games to real life doom guy is popping in and out of cover all the time.

>That'd be like saying an arena shooter like Quake 3
NO.
anyone who did watch ANY arena shooter game play knows that if you do not move in arena shooters you die. The game actively does punish you for not running LIKE A CRAZY from MEGA armor to Quad damage etc.

[Anonymous No.10651991]

>>10651757
>>10650367
HUH.
I played DOOM 64 on emulators way back.
And yes the game was to dark to play.
So I simply decided to crank up the brightness to the max in the emulator.
(a part of me did think it is a emulation error)

The game was nice.

What makes you think DOOM 64 was not supposed to look like this?

Unless you screen record a actual CRT playing DOOM 64 on a N64 I do not see your point.

PS: The WEBMs are from DOOM 64 for PC...

[Anonymous No.10651992]

>>10651867
thats because anglos have a retarded language in general.

blood isnt a 'cover based' shooter, but 80% of the combat revolves around playing peek a book with cultists that have instant reaction time and exposing urself gets you killed. it's literally 'based' around 'cover' or you fucking die.

not a 'cover based' shooter . . . for some reason

im literally controlling a tank in a tank sim. those are not 'tank controls' . . . but im in a fucking tank with a control scheme with very similar movement orientation to those games with 'tank controls' with added caveats.

[Anonymous No.10651995]

>>10651795
>Doom Eternal plays nothing like how the original Doom played
I agree.

>I always get confused when nostalgia-fags misremember Doom
I think there was some push in society where people would drop in even in MSM publications
>Oh this game is slow and requires cover...
>Nothing like the original DOOM!

>and you took your time moving through levels because you never knew when you were going to be ambushed
I think I discovered this while deciding to finish DOOM64 on the PC.

There is a uncertainty what is behind the next door.

[Anonymous No.10651998]

>>10651995
I think this is a mess of straw men, regurgitated and irrelevant bullshit and you needing to shut the fuck up more often.

[Dave No.10652003]

>>10650383
>Half the PCs at the time could barely run it over 10 fps.

I used to run it on 386 and no one ever complained about FPS

[Anonymous No.10652010]

>>10652003
486-DX2 was the de facto PC gaming standard since 1992 and it ran Doom at 25-30 fps.

[Anonymous No.10652087]

>>10651773
Doom basically combines dungeon crawling with shooting action, which is why it's so fun.

[Anonymous No.10652107]

>>10652003
You were looking at 10 to 15 frames per seconds on a 386 depending on your settings, which was definitely playable and considered acceptable, but dropping down to 10 frames, or even below, was not exactly the bestest feeling and things like that very much made many people wish for more.

People would seek out 486 computers for better performance, either just for games like Doom and similar, or the fact that a 486 could get you to around 20 to 25 frames on average with these games was a strong selling point to many people when it came to upgrading your computer for multiple purposes.

[Anonymous No.10652187]

>>10652107
486 wasn't exactly new in 1994 but it was affordable. My family had a 486DX2 rig and iirc it did cost only around $2000.

[Anonymous No.10652221]

How are you supposed to avoid pig cop hitscan damage in Duke without strafing in and out of cover?

Not exactly the same as building your game around literally pressing a button to crouch and stick to a knee high wall like what happened in the 00's.

[Anonymous No.10652239]

>>10651451
see >>10652221

[Anonymous No.10652304]

>>10651795
>I always get confused when nostalgia-fags misremember Doom.
Serious Sam fags.

[Anonymous No.10652331]

>>10651991

[Anonymous No.10652445]

>>10652331
HUH?