Doom

strelok

Duggy747 wrote: »

If they worked out the QTEs having a good flow to them then I won't mind them, I imagine they're entirely by choice and you can avoid using them if you want.

If that's the case then I'll be happy using them sparingly when I feel like slicing an imp into 2 halves with the chainsaw because it really deserved it and caused me more trouble than the others :pac:

i saw some gameplay footage where the enemy would gain a bright red sheen and then the player would or wouldn't perform a qte so I'd imagine you just toggle a key in the direction of an enemy when the visual pops on. it did look very easy to avoid.

BMMachine

QTE's are lazy anyway, integrating them will always just make something great worse. the best thing about id games - full control of yourself, QTE's take that away

Retr0gamer

It could be a gameplay decision though. It kind of reminders me of the back stab from the souls games. A qte might give the player some invincibility frames.

strelok

the backstab requires a bit of skill though, this just looks like you press a button when the game prompts you and go "ooooh, shiny"

Sonics2k

I don't know, sometimes QTE's can be okay if not horribly overused an put in at completely inappropriate times.

As long as the game isn't absolutely flooded with them, then QTE's can make a game a bit more fun.

Kiith

If they are optional, then who cares if they are in. It's fun to sometimes see a extremely over the top kill, as long as your aren't constantly forced to use them. It's Doom...there'll be plenty of enemies to kill the regular was as well

petes

Same as everyone else, as long as it's not flooded with them and you've a choice I've no problem with them, will only be a novelty for the first hour or so anyway and back to killing things properly!!

Generic Dreadhead

Whats the issue with the QTE's?
It's essentially a melee attack and is not a lot longer than the animation for punching or rifle butting in most games.

Gbear

Cormac... wrote: »

Whats the issue with the QTE's?
It's essentially a melee attack and is not a lot longer than the animation for punching or rifle butting in most games.

I think it's about control.

If you look at the takedowns in Far Cry 3 (the only one of those I've played) you've got quite a decent amount of control with what you can do - robbing someones gun and shooting everyone, pulling the pin in their grenaded, attacks from above, below, knife throwing, chained takedowns.
It's not quite fully emergent from your controls but it's granular and quick enough, and requires enough skill, that it can add a lot to gameplay.

If this, on the otherhand, is just "press e to engage short kill sequence" that always looks the same, then there's no skill and it looks boring after 2 or 3 times.

There either needs to be variations that you can do (not unlockables or random variations but ones that require input) either with how you go about individual take downs, or in how you handle them in different circumstances (number of enemies, distance between them, various different kinds of takedown depending on your approach - running, walking, landing on top of, etc) for them not to just be a shallow and pointless gimmick that works well as a marketing tool but add nothing to the game.

Basically, games where you just shoot stuff aren't interesting anymore and everyone wants the founders of the genre to be able to continue to innovate and move it in different and interesting directions.

Generic Dreadhead

Gbear wrote: »

Basically, games where you just shoot stuff aren't interesting anymore and everyone wants the founders of the genre to be able to continue to innovate and move it in different and interesting directions.

I truly hope Doom does not do this.

I want a game where I can just shoot stuff and occasionally rip a deamons head from his shoulders

Skerries

Multiplayer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNFUAH3V1U4

Looks a bit like Halo

Shiminay

Deleted User wrote: »

Looks a bit like Halo

D'you know what? I think you're on to something It's like Halo and Quake 3 got together and created some unholy spawn

It seemed quick and pacey which is all I ever want from an online FPS multiplayer experience. I hope people still play it 6 months after its released...

TerrorFirmer

Looks good - but looks and sounds incredibly like Halo team deathmatch!

Potential-Monke

I think ye will find Halo was copying Quake (I just dislike Halo greatly).

Anyway, that looks amazing. I've a feeling, if it plays as good as it looks, that CoD, Battlefield and counter Strike may lose a lot of players to this. And it just to happens to be releasing the day after my birthday, so it will be a lovely present to myself!

Hank Scorpio

Played the beta. Multiplayer is slow and clunky with loadouts and easy to use overpowered weapons, if you're expecting an arena type shooter think again. Feels nothing like Quake/UT etc.

dreamers75

Deleted User wrote: »

Looks a bit like Halo

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Looks good - but looks and sounds incredibly like Halo team deathmatch!

dreamers75

dreamers75 wrote: »

The slow movement, the low gravity, the weapons, the emphasis on melee, the floor traps, the look of the players; all remind me of halo

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The slow movement, the low gravity, the weapons, the emphasis on melee, the floor traps, the look of the players; all remind me of halo

What?

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

What?

Yeah maybe not so much after watching it again. You do seem to slowly float through the air a bit though.

I'm sure it will be nothing like Halo. It was just my initial reaction.

Retr0gamer

In fairness movement in Halo is glacial in comparison to the likes of old school Doom/Quake/Unreal multiplayer. It was one of the first games to slow movement down so it could work on consoles.

BMMachine

Halo is very slow compared to UT/Quake.
will be annoyed if they console this up. its the one game that should be absolutely pushed to its limits and not nerfed for consoles

Generic Dreadhead

BMMachine wrote: »

Halo is very slow compared to UT/Quake.
will be annoyed if they console this up. its the one game that should be absolutely pushed to its limits and not nerfed for consoles

Yeah cause there are no fast paced FPS games on Consoles and sure you only need to look at Uncharted 4 to see that consoles aren't up to much graphics wise

tuxy

Cormac... wrote: »

Yeah cause there are no fast paced FPS games on Consoles and sure you only need to look at Uncharted 4 to see that consoles aren't up to much graphics wise

That's a bit harsh I know they did have to limit uncharted 4 to 30 fps but I think they have done well considering the ps4 uses an APU.
And yes game like halo and cod were a big stepback in terms of pace compared to quake and ut but again they have done well with the hardware available.

Generic Dreadhead

tuxy wrote: »

That's a bit harsh

I was being sarcastic, I should have used this guy -> :rolleyes:

Retr0gamer

Not to turn this into a console vs. PC argument, slower paced FPS games have their place and all but it would be great to get another multiplayer FPS with the pace of UT or Quake 3. They just don't exist anymore.

tuxy

You can play the early version of the new ut right now
https://www.unrealtournament.com/

I don't see how a multiplatform game can be fast paced, it would be unplayable for people using a gamepad.

BMMachine

Cormac... wrote: »

Yeah cause there are no fast paced FPS games on Consoles and sure you only need to look at Uncharted 4 to see that consoles aren't up to much graphics wise

i care not a jot for graphics tbh. and no, there are no fast paced FPS games on consoles. those games you think are fast are like a toyota corollas compared to an F1 car when it comes to UT and Quake, especially quake

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J26od1tE1s

not even near possible on a console, just a fact

TerrorFirmer

Of course console games are always going to be slower, they largely have to be when you're using a gamepad versus a keyboard and mouse setup.

Unreal Tournament and Quake III on the consoles were nowhere near as fast as the PC versions either, good efforts for console at the time though.

I was referring to the announcer pitch, the look of the characters, the melee and execution moves in reference to Halo. It is reminiscent of Halo.

I think ye will find Halo was copying Quake (I just dislike Halo greatly).

How is that relevant? Some people just pointed out that it looks like the Halo multiplayer. Halo as a title looks and moves nothing whatsoever like any of the Quake games.

No-one was trying to start that an argument of who-did-what-first and the X or Y merits of any particular title. It's so tiresome that anytime the word Halo is mentioned certain people have to try their best to attack the franchise immediately.

Generic Dreadhead

Ok, well that IS pretty fast.

To fast for me