How is it a full story without text?

One [img1] speaks more than a thousand words.

More like someone is lazy ass.

We haven't seen the image yet.

I think someone with better skills should remake this thread, this is lame.

Godservant is Tim Willits confirmed

Then Tim Wilits also received a VAC ban.

https://steamcommunity.com/id/fcdpsanchez

https://steamcommunity.com/id/fcdpsanchez/posthistory/

Bgahahahah:

if esr seriously thought that id would release a good quake after persistently flopping quake live, q4 and etqw, i really have no clue what yall were thinking, fool me twice and the shame is on me. Bethesda really bought the sinking ship and Rage was the last good id game, true to its roots, the rest is just a soup of all the other ideas from all the other games with id logo slapped on the box cover to make more sales. If Doom4 didn't have id logo on it, i would seriously thought its some sequel to dead space by crysis devs. No unique content whatsoever, a hundredth game about lone space marine trapped in an alien world on some spaceship, metroid, system shock, the list goes on.

ok, i really don't care people have their tastes, just to some up my whole view on this situation, id basically uses its company name and franchise name to push more sales selling pretty mediocre titles by any reasonable standards, in the 90s they were really winning because of their best in breed engines, now for some unknown reason they are using 3rd party engines and their only true selling point is gone, on top of that they started using contractors to build content for their games, as end result there is nothing left that feels like id in their games, they basically sell their name, which simply downgrades ip the same way call of duty is being used to sell copies of mediocre titles made my 3rd party devs, moral of the story- dont be a sellout or you will be laughed at by everyone including your most loyal fans. from doom1 in 1994 to a laughable joke of a game like quake champions where you play the game to get a helmet for ranger character. why on earth did they do it? it's like seeing a rock star bathing in their own vomit, why would anyone do that, idk.

what i would have done is instead of pumping out games in say quake franchise, i would rather concentrate on doing remasters instead, keeping same map layout like the serious sam hd remakes, and for games with new gameplay i would rather create new ip like say epic does with fortnite and so on, i would stay away from creating sequels just for the sake of cashing in on the ip name cause that just looks dull.

it looks dull mainly because the artists are forced within narrow limits of what the game should look like, instead of creating a new vision for the game, for me at least a game is sold on its unique look, and when you play say fallout 4 you basically play the same game for the 6th time because you have played all the previous games, instead of playing something brand new or at least a heavely modified version of fallout universe, it really is not fun to stare at the same pipboy or nuka kola for the nth time, why not keep same fallouty gameplay and add new art and so on. it only makes the game less fresh when you keep reusing the same content.

when quake 2 was released it wasnt trying to be quake 1, it had its own atmoshpere, what we have now is each sequel has to be forced within some unknown parameters which have been set by the original, and that to me is wrong, a sequel is a new story in the same universe, it doesn't have to be a carbon copy of the previous product or like a standalone mission pack, its more like a new game happening on the same planet etc. too much sequels really make it all wrong by staying too much in the framework set by the previous titles, people always want new expereince in the same universe, not the same experience in a new wrapper.

me, i really would rather deal with sequels as dlc instead and would never try to resell the same experience multiple times cause that just destroys the reputation of a company.

remasters are okay, but renaming the same game and reselling it again is imo silly, the only sequels i like are perhaps stalker clear sky, and that sequel had many new features, whereas problem with doom sequels is imo none of them were any better than doom1, which is classic, we got basically a mission pack resold as doom2, one system shock lookalike under doom3 title and one dead space lookalike under doom4 name, none of these sequels look anything like original doom1 game, but they basically have the same experience, so i really have no point to play any of them, if i played any doom game i can say that i played them all, why not than simply make doom1 remake on a new engine and just keep pumping out mission packs for it.

i just really don't like obvious marketing when it comes to selling out games that we all love be destroyed by sequels, many people think call of duty is a joke now because there were multiple mediocre sequels, same with doom, many people liked doom 3 including myself, but i bet none of them think that any of the sequels are better than original game.

I thought this was a GodServant thread.

Hmm, I think Doom 2 had better maps than Doom 1. Computers had improved, so they could make more complex maps, and I think they had also learnt a thing or two about making maps in the process of making Doom 1.

I do especially love the episode 1 maps from Doom 1 though.

This thread is about our true god. Take heed and avoid imposters.

:D

doom 2, a sequel? no, 2-3 new monsters and 30 maps with basically same textures, worthy of a name to be called a sequel? if you take any of the user made megawads, it actually looks quite pale in comparison to something like memento mori megawad. i am not against true sequels where the entire game receives an overhaul, but there is very few sequels that actually do that. it's a marketing trick to get sales rather than make a better game, and that is what i am against, blindly defending an obvious sellout by the dev, no one actually wins in this situation, a dev is basically rewarded for shitting on their own customers and then the studio gets sold, we need to stay real here, if people were more open about id pumping out mediocre sequels during 2000-2009 before it got sold, they would never have been in this situation.

I rate a game by how fun it is, not how many lines of code went into making it. :P

Doom 2 was an epic game. IMO better than the original, which was released only a year before. You can even think of it as the same game, just a part 2---just like how TV shows have multiple seasons.

i dont play doom 2, i have played both games 5 times from start to finish. if i was ever charged full price for doom 2, i for sure would have felt ripped off because its basically is a mission pack sold as a separate game, i am not talking about doom 2 alone , i am talking about practice of marketing games in a way to increase sales where the game is not any better but it is presented like it is, that includes buying reviews from popular gaming magazines etc. many people fail to realize how their views of the game are based on what other people think about it rather than their own honest opinion.

if given honest opinion i really as i said can not see myself paying 60 dollars for a mission pack, 15 dollars as addon to original, yes, but not full price, same thing with new doom, they basically are going to sell this new doom game for full price, on top of all the useless dlc, which is basically a sellout, no matter how good you think the game is, its not worth the price unless you are pirating the game and then say yes the game is fun for 0 dollars.

I tend to think how much a game is worth is proportional to how many hours of enjoyment I can get out of it. How many man-hours the developer put in is not directly a factor to me. If the developer can make a game I'll enjoy for 1000 hours in a day, then good for them; they must be amazing.

People will pay $80 for an AAA title and play it for only a few hours while complaining about $15 for a game they might end up playing for a thousand.

The only other way the developer's level of effort factors into it is in how easily it would be for the competition to provide a similar experience at a lower price. In 1994, when Doom 2 came out, there was no one else providing that experience. There were no community-made wads at that time of the same quality as Doom 2---and if, on the off chance, there were such wads, few people knew about them because the majority of people did not have the internet in 1994, and getting your hands on such things was a much more difficult process.

At the time, that gameplay was still fresh, it was still amazing, it had not nearly got old yet, and people wanted more of it. I see absolutely no problem with the id software of the day providing people with what they clearly wanted and charging people what they were clearly willing to pay. Anyone who would have felt ripped off in paying the market price surely must have been someone who would not get many hours of enjoyment from the game---they could play something else instead. The developers were still, deservedly, cashing in on the amazing work they had done with the engine only a year earlier.

I also don't remember hearing that people had reverse engineered Doom. I'm pretty sure it was that id software that had made the community content possible.

As for marketing games, at least in the case of QC, I don't think calling it "Quake" helped a great deal. That only raised people's expectations, and truthfully, I think the game would not have caught half as much shit for its problems if it had simply been called something else. The game being a product of id software and Bethesda would have been enough to push it.

That said, I was really only responding to your initial remarks about Doom 2, a game which I loved and gained many hours of enjoyment from as a kid, and not specifically disagreeing with anything in the rest of what you said. : )

again i liked playing doom 2 when it was relevant to me as a game, but currently i have no plans to ever play it again because to me it is a mission pack for doom, i am not thinking about things as they were but rather what they are now, looking back how good things were is not always right unless you compare it to how things are, in retrospect so to speak, if id didn't turn out the way it did, selling themselves over and over again, i would never had to bring up doom 2 as an example of their policy of exploiting their customers were there was no need, there was clearly no need to make endless sequels upon sequels which lead to the ultimate downfall of the company and then what they did is blame it all on the internet piracy, without taking in account that they were milking their customers all these years by releasing mediocre titles under ip that had goodwill, ie releasing a good game doom1 and then releasing sequels upon sequels, claiming invention of fps genre as their own etc, there are way too many things that make me really annoyed by the company that i once respected and now i see is all they are just a bunch of drama queens with heavy sellout traits, willing to stain their own fans just to make a few bucks. i am not saying doom 2 is a bad game, i am saying they milk their customers every chance they get, it never actually feels good to be a customer of a company that keeps exploiting you, kinda like slavery, where you give someone money, and instead of being thankful they keep demanding more like you owe them something.

There are probably quite a few games that I enjoyed immensely and that were worth every dollar but that I probably would not be able to enjoy as much today. That doesn't mean they weren't worth what I spent on them. How things were back then is what decides how much things were worth---back then.

Today, the 486 DX2 is a piece of shit, not worth $5. Back then, it was a landmark PC that people were willing to spend a fortune on.

If people feel the are being milked and exploited like slaves, maybe it's time they vote with their wallets instead of believing that just because something comes with a certain brand, it must be high quality.

i am not judging a company based on what they were, if a company produces a bad product, i consider it a bad habbit to defend it based on what they released in the past. i am judging id on not what they have done in the past but what they keep doing atm, which is releasing sequels, i don't care what they were in 1993 or 1994 or 1995. again you are defending your memory from the past, i am not playing doom 2 because it would be absurd to play it today when there are tons of other things and what you keep doing is hey doom 2 was awesome, and? whats your point, i am not saying it was bad, i am saying the company is pos atm, not when they were releasing doom 1 or doom 2, none of the people who made doom 1 or doom 2 even work there anymore except some artist and a half assed mapper turned studio director. all of that stuff is in the past, forget it, it will never come back because its like expecting the Beatles to make another great album, it will never happen and all that is left of id is just a logo on their games, the company doesn't even have their own style anymore and uses contractors for everything.

I'm not defending the current id software.

But you gave Doom 2 as an example of their bad behaviour.

I think what they did back then with Doom 2 was perfectly fine. I'm quite glad they did what they did back then.

Don't mistake me for someone who is blinded by nostalgia when it comes to judging the current id software.

It's just that you said originally:

...problem with doom sequels is imo none of them were any better than doom1, which is classic, we got basically a mission pack resold as doom2...

My point is that even if Doom 2 was just a mission pack, it was a good thing for them to release in the climate that existed back in 1994 (it's not an example of a trend in their wrongdoing), and I think it was worth the price, given how many hours of enjoyment it gave me, and I also think it was better than Doom 1 (which is just my opinion obviously). Being able to focus on just the maps and having learned from their experience with Doom 1, combined with the improvement in hardware, allowed them to create what I think are actually better maps.

the problem with that view is that doom 2 today is not a playable game, and its like saying pentium 1 was a nice processor. it doesn't matter really if it was nice or not because currently all intel cpu have a major hardware security flaw that questions validity of intel as a well trusted company.

putting so much emphasis on the past to defend whatever stuff is happening atm is absurd, no one cares so much about how things were, play doom 2 if you like, which i don't, i don't want to be hey i remember these 2 people in 1974 sang a really good song, the song is now crap but who cares.

anything good stands the test of time and i can't say that i would choose to play doom 2 today over any other game, it's a nice 15 minute past time like a walk in a museum, but to take this game seriously?

i am using doom 2 as example because id kept on doing sequels and reusing same content since 90's which led to their downfall, yes doom 2 was nice, but was it really an honest business practice? no, they kept on pumping out sequels right up until they were sold to Bethesda, and now they are back doing more sequels. why?

While some people might think Doom 2 is still a playable game, whether or not it is is beside the point. But if you play a modern mod, it's still actually quite fun.

putting so much emphasis on the past to defend whatever stuff is happening atm is absurd

I already addressed this when I said:

I'm not defending the current id software.

...

yes doom 2 was nice, but was it really an honest business practice?

I don't see what was so dishonest about what they did with Doom 2.

Like I said, I'm glad they did Doom 2 the way they did. People back then knew what they were getting (they could see the demos playing in the stores), and they got it. I doubt many of them felt they were ripped off. Why? Because it was a good game.

Back then, I don't think people even cared whether a game was using the same engine or not. They wanted the content, and after all, id software had already been doing that for many iterations with Commander Keen.

I don't think all the Quake games were sequels anyway (or have they found a way to somehow put them all in the same universe?). They just had the name, which I think was more or less the way of saying, "this is the latest deathmatch game from id software".

Whether or not sticking with sequels damaged their output, or whether it would have been shit anyway is another matter. I don't really know, to be honest. I will say I think everything up to and including Quake 3 was great.

i am not using doom 2 to decide whether or not the game is good, all i am saying is that their strategy of pumping out sequels the same way call of duty franchise is used to pump out mediocre titles led them into oblivion. i don't care about playing doom 2 with mods or not, it's not a relevant game to me. doom 2 is basically a recycle of doom 1, there was no need to create a whole new game just to introduce another campaign, it's still is a bit scammy, i am not sure why you are defending the practice, as i said i am not against this particular game, i am against the practice of releasing shoddy games based on success of past titles, i would still choose to play doom 1 any day over the second one, and if they wanted to make service to the fans they could have released the second one for free. many people simply pirate the doom wads so they don't care, but if you imagine a 60 dollar tag on these wads that would be another story, i am talking about the root cause of their failure is they started doing these things long before they failed as a studio, releasing sequels that is, then they started using 3rd party studios to make their games, next they started using just the name of the franchise, it's still all comes down to their integrity as a company, not every gaming company does that, many companies kept innovating and releasing new ip in the 90s or at least used the ip carefully not to upset the fans, the way id does it is careless and unwarranted use of ip to make more sales, they don't care if the game is a flop in the end cause they think that it's all because pirates don't want to pay for their half baked products.

I'm not defending the practice in general. I'm defending the creation of Doom 2 as it was done, which I think was perfectly acceptable. No one was scammed. They simply did not have to buy it. No one owes us anything for free.

If you prefer Doom 1, that's fine too. Each to his own. It's actually a great game as well.

it goes both ways so if developer acts like this and basically recycles content to make customers pay twice we as customers don't owe developers anything as well. it's just a dumb practice for the developer to scam their customers and then complain that nobody buys their products, as i said i am referring to this game as it is right now, not what it was in 1995, i am looking at it back as a whole experience buying id products, not just doom 2, as well as my interaction with the company as a customer and a fan, i don't judge the game based on how good it is but my experience as a customer of this company, the whole experience of buying their game, talking to them, listening to their talks, watching how they treat their fans and customers, etc. i don't judge the company based on some game their released in 1995 and then close my eyes too everything they did afterward. i want to see a single person who actually think they would play doom 2 24/7 over every other game today.

Well, those customers probably are buying the games because they are labelled with a particular brand. That's why the game companies keep doing it.

Since you love sequels so much, I assume you're looking forward to Terminator 6. :D

Yeah, sometimes they should just leave it alone.

i am not against idea of making products in the same universe, if the goal is not to make more money, but to make something interesting, like for example the dark knight batman movie, not every James bond movie is crap etc. i have very limited funds atm, for me buying a full price game is 4 days of full-time work (and i am currently unemployed because of completely screwed up salary in russia, 10 hours a day job nets you about 400 dollars a month) + i don't have a pc that can run these games, so i either buy really old games on sale that i like, or just skip it or watch them on twitch, same with movies, i simply don't watch them most of the time. even if i actually had loads of money i would still be weary of buying crappy products as they simply confirm that i have a bad taste. rage 2 is not a bad sequel, since this franchise is less than 10 years old and there wasn't 10 rage games published yet, but i haven't actually try it yet, waiting for 90 percent sale, hopefully its not a complete mess.

I think practically every movie and game made these days is made for the primary purpose of making money, whether it's in the same universe or not. They reuse a brand for that reason. People are just more likely to pay for something with a familiar brand, so they'll keep making products with the brand until the brand has lost most of its value, which would probably be happening because the quality has degraded or people just got bored of the concept.

When I see a Quake title, I think of the good times I had in Quake, and that automatically makes me more interested in looking into the new Quake game. Whatever happened with QC, if they started talking about a Q5, it would immediately have my interest. Perhaps that is foolish, but I think that's how it is with most people and brands.

yeah that is unfortunate, if id actually talks quake nowadays, the first thing that comes to my mind is etqw and q4 and quake live and quake champions, if they say q5 than i am pretty sure it's some kind of those things going on unless they explicitly say that it will be done internally. a brand is stained at this point. they overuse brands which is to me smells like the company is out of ideas, epic and many other good companies don't overuse their brands unless it makes sense, blizzard only releases sequels when it makes sense like starcraft 2 where the whole game received an overhaul but it's basically the same game with a new campaign, in sequel what id does is that they loose what was originally in a game and add something gimicky that wasn't related to the game at all, rage was i think their best attempt to at least try to be new and fresh, if they did another enemy territory in rage or doom universe with bots as an option to randomize sp campaign same way q3 or ut were basically mp game with offline mode, i spend many hours just playing offline on all the different maps.

Let's hope the next Quake game is a fully internal development, yes. Maybe if they give it a bit more love next time, it can revitalize the name of Quake. But we fans are quite picky and will probably never be happy. :D

You know if a company abuses its brand, maybe you could say we are getting "tricked" a little, but mostly they hurt themselves since they can no longer get as much benefit from the brand in the future.

ESRandom.com

In the end we can’t put all the blame into any singular person.

The true story behind it.