No "chainsaw to get ammo" thing anymore?

[Nikanuur]

I know that people voiced their concern about these, but I personally liked the added dimension to the Doom's gameplay, as seen in the previous two installments of the IP, such as arcade elements, mantling and other environment utilization, or the exploration. But I could really do without three things in the Doom(s):

1. Game focusing on the closed-arena combat.
2. Constant ammo shortage in what is a frenzy-killing FPS, with the twist of having to chainsaw enemies for ammo drops.
3. Almost-like-forced, ubiquitious "shoot until you can melee him".

Especially the latter two. I mean, if it were done as spicing it up, it would've been cool. Having to do i all the time, because the strange "be mindful of your ammo" sentiment in the IP that actually started the whole "unload truckload of ammo everywhere, or kill with precise headshots" is like: blink, blink, excuse me?

Are these gone, then? The gameplay looks quite different from the trailers. But there are only short shots, so, idk.

[Sar]

You can literally see Doomguy finishes some demon with one of his new melee weapons and ammo icons drop. They’re just monochrome again, like in 2016. I hope there will be a mod to add rainbow fountains back.

[Nikanuur]

I see. Well, that's a bummer. Judging from how well the last Dooms sold, I suppose people either liked it, or were lured in by the IP itself. Even though I really didn't like it, I must admit that it was an interesting concept.

Then again, repeating such against-the-grain oddity three times in a row, man, that feels like a red flag as far as adhering to good standards and upgrading what can be upgraded goes.

[Raider]

game developers: yeah remove all ammo on the ground it will save us hundreds of hours

that just lazy

[Nikanuur]

Originally posted by Raider:

game developers: yeah remove all ammo on the ground it will save us hundreds of hours

that just lazy

And probably this as well, yeah, I agree :/

[Sar]

Originally posted by Raider:

game developers: yeah remove all ammo on the ground it will save us hundreds of hours

that just lazy

Except there is ammo on the ground both in Doom 2016 and in Doom Eternal.

[Grampire]

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

I see. Well, that's a bummer. Judging from how well the last Dooms sold, I suppose people either liked it, or were lured in by the IP itself. Even though I really didn't like it, I must admit that it was an interesting concept.

Then again, repeating such against-the-grain oddity three times in a row, man, that feels like a red flag as far as adhering to good standards and upgrading what can be upgraded goes.

So you're saying it's a red flag and not adhering to "good standards" for.... reasons?

Saying you don't like it is fine - just be careful not to transpose your preference onto what good design is.

Originally posted by Raider:

game developers: yeah remove all ammo on the ground it will save us hundreds of hours

that just lazy

Lets actually try thinking about this at least once without looking at the OG games and clutching our pearls like pickled boomers.

This is actually only true if you think providing a limited amount of ammo and controlling how the player fights is not lazy design. In that sense, you want the dev to supply ammo in a way that they're hoops the player needs to jump through. Use the shells left for you, the cells for this certain fight, etc.

On the other hand, with the chainsaw, I can make a fight in a huge arena with super heavy demons last 10 times longer than normal by using only the weakest weapon in the game if I want. I'll also never run out of ammo while doing so.

You can also throw an insane, daunting number of heavies at me that would require many times more ammo than I have on hand plus what's in the arena if i did use it efficiently. Thus, the devs aren't restricted by what ammo they've "left on the floor."

Still think that's lazy?

[Zapmaster]

It's been a while since I played classic Doom's but I remember being very ammo starved in some levels, especially in Doom 2. In Eternal this is never an issue once you learn to play the game, so this whole ammo things always seemed like a silly argument to me.

That said, by all accounts they are making DA way more accessible and simple gameplay wise then Eternal. So I think players like you who found Eternal's fast pace & hot key juggle frustrating will be more at home here.

[Nikanuur]

Originally posted by Zapmaster:

It's been a while since I played classic Doom's but I remember being very ammo starved in some levels, especially in Doom 2. In Eternal this is never an issue once you learn to play the game, so this whole ammo things always seemed like a silly argument to me.

That said, by all accounts they are making DA way more accessible and simple gameplay wise then Eternal. So I think players like you who found Eternal's fast pace & hot key juggle frustrating will be more at home here.

You may disagree and you may find it silly, but it's my opinion, and you haven't changed it—if that was your intend. Certainly not with an argument based off of a blatant exception in otherwise ammo-rich game, nor by disregarding the elephants in the room—that the run-of-the-mill FPSs (much less those that laid foundations to the FPS genre), never revolved around some niché, self-serving mechanics, such acquiring semi-rare ammo mostly only by chain-sawing creatures, or having a hard-to-pass prompt to finish each and every frikkin kill with a melee.

[Sar]

You know why classic games were “ammo rich”? Because they were designed to be beatable by restarting the level with a handgun and 50 bullets. If you play them “continuously” (and there is no shame in that), you’re going to have way more ammo than somebody who is “pistol-starting”.

[stylish]

I'll give a shot.

[Carbon]

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

You may disagree and you may find it silly, but it's my opinion, and you haven't changed it—if that was your intend. Certainly not with an argument based off of a blatant exception in otherwise ammo-rich game, nor by disregarding the elephants in the room—that the run-of-the-mill FPSs (much less those that laid foundations to the FPS genre), never revolved around some niché, self-serving mechanics, such acquiring semi-rare ammo mostly only by chain-sawing creatures, or having a hard-to-pass prompt to finish each and every frikkin kill with a melee.

Hot take, 4 to 9 years late, now cold.

It's called differentiation, trying to be innovative and add some dimension into a genre that really needs it to stay alive. People don't want to just run around shooting things mindlessly; the death of arena shooters and their ilk have demonstrated this quite conclusively. If such a game were to thrive, it would require some depth to the gameplay, which 2016's introduction of glory kills and Eternal's additional ammo management system sought to address.

These non-traditional aspects were both divisive upon arrival (hence my initial comment) but are now seen quite favorably overall and arguably were central to the rebirth of the franchise. You're free to have whatever opinion you wish and frankly, nobody cares enough about some random Steam person to try to change it, but you're being myopic and too wrapped up in the "what" and not the "why"; a forest for the trees type thing.

[Nikanuur]

Originally posted by Carbon:

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

You may disagree and you may find it silly, but it's my opinion, and you haven't changed it—if that was your intend. Certainly not with an argument based off of a blatant exception in otherwise ammo-rich game, nor by disregarding the elephants in the room—that the run-of-the-mill FPSs (much less those that laid foundations to the FPS genre), never revolved around some niché, self-serving mechanics, such acquiring semi-rare ammo mostly only by chain-sawing creatures, or having a hard-to-pass prompt to finish each and every frikkin kill with a melee.

Hot take, 4 to 9 years late, now cold.

It's called differentiation, trying to be innovative and add some dimension into a genre that really needs it to stay alive. People don't want to just run around shooting things mindlessly; the death of arena shooters and their ilk have demonstrated this quite conclusively. If such a game were to thrive, it would require some depth to the gameplay, which 2016's introduction of glory kills and Eternal's additional ammo management system sought to address.

These non-traditional aspects were both divisive upon arrival (hence my initial comment) but are now seen quite favorably overall and arguably were central to the rebirth of the franchise. You're free to have whatever opinion you wish and frankly, nobody cares enough about some random Steam person to try to change it, but you're being myopic and too wrapped up in the "what" and not the "why"; a forest for the trees type thing.

Yeah, sure, and that's perhaps why the retro scene has been so booming. And that "nobody cares" stereotypical, internet ad-absurdum... don't make me laugh.

Golden standards don't mean there can't be an innovation. But an innovation doesn't mean against-the-grain oddity repeated thrice in the row. Which, by the way, self-burns the cheap argument about "sticking to something for too long" for the second time. My arguments still stand. Now also better than your math.

[Joker]

the ammo acquisition concept from eternal seems to be present in TDA. the 'ammo loop' so to speak is simply:

1. spend ammo
   
2. run out of ammo
   
3. chainsaw to get ammo back

TDA seems to do the exact same thing from what we can see in the footage, except now its just:

1. spend ammo
   
2. run out of ammo
   
3. glory kill to get ammo back

the only differences will be glory killing instead of chainsawing and animation speed for the glory kills is significantly faster than chainsawing. i think everybody who spent a decent amount of time in the eternal forum can tell you with most certainty that the reason for this change is due to the many people who complained about the chainsaw and glory killing locking you in place, killing your momentum, and the animations taking some time to finish. they seem to have countered this a lot with the speed of glory killing.

[Carbon]

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

Yeah, sure, and that's perhaps why the retro scene has been so booming. And that "nobody cares" stereotypical, internet ad-absurdum... don't make me laugh.

Golden standards don't mean there can't be an innovation. But an innovation doesn't mean against-the-grain oddity repeated thrice in the row. Which, by the way, self-burns the cheap argument about "sticking to something for too long" for the second time. My arguments still stand. Now also better than your math.

You're just adding width (and some implacable ideas) to the same opinion while sales and reviews stand between that and reality. You certainly don't vote with your wallet, whatever that might imply.

And yes, nobody does care. About either of us. Thankfully.

[Ace]

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

1. Game focusing on the closed-arena combat.

Nothing wrong with this, it's fun.

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

2. Constant ammo shortage in what is a frenzy-killing FPS, with the twist of having to chainsaw enemies for ammo drops.

Learn to manage your ammo, playing these days i never have ammo problems, it's a player issue.

Originally posted by Nikanuur:

3. Almost-like-forced, ubiquitious "shoot until you can melee him".

Nothing in eternal is forced especially the glory kills, the game gives you tons of ways of getting what you need back, learn to use them.