Doom 3 has aged better as a game compared to Half-Life 2 imo

[forsanxl]

Don't get me wrong, I think it's fair to say that even for the time, when Half-Life 2 came out. It overshadowed what Doom 3 did in terms of the technical aspect.

But to me, time has been kind towards Doom 3. Sure, you had to stop and listen to a few audio logs here and there, to hear out for storage locker codes, but you can still play it at a somewhat fast pace when demons show up and what gimmicks there are don't last very long.

Meanwhile in Half-Life 2, there are entire chapters dedicated to gimmicks. Like being an Antlion guard, driving a buggy/boat. Which can be fun for few minutes, but can also get boring fairly quickly. Black Mesa East is basically an unskippable cutscene that lasts close to 20 minutes. Oh and the annoying teammates that block your way too, I'll take one sentry bot over dozens of brain dead teammates.

Don't get me wrong on this either, I think they're both great games for different reasons. I just enjoy Doom 3 more.

[Bullett00th]

I fully agree.

I had an amazing time playing Half-Life 2. And I tried it again with some mods but I think I stopped at Nova Prospect and never actually finished it a second time.

Doom 3 I keep coming back to every few years and enjoy the hell out of it every time. I also don't see the emails and audiologs as gimmicks. On the contrary, I enjoy them for their authenticity and for how they introduce the story kinda in reverse and slowly build the puzzle of what happened.

On top of that I simply enjoy Doom 3 as a shooter much more than HL2.

[PCConsoleGamer]

Doom 3 was/still is one of the best games out there.

[forsanxl]

Originally posted by Bullett00th:

I fully agree.

I had an amazing time playing Half-Life 2. And I tried it again with some mods but I think I stopped at Nova Prospect and never actually finished it a second time.

Doom 3 I keep coming back to every few years and enjoy the hell out of it every time. I also don't see the emails and audiologs as gimmicks. On the contrary, I enjoy them for their authenticity and for how they introduce the story kinda in reverse and slowly build the puzzle of what happened.

On top of that I simply enjoy Doom 3 as a shooter much more than HL2.

I agree with you about Doom 3 as a shooter. It still has most of the weapons one would expect from a Doom game and the same goes for the enemy types too. Imo, I felt that Half-Life 2 banked too much on the Gravity Gun to make up for the loss of the experimental weapons from the original, but that didn't work out well as time went on imo. I feel the same about the lack of Bullsquids and Houndeyes, they chose to throw more Combine Soldiers at the player instead.

[Bullett00th]

Originally posted by forsanxl:

I agree with you about Doom 3 as a shooter. It still has most of the weapons one would expect from a Doom game and the same goes for the enemy types too. Imo, I felt that Half-Life 2 banked too much on the Gravity Gun to make up for the loss of the experimental weapons from the original, but that didn't work out well as time went on imo. I feel the same about the lack of Bullsquids and Houndeyes, they chose to throw more Combine Soldiers at the player instead.

Yeah enemy variety is another issue with HL2.

I appreciate the way they diversified headcrabs and headcrab zombies, and antlions are interesting both as an enemy and as a weapon. But in general it's not as fun as HL1 in terms of weapons and enemies.

Combine are a whole different issue. They're worse than the simple soldiers in HL1, but they're also indicative of what went BADLY wrong during development.
Remember the 2003 E3 demo of HL2? It showed really advanced combine AI, coordination and use of physics with Freeman blocking a door in Ravenholm and the combine trying to break through. There's none of that in the final version, and to this day they have pretty barebones and braindead AI.

F.E.A.R. released the following year and pretty much destoryed HL2 as a shooter despite being monotonous and having basically no enemy variety whatsoever

[Ikagura]

I totally disagree.

[PsyWarVeteran]

HL2 was a massive dissapointment after the fantastic original game and is rightfully criticized by a handful of people who aren't blinded by the "realistic box stacking physics" as being a game with a lot of gimmicks, banter and exposition that slows the gameplay down to a halt, bad weapon and enemy variety, terrible gunplay etc. etc.

Doom 3, even though clunky, has gameplay as its main focus, HL2 feels like a tech demo that got turned into a game.

[Ikagura]

Originally posted by PsyWarVeteran:

HL2 was a massive dissapointment after the fantastic original game and is rightfully criticized by a handful of people who aren't blinded by the "realistic box stacking physics" as being a game with a lot of gimmicks, banter and exposition that slows the gameplay down to a halt, bad weapon and enemy variety, terrible gunplay etc. etc.

Doom 3, even though clunky, has gameplay as its main focus, HL2 feels like a tech demo that got turned into a game.

Yet the Source engine is still seen as a big advancement in gaming and how realistic it still is.

[forsanxl]

Originally posted by Ikagura:

Originally posted by PsyWarVeteran:

HL2 was a massive dissapointment after the fantastic original game and is rightfully criticized by a handful of people who aren't blinded by the "realistic box stacking physics" as being a game with a lot of gimmicks, banter and exposition that slows the gameplay down to a halt, bad weapon and enemy variety, terrible gunplay etc. etc.

Doom 3, even though clunky, has gameplay as its main focus, HL2 feels like a tech demo that got turned into a game.

Yet the Source engine is still seen as a big advancement in gaming and how realistic it still is.

Still though, at the end of the day, graphics aren't everything.

[forsanxl]

Originally posted by PsyWarVeteran:

HL2 was a massive dissapointment after the fantastic original game and is rightfully criticized by a handful of people who aren't blinded by the "realistic box stacking physics" as being a game with a lot of gimmicks, banter and exposition that slows the gameplay down to a halt, bad weapon and enemy variety, terrible gunplay etc. etc.

Doom 3, even though clunky, has gameplay as its main focus, HL2 feels like a tech demo that got turned into a game.

Funny you say that Half-Life 2 felt like a tech demo turned into a game, because some players say that for Doom 3, but then some of those same players don't apply that same logic to Half-Life 2.

[PsyWarVeteran]

Originally posted by forsanxl:

Funny you say that Half-Life 2 felt like a tech demo turned into a game, because some players say that for Doom 3, but then some of those same players don't apply that same logic to Half-Life 2.

Some peoples' fanboyism knows no bounds, example above, take it from me:
The original HL is my favorite game of all time, logic says I should like HL2 or at least try to sell it to other people by pointing out its positives etc. though I can easily say that HL2 was a massive disappointment. A great technological achievement but not fun enough as a game, which is the most important thing.

Doom 3 was crushed by HL2, graphics, mapping and many other things made it seem like it was incompetent yet actually, it was a good game that was unfortunate enough to be released at the same time as another, far more anticipated juggernaut.

[Ikagura]

Originally posted by forsanxl:

Originally posted by Ikagura:

Yet the Source engine is still seen as a big advancement in gaming and how realistic it still is.

Still though, at the end of the day, graphics aren't everything.

I never talked about graphics tho.

Doom 3 kinda looks ugly compared to HL²'s facial features.
Doom 3 was a horror game with the Doom IP slapped on it, Half-Life 2 is really a sequel to Half-Life.

Originally posted by forsanxl:

Funny you say that Half-Life 2 felt like a tech demo turned into a game, because some players say that for Doom 3, but then some of those same players don't apply that same logic to Half-Life 2.

Doom 3's tech advancement was the way it managed shadows, nothing more.

HL² may have been a tech demo in some way but it was a better one than Doom 3.

Originally posted by PsyWarVeteran:

Some peoples' fanboyism knows no bounds

Oh right, because people prefering HL2 over the first are automatically fanboys, got it.

[forsanxl]

Originally posted by Ikagura:

Originally posted by forsanxl:

Still though, at the end of the day, graphics aren't everything.

I never talked about graphics tho.

Doom 3 kinda looks ugly compared to HL²'s facial features.
Doom 3 was a horror game with the Doom IP slapped on it, Half-Life 2 is really a sequel to Half-Life.

Ok, but you knew what I meant right? Even if Half-Life 2 was more revolutionary in the technical aspect than Doom 3, as a game, as good as it is, it trips and stumbles as a sequel to Half-Life 1. PsyWarVeteran said it well above.

[PsyWarVeteran]

Originally posted by Ikagura:

Doom 3 was a horror game with the Doom IP slapped on it, Half-Life 2 is really a sequel to Half-Life.

Nonsense, HL2 has nothing in common with the original besides the crowbar and is full of retcons, it could very well be a original game and no one would question it.

[Ikagura]

Funny how someone who likes HL² is a fanboy but you're acting like a Half-Life 1 fundamentamlist.

[PsyWarVeteran]

Originally posted by Ikagura:

fundamentamlist.