• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Game Informer's February cover is Doom

I think people are a bit crazy when they say the game doesn't look good, I think it looks really really good. Much better than most FPS that have been shown. Cannot wait for Doom info!
 
dg.jpg

Actually pretty accurate looking
 
Near looking cover. It will be interesting to see modernized versions of classic Doom enemies, and where ID takes the overall story.
 
This version of Cyberdemon still looks like a Zerg

Hell, GoW's Brumak looks more intimidating and fitting for DOOM

Bring back the H.R. Giger-inspired look please
 
I remain cautiously optimistic about the campaign after dumping like 20 hours into the alpha tests on PC. After getting over combat not being just a better version of Doom 2, actually looking like it doesn't play even remotely similar to it, its easier to look forward to as a semi-new concept in the monster mass murder sub-genre of FPS. The doesn't really help the art style though which remains pretty bland. Even if it does suck the multiplayer really did it for me, despite being a dumbed down version of an arena shooter I can't remember the last time I played a deathmatch tuned this well. Probably not since UT2004?

As for Game Informer's coverage I expect a nice mix of interesting new tidbits and cringeworthy quotes from the devs like that one where Marty Stratton said classic Doom's combat was about fighting in arenas. smh
 
i tried the game in alpha headshots dont kill instant ..
loved it..
this game takes skill .
it was just like ut2004 loved it
 
i tried the game in alpha headshots dont kill instant ..
loved it..
this game takes skill .
it was just like ut2004 loved it

Yeh the alpha really did, it's going to be a big wake up call to a lot of babied gamers.

The whine threads on here will be rich.
 
I remain cautiously optimistic about the campaign after dumping like 20 hours into the alpha tests on PC. After getting over combat not being just a better version of Doom 2, actually looking like it doesn't play even remotely similar to it, its easier to look forward to as a semi-new concept in the monster mass murder sub-genre of FPS. The doesn't really help the art style though which remains pretty bland. Even if it does suck the multiplayer really did it for me, despite being a dumbed down version of an arena shooter I can't remember the last time I played a deathmatch tuned this well. Probably not since UT2004?

As for Game Informer's coverage I expect a nice mix of interesting new tidbits and cringeworthy quotes from the devs like that one where Marty Stratton said classic Doom's combat was about fighting in arenas. smh

For me, its like doing a reboot of Casablanca or Die Hard. The original is still perfect, what more could you really add? I fully expect this to be a highly competent modern remake of an influential masterpiece. The Force Awakens of video games, lol. Something slick and fast and fun in the moment, but quickly recedes from memory. A year from now? When I want to play Doom? I can't imagine I'll think twice about this version. Why play the imitation when I can have the real thing?
 
For me, its like doing a reboot of Casablanca or Die Hard. The original is still perfect, what more could you really add? I fully expect this to be a highly competent modern remake of an influential masterpiece. The Force Awakens of video games, lol. Something slick and fast and fun in the moment, but quickly recedes from memory. A year from now? When I want to play Doom? I can't imagine I'll think twice about this version. Why play the imitation when I can have the real thing?

Some really bold claims before the game has even been released, I'd understand if you'd played it but to say these things before it's even out, it's all speculation. Also, the Force Awakens turned out better than "Something slick and fast and fun in the moment, but quickly recedes from memory" for most people.
 
For me, its like doing a reboot of Casablanca or Die Hard. The original is still perfect, what more could you really add? I fully expect this to be a highly competent modern remake of an influential masterpiece. The Force Awakens of video games, lol. Something slick and fast and fun in the moment, but quickly recedes from memory. A year from now? When I want to play Doom? I can't imagine I'll think twice about this version. Why play the imitation when I can have the real thing?

My perspective is that it barely qualifies as an remake, or even an imitation if the single player footage is representative of most of the game. It really doesn't look like original Doom at all, it's like a sped up RAGE with demons and mantling and that melee pinata mechanic. They can talk all they want in interviews about how they were inspired by the original but all they really have to show for it is some recycled demon designs, the E1M1 theme, and hey check it out it's the super shotgun remember the super shotgun??? from classic game Doom from the 90s!! etc... Not denying that the way they've branded and marketed the game so far isn't a completely cynical approach from a company that employs basically nobody responsible for the game they're supposedly making the successor to but when it comes down to actually playing the game it probably isn't going to matter to me. This new game called DOOM, no matter how it turns out, isn't going to change my habit of playing Doom 2 WADs every couple months.

Honestly I have no expectations of it having any long term status as a modern classic or anything like that. SnapMap is too limited and feels like an artificial attempt to build a community around the game, especially being console friendly when console players aren't going to give a shit about this game 2 months after it comes out.
 
The Cyberdemon looks off a little bit, mostly because it's arm appears to have slightly too many mechanical parts. But the Cacodemons, coloring, and the giant skull in the background are spot on.
 
Damn, this thing looks like Doom. Not like that horror corridor thing they tried to pass off as Doom in the early 2000s.
 
That looks great. I'm still on damage control until it releases. I am anticipating the new DOOM without that many big details. We've had concept art for years it seems.
 
Glad they got rid of the green fart gas filter in hell, if the color is accurate.

I like the design of the Cacodemon, but really dislike the Cyberdemon and whatever the hell that purple thing is.
Cyberdemon looks like a villan from a kids CG movie.
 
Honestly, that gameplay of "Hell" being a brown desert environment that didn't look out of place in say, Borderlands made me lose a lot of steam, it was bland and uninteresting.
 
I'm surprised to see people even argue that OG doom wasn't a bright and colorful game. It's like Yoshi's Island compared to Doom 3 and the new one.
 
Excited to say the least. Loved what I played in the alpha, and it really indicates that from a pure "feel" perspective, they understand Doom well enough to make the single player an action-packed, gory blast.

Hopefully we get details on mechanics, and how they've changed. The glory kills are a neat idea, but need balance to keep them exciting and useful.
 
I see the Doom "purists" are still showing their "concerns."

Tell me about it. Shameful behavior. We all know that the definitive take on Doom (2016) is that it exceeded expectations, and the developer delivered a worthy follow-up to the previous entries. There's no need for any skepticism for a project that's been in development for nearly a decade or has three-to-four external studios handling major components of the game.
 
Top Bottom