Project Warlock
Shootrage

@lpowell - If I sounded like an elitist snob saying that only noobs would enjoy Doom2016 then I communicated my thoughts poorly. The gist is that, IMO, Doom2016's strength is more in it's spectacle rather than it's mechanics.

@dumptruck - Sometimes the challenge is the fun :D

@qmaster - Nice find!

@shambler - So just imagine my words of wisdom are actually here

Imagining so hard right now. 

Dear Santa,

need edit button, no write good.

-kp 

Project Warlock looks alright, they've actually placed some restrictions on themselves. That Shootrage one looks more like a badly made mid 2000s FPS than a good 90s one. 

The monsters in Doom 4 also don't look demonic in the slightest. You can tell the designer for them worked on Pacific Rim because they look like kaiju rather than actual demons. The game itself also has proper MP rather than a halo clone. If Doom 3 SP had always run it would be better off. 

 

Try coming up with an actual argument please.This looks like something out of Pacific Rim https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e8/fc/17/e8fc17931e54204b7c0c7273fb44b974.jpg 

Post with a name and try again. 

You are wrong 

I haven't played Doom 2016 yet, nor have I seen Pacific Rim, but going through http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Doom_(2016)_Monsters I get the point anon is making. The Possessed/zombies look fairly Doom-like, as does the Baron of Hell (that thing is awesome!) the Mancubus, and the Cacodemon, sort of.

The Hellguard, the Cyber Demon, this guy ( http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Possessed_Security ) the Hell Knight and the Pinky look more like some kind of alien rather than demons to me. 

The Possessed Security and Possessed Soldiers look a lot like strogg, I assumed they were a call back to Quake 2 and 4. 

http://doomwiki.org

The wikia is run by nazi 

Get out. How dare you mention those 2 abomin4tions. Don't you know Quake has never had an actual sequel?

(Quake 3 is only half an attempt since it's singleplayer sucked, ie didn't have any.) 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zqjNkdXT94 less of the retro but plenty of the possibility of old skool visceral action. Unlike a lot of these games it seems to have a really strong theme and atmosphere.

Painkiller and Bulletstorm devs, well if they can lose the general hodgepodge hordiness of Painkiller, and pretty much everything about Bulletstorm, it could be good.... 

the scale seems a bit whack though, like the player character's two foot tall or something. Could be intentional, but it doesn't come across that way to me. 

Looks really nice, but that's the thing... Of all the games i've ever played, Ethan Carter was the only one to ever give me motion sickness. I hope I don't have the same experience with this. 

Yeah, I've watched this trailer like 10 times already (I'm the filthy anon that double-posted this last night). I love the aesthetic but have some reservations in regards to gameplay. The trailer looks like a very, very, very pretty Painkiller with abilities. Early in wrath, there was an ability, spririt leap, that was basically identical the one one demonstrated in the video (@0:50ish). I had this there to make up for the slow player movement. In the end, boosted player speed was more fun. I feel like that's what they're going for: a slower, somewhat tactical approach. It could be really cool, but I think the gameplay will be pretty slow, but it's too soon to tell. Honestly, with that aesthetic, I'd still play the shit out of it even with Painkiller gameplay :D

@text_fish - the scale seems a bit whack though, like the player character's two foot tall or something

I would bet it's absolutely intentional. Pretty oldschool, too. Not only is quakeguy short, but the camera is in his chest, same with Doomguy... and Duke Nukem... and Caleb... 

have you tried the Apocryph alpha? They added a blurry effect when turning that gave me a similar sensation.

A supposedly game based on 20 years old gameplay that produces dizziness when played that way is ridiculous. I could only go forward or backwards during the combats due to that. 

1. Excessive headbob = worst offender
2. Motion blur = redundant garbage
3. Depth of field = redundant...your eyes do that for you. 

Not least because it is completely stupid fake bullshit. In real life your mind / balance compensates for the headbob in your vision so when you're running it doesn't feel like you're bouncing around all over the fucking place - because hey 40,000 years of evolution have worked that out. Maybe in another 40,000 years devs will work out that something that is simultaneously unrealistic AND wrong AND detrimental shouldn't be in their games. 

Basic rule of thumb: assume people have poor eyesight and don't need any help blurring things further either through motion, filtering, etc. Don't make it more of a chore to enjoy the game. 

That fucking FOV in Witchfire though X_X
The fuck is wrong with people 

We can hope they have an adjustment in the settings. It's a contentious enough issue that it should be standard in all PC/MAC/Linux versions of the game. I'm not too fond myself of anything above 80 or 85 depending on if it is an indoor or outdoor game but to each his own. 

That fucking FOV in Witchfire though X_X

Yeah, it's pretty terrible. Hopefully it's just for the teaser to get that cinematic feel. 

Its like having fucking glaucoma, I don't understand the attraction of claustrophobic tunnel vision, console OR pc, its fucking awfull no matter where.

Is it due to the limitations of controllers for FPS? then fucking find another / better way to play FPS from the couch ffs. 

It's due to performance. Lower FOV = Higher Performance because you have less to draw on screen. Historically the consoles have been less performant than PC rigs.

There is also the "screen-is-like-looking-out-a-window" theory which says that people feel wierd if they can see more "out" their computer moniter than would be possible if it were a window. This is of course complete nonsense.