Why is it so underrated ?

Why is it so underrated ?

Attached: 36033-doom3-windows-front-cover-2157848988.jpg (799x845, 213.54K)

It's been forgiven recently I feel. Imagine the people who shit on this game playing some of the shit we get today like Gone Home or Halo Infinite. I loved Doom 3

I feel like the term FPS has been hijacked by the boomer shooter crowd too. FPS now means any doom clone basically.

This game was the reason I got my first gaming PC. This game was agg

literally too scary

it was system shock with a doom skin. i liked it but i fully understand why its a black sheep in the series.

DOOM 3 discussion today is usually fair to it.
I think it's a decent game and it has some good mechanics, but there are many options that are more fun and the nuDOOM games feel far more faithful to the series' strengths

"Gee what's behind this door?"
>Imp Lunge
"Huh, cool a hidden cache!"
>Imp Lunge
"Surely they wouldn't make anot-"
>Imp Lunge
"All right, 1v1 on this imp, now to get some distance and -"
>Imp Lunge

People give Doom 3 shit for the torch shit and shotgun spread (for some fucking reason, must be a skill issue) but the imp lunges are by far the WORST, most overused aspect of this game. I swear there's a bit in Delta labs where it happens back to back.
Game's okay on it's own merits I guess.

>but there are many options that are more fun and the nuDOOM games feel far more faithful to the series' strengths
this was never the concern when Doom 3 came out. It was meant to be the next logical step in the series, which it actually was in the first place, a survival horror game. There isn't a set formula for doom, doesn't need to be an arcadey shootem-up. that was the original game, and nu-doom is okay but unfortunately it relies on an arena based level design which gets tedious. I would say doom 3 is superior, it is also about 20 years old at this point and the aesthetic still holds up, even if the metal corridors gets tedious in many levels. They should have expaned the hell maps imo.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 79.79K)

>There isn't a set formula for doom
objectively incorrect since there were multiple games that all had the exact same playstyle before survival horror doom 3 came out. this was the biggest complaint from people who didnt like it

not like the imps are a threat.
too easy and lame,other than the hell levels,the whole game was poor in what i like in DOOM,while not offering anything compelling in return. (like id put DOOM64 below DOOM 2,but at least i found it's gameplay good and its atmosphere to be consistently great)

Imp lunge is a free shotgun kill.
Plus you can use geometry to block them when you know they're coming.
They're only annoying on the first playthrough

What games doom 1 and 2? I played doom 3 when it was released, never saw anyone complain about it being slow paced. Most people loved the horror aspect and the graphical and sound design. Frankly I dont give a shit if they were displeased, this was one of the last games the original ID put there heart in. Dont complain about doom 3 if nu-doom scratches your itch. I never understood why people get combative over it, they can have both styles if they want. I will say doom 3 is more sophisticated on many ways.

It was more similar to Half-Life than System Shock

Barrier to entry because of fear factor filtered like 75% of the playerbase whether they'll admit it or not lmap

Attached: 1653223691107.png (641x731, 255.91K)

Because people wanted a fast action shooter like the previous dooms and instead got an atmospheric horror game. A good one, but they don't care.

>There isn't a set formula for doom, doesn't need to be an arcadey shootem-up.
>I would say doom 3 is superior
The classic DOOM games are typically considered more fun, then and now. The series doesn't need to be anything in particular, but if you abandon the strengths of every other game and replace them with elements that feel slow and weak, it's not a surprise when fans ask for what they used to have
It could have been great, if it came out instead of HL2 and did what that game did as good as it did, though it would still feel like an awkward shift in format

You know you CAN play doom 3 as a fast shooter. People just don't because it's dark and scary and doing that in that situation takes bravery they don't have lol.

People who didn't go into it expecting it to feel much more like survival horror were probably sorely disappointed at how sluggish the gameplay felt in comparison.

Also, I'd argue it's the worst out of the mainline franchise, but still really good.

at least metadoom is epic

The game mechanics are designed to prevent that. The whole flashlight deal is meant to be a huge compromise and it slows gameplay down as an intended effect
Abandoning the flashlight to go guns blazing leads to struggling more against fewer enemies, than in the classic games, as you aren't nearly as much of a powerhouse.
So playing it the same way is just more frustrating

muh duct tape mod

Have you ever tried it? In fact have you even ever played the damn game at all?

Blame the BFG edition

Fails as an FPS because its just a linear mindless shooter without interesting setpieces but that 1 time with the lamp guy
Fails as a horror game because every jump scare is predictable and only 2 year olds are afraid of the dark
Fails as a doom game because it takes way too long to reveal the roster of enemies, so by the time the prospect of facing interesting combinations of enemies is real (opposed to the 1 imp jumping you after opening a door then a zombie grunting and appearing behind a corner which makes up 80% of the game), you're at the final boss and the game ends