Preferred WAD difficulty style?

[robocaco]

3 hours ago, Btyb88 said:

Well-made slaughter maps or any map that assumes you will die the first time. Some of my favorite moments are replaying the same Sunder map/fight multiple times having to figure out the best strategy. Of course if the map is just 100 Cyberdemons in a 512 square room, that ain't fun.

Maps that expect you to beat them first-try just seem too easy and a bit boring to me.

[Mayomancer]

Tough encounters on a smaller scale on a map with some clever progression, so it's like getting ambushed by angry badgers while trying to read a map.

[DynamiteKaitorn]

As long as the map errs on the Easier side, I'll likely gel with it more than brutally hard, RNG-Fest maps.

[Deleted Account]

my fav fights are where you can stand back and spam rockets into a big crowd.

[Yuki Senmatsu]

UV with Fastmonsters unless it's too hard then either, HMP or w/o Fastmonsters, and maps that are QUAKE 1 Hard Mode style

[Nefelibeta]

Speed of Doom is probably my favourite if you ignore some of the Joshy maps.

Sometimes ribbiks maps. (and only sometimes)

[BaileyTW]

I like it when there is a huge contrast of difficulty between early and later maps but that the curve in difficulty is at least kinda smooth, and when the hard maps do come around that not all of em are like 25+ minute maps and some of em are just nice and short ones I can fell good about getting fast. Speed of Doom and Alien Vendetta have a gradual curve of difficulty which I like but by god Speed of Doom especially has like no short later maps that aren't map 23, and Alien Vendetta has some chunky-ass maps later on which are my favorite of the bunch but still.

[MoreMending]

I prefer slaughter maps that aren't FULLY slaughter, like 10-20 enemies in each room is enough for me

Edited January 8, 2022 by MoreMending

[horselessheadsman]

Any level of challenge is fine as long its not frustrating, or boring, which slaughter maps tend to become for me.
Eye of the beholder and all that..

[Thelokk]

Instant turnoffs for me:

 

- Slaughter maps. They're a trend, they were fun for a while, now they need to go. A 10x10 block of revenants times 20 is not good map design. 

- Maps that don't implement difficulties. Why not put a few hours more into your map, and ensure that the HMP /HNTR crowd can have a good time? the UV-only thing is another trend that needs to go, it's lazy and unfriendly design.

- Difficulty by platforming. Doom is not a platformer, period. 

[LadyMistDragon]

I can take pretty much any difficulty up to something like Deus Vult, but I prefer things to be more along the lines of Speed of Doom's first half or perhaps most of Scythe 2. Difficulty curve's the sort of thing I never really gave much consideration but honestly, it shouldn't drop the ball in the last third just because the mapper in question has ran out of decent ideas. (read: Perdition's Gate and this other one I played for Random WAD Adventures called Armagedn that @Doomkid of all people left a shitpost review. Ancient Aliens is probably the best example of what a host of guest mappers can do for the last 3rd or so.

Edited January 12, 2022 by LadyMistDragon

[Doomkid]

lol I think that link may be wrong, the only old fart I see leaving a shitpost review in that thread is Scuba Steve!

 

EDIT 2 weeks later for some reason: I don't see how it's a shitpost review, but hey

[Andromeda]

The link in question: https://www.doomworld.com/idgames/levels/doom2/a-c/armagedn

 

Not sure if it qualifies as a shitpost review honestly.

[Astronomical]

I prefer Hell beneath style maps, small limited movement with just enough enemies to be threatening to the average player.  American McGee was the best of the original doom team, and the style of thinly populated cramped maps are my favorite of the iwads.

[bofu]

I prefer WADs that have an oldschool aesthetic (but with more attention to detail than was typical in the 90s) and a gameplay loop that isn't just 100% mindless slaughter, but instead switches things up and relies upon limited monsters placed in dangerous situations for difficulty. I don't want to be circlestrafing and dumping BFG shots into boring hordes of the same enemy for minutes at a time, but at the same time, it can be fun to get dumped into a well-made arena with dozens to hundreds of enemies if there are enough resources and interesting terrain setpieces to make it engaging.

 

Sure, any mapper can throw 50 revenants at you in a wide open arena, but in my opinion, a great mapper can figure out a way to make 2 revenants trickier to deal with than those 50.

[Graf Zahl]

I prefer maps with lots of smaller enemies over those with less bigger ones.

And I generally avoid maps which treat the Revenant as a cannon fodder type of enemy.

 

[Uncle 80]

Classic style, monster count somewhere between 100-400 depending on map size (more monsters is ok if the map is an epic of course, like "Unstable Journey"). I'm generally not interested in OTT slaugther/"combat puzzle" - with a few exceptions, like Vanguard for instance (but that WAD grants the player so much stuff it's barely "combat puzzle" anyways).

 

Exploration, puzzle elements and secrets are also very much appreciated features! And cohesive style in the designs, be it custom or stock textures, as long as they are used for a "purpose" rather than just switching up themes for the sake of it. Music that fits the atmosphere in a map is also a big plus.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Uncle 80

[ReaperAA]

My preferences:

• Maps that are around 15-ish mins long on average. I don't mind if maps are shorter, but long maps in succession start feeling like a slog. Occasional long map is fine for me.
• Middle 2 episodes of Eviternity is generally my ideal comfort difficulty. I don't mind playing easier or harder maps when I am in mood though.
• I prefer maps that make intelligent use of monster to increase difficulty (like Plutonia) and not by throwing hordes of enemies at me (like Hell Revealed).
• I prefer good mix of incidental and arena encounters. All incidental combat or all arena combat can get tiring for me.
• In case of a megawad, I prefer variety in aesthetics. Samey looking aesthetics can get tiring for me.
• I don't like constant difficulty or an exponential difficulty curve in megawads. I prefer more ups and down in difficulty. I feel that breather maps are very important to have, especially in between a group of hard maps. Likewise, if there are many easy maps, it is important to have a tough map in between them to spice things up. Alien Vendetta mostly got it right, with the exception of maps 25, 26 and 27 being 3 consecutive maps that are very long.

[roadworx]

i find myself enjoying slaughter-lite the most, sometimes straying more into the early 2000s slaughter scene (think av and scythe 2) if i'm more in the mood for that. lots of enemies being thrown at me, but never in the style or intensity of modern authors like ribbiks or insane_gazebo. having interconnected layouts so i can be snuck up on and shot in the back of the head is great too

 

that combined with a bit of mild resource deprivation is what i consider ideal

Edited January 13, 2022 by roadworx

[King Know-Nothing]

I like maps where my ass gets burned by clever enemy placement more so than just being overwhelmed. Both can be fun if I can wrap my head around the encounter, but my brain goes 'brrr' in rooms where the combination and use of space feels so particular and filled with intent; JPCP's Odd Encampment's dark strobing room with an Archvile, three Chain Gunners, and a Hell Baron seems like a good quick example for those who've played it. I won't go into a whole break down of it, but it fucked me up the first time I entered it and by the time I finished it I was like "ooooh, that's clever, I like that".

 

Though honestly, as can be so easily said, it all depends on my mood. Sometimes I love levels that kick my ass and force me to really think it through, but then I love something that just makes me feel like a badass as I plow through it. The only particular things I have yet to find a taste for is extreme ammo deprivation or maps that generally strive to be merciless, but who knows, maybe as I get better at the game, I'll find I like them as well. I guess, to me, a dynamic range is the most important thing, or else it starts to become monotonous.

[Hazel-Rah]

I definitely prefer maps/megawads that are on the easier side of things. I recently started a pistol-start UV run of the original Doom and even that's stressing me out, haha.

[esselfortium]

I like encounters that encourage me to move around a lot, but I'm not fond of forcing it with constant lock-ins.

 

I like having some breathing room in between major encounters, instead of being instantly punished around every single corner.

 

Revenants are probably the most fun monster to fight.

Skillsaw's brand of gameplay is great because I am not remotely a top-tier player, and he's good at setting up fun challenges that make you feel like you're actually good at this game.

[Ludi]

I like maps with a difficulty curve from the start to end, but generally I like the difficulty to be a bit harder than Plutonia

[ChopBlock223]

Mutiny on HMP was a very good sweetspot for me, a good challenge which never felt unfair, any death was me fucking up.

[Cruduxy Pegg]

I prefer maps with more complex movement ( hello pits and lava pools ) than giant kill zones or corridor crawls. I don't really care much about how hard a map is though. As long as it is engaging I will just continue playing most of the time. Best way to lose me is to ironically make me get lost finding how to progress, fastest way to make me stop playing. Not even gonna bother noclipping through doors or checking how to progress if it happens a lot.

[Rymante]

Maps that lean toward being tough enough to keep you on your toes but not completely crush you are my preference.

 

I also tend to prefer shorter maps that use both the level design & limited enemy placement to make very interesting combat encounters as apposed to large, lengthy slaughter gauntlets.

[RHhe82]

I already answered here, but as I’ve played very little modern wads so far, so my views evolve quickly.

 

I still believe microslaughtery elements are okay by me, but it’s a fine line there. I was playing Tangerine Nightmare, and I was really enjoying it until the last map (barring credits map and the secret one) which, I don’t why, I bothered playing it. I guess I would have given up, if I hadn’t discovered I was almost at the end.

 

I’m also starting to dislike long levels. I was playing TNT: Revilution, and I really enjoyed that too, until the level started to get long, evilutionisque chores. Sometimes long levels are great (some of Interception II’s maps are examples of this, such as Slipgate Ex Nihilo), but my sweet spot are maps that take 10-20 minutes at most (and I’m a slow player).

[Zaxxon]

I like clever level design and cool architecture. If these things are in your WAD, i'll play it to the end no matter how difficult and punishing it is. However, by clever level design i don't mean oversized maze-fests with 100 switches to unlock a mystery path somewhere on the level that leads you to finding a key, to open another confusing section. A clever and cool level design for me would be something like Plutonia, Plutonia 2, Alien Vendetta and another one i just finished yesterday, Flashback to Hell, just to name a few. I enjoy stuff like Back to Saturn X Episode 1 (i haven't tried 2 yet), just because it looks amazing and fresh, but the size of its levels with the tons of unnecessary optional areas that are solely there to further confuse the player, and it's neverending mish-mashes of switch puzzles, left a sour taste in my mouth. To put it short, if a map goes on for more than 20 minutes on a blind playthrough, and has above 200 monsters in it, with sometimes multiple Arch-Viles in one place, then it's not my type of map. I also don't like that the 32 maps in BTSX are all in the same or similar setting.Still i feel kind of bad for criticizing BTSX or other similar WADs, because how can i say a bad word about something that clearly requires a massive effort and talent to create? But It's just a matter of opinion and personal taste.

 

That aside, if i forget for a second my level design and architecture prefrences, and we talk solely about the difficulty, aka, how hard it is to complete the maps deathless on UV, then i prefer WADs with balanced difficulty progression that caters towards non-pistol start... because i like the wads i play to feel like one whole game, rather than a collection of random levels that feel like you're starting from scratch everytime. Also, I don't like slaughter-fest WADs, but i like the ocassional surprising "big fight" set piece... i just don't like it when it's in every level, because then it gets stale.

 

When it comes to my personal best combination of design, level size, monster count, puzzle complexity and overall challenge, my go to example is rather unpopular - Doom 64! Of course,  with a mouse and keyboard, and on it's highest skill setting "Watch me Die'', because it is among the easier titles in the series. The levels are clever, but not too big, the monster encounters and their placement is very clever and it even has a few big showdowns spread throughout the game to mix it up, while the rest is a classic Doom style map (the good ones). Most og Doom veterans will probably find it way too easy, but for me it's a well-rounded game that any Doom player can get into and enjoy. And if someone is looking for that kind of experience, i'll recomend again Flashback to Hell which i think can be enjoyed by most Doom players, old and new, skilled and not so skilled.

Edited February 3, 2022 by Zaxxon

[Frankouu]

Stuff like Eviternity map 29 that was phenomenal, long, multiple harder fights, but not too grindy or tediously gimmicky. Map 29 is absolute pinnacle of Eviternity IMHO. Otherwise stuff like Ancient Aliens or Going Down, Medium to small sized maps with a respectable challenge or a fun gimmick.