By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Doom for Switch Reviews - 78 Metacritic (45 critics)

DonFerrari on 10 November 2017
Mnementh said:
Pemalite said:

False.
The PC can be portable on top of having superior visuals, controls and performance.

Indeed they can. However, artificially inflating scores because the hardware is portable is biased in my eyes.
Review the game for the games merits, not the hardware it operates on.

The difference with your examples is that... The Home Consoles don't have compromised controls in their comparison which directly influences gameplay, mobile devices do.

VR is also an entirely different kettle of fish and requires a much different approach to game development in general.

The Xbox One version also outscores the Playstation 4 version, despite the Playstation 4 version being technically superior in many aspects and that is also silly in my eyes.

Home console have often inferior inputs compared to PC. It is usually not a problem with todays games as they are tailored with console in mind, but try the original Starcraft or games like this that heavily rely on mouse on console.

VR is different, as handheld is different as mobile touchscreen-devices are different.

I agree that XB1 and PS4 versions are similar enough that the scores shouldn't show much differences. But that doesn't mean a platform with inherent differences like the Switch can't improve or deteriorate the experience. It fully depends on the game though, which effect the platform has.

Yep consoles have inferior ports, and no issue with they getting some discounts on the score (unless PC while having better specs end up showing worse due to bugs);

And which improvement have Switch brought to the game to warranty better score?

Mnementh said:
DonFerrari said:

Some games will be better played on VR, others will be the same (or the fact that PSVR makes the game show as in a 300" TV demands an increase on the score?). The simple fact that a PC game is mostly played on a monitor, a console on a big TV and a handheld on a small screen doesn't change the game alone. The only instance where that should be relevant is when the game depends on the portability to work or improve, like geolocation, social factors, etc. In this case the game just downgrade from being portable.

Several PS3 games that came 1 year after X360 sold better, so what is your point on it?

Well 500k for Doom and 1M for Skyrim would probably mean good profits so that would push more support.

You outright say we ignore factors like control-scheme? As I said as example: I really like Jagged alliance, but I despise the 3DS-port, as the controls work horrible. You say it should be ignored, as the game stays the same. The fact that 3DS doesn't use a mouse shouldn't impact the score of the game. Well, I disagree heavily.

That some PS3 late ports sold better than on X360 shows the selling power of the PS3. Some late ports on Switch also sold better than on any other platforms. But the general rule of thumb is: late ports sell worse. That the trend was in some cases reversed shows, that other factors played a big role.

Does that mean you expect sales better than on other platforms for Doom and Skyrim on Switch? But then you say my expectations already would mean financial success, so I'm confused what your point is here.

Were did I outright said it?

The fact you play on KB+M, control or HH in itself shall not give extra or minus point to the game unless that really impact the game in a meaningfull manner.

Errr on the case of PS3 as far as I remember it was more common for late ports to sell better than worse, but that is irrelevant anyway.

Nope I don't expect better sales than any other consoles. I said that if the game do bad, there shouldn't be excuses. And also that the numbers you posted should mean a good success. But if the game instead do 200k (instead of 500k) and 500k (instead of 1M) that would mean it didn't do well, do you agree?

monocle_layton said:
DonFerrari said:

Welcome to the group that considers reviewers to be completely unnecessary and unprofessional.

Some games will be better played on VR, others will be the same (or the fact that PSVR makes the game show as in a 300" TV demands an increase on the score?). The simple fact that a PC game is mostly played on a monitor, a console on a big TV and a handheld on a small screen doesn't change the game alone. The only instance where that should be relevant is when the game depends on the portability to work or improve, like geolocation, social factors, etc. In this case the game just downgrade from being portable.

Several PS3 games that came 1 year after X360 sold better, so what is your point on it?

Well 500k for Doom and 1M for Skyrim would probably mean good profits so that would push more support.

Technically it have everything worse than ALL other platforms, but can be taken with you... Notebook and PSVR connection can also do it without being that lowered.

X1 deserves 2 points more than PS4 because the controller of X1 makes the game better in case you don't know... and is better than the PC version even if you can choose between X1 control or KB+M because the higher framerate, textures and resolution are distractful (sarcasm).

So the score of the game should be based on the price of the machine?

What? I never said that.

The Switch is portable, and plays a very good game with obvious compromises. What exactly is the issue? Resident Evil will obviously get a higher score on a ps4 or xbox one compared to a fucking ds. It's also why Skyrim VR might score higher than Skyrim

So if price have nothing to do with score and portability why bring it?

For me no issue. If the game runs fine and players like it, that is all fine. The discussion was why should portability be a factor to increase or lower the score if that portability doesn't impact the game itself?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Mnementh on 10 November 2017
DonFerrari said:
Mnementh said:

Home console have often inferior inputs compared to PC. It is usually not a problem with todays games as they are tailored with console in mind, but try the original Starcraft or games like this that heavily rely on mouse on console.

VR is different, as handheld is different as mobile touchscreen-devices are different.

I agree that XB1 and PS4 versions are similar enough that the scores shouldn't show much differences. But that doesn't mean a platform with inherent differences like the Switch can't improve or deteriorate the experience. It fully depends on the game though, which effect the platform has.

Yep consoles have inferior ports, and no issue with they getting some discounts on the score (unless PC while having better specs end up showing worse due to bugs);

And which improvement have Switch brought to the game to warranty better score?

Mnementh said:

You outright say we ignore factors like control-scheme? As I said as example: I really like Jagged alliance, but I despise the 3DS-port, as the controls work horrible. You say it should be ignored, as the game stays the same. The fact that 3DS doesn't use a mouse shouldn't impact the score of the game. Well, I disagree heavily.

That some PS3 late ports sold better than on X360 shows the selling power of the PS3. Some late ports on Switch also sold better than on any other platforms. But the general rule of thumb is: late ports sell worse. That the trend was in some cases reversed shows, that other factors played a big role.

Does that mean you expect sales better than on other platforms for Doom and Skyrim on Switch? But then you say my expectations already would mean financial success, so I'm confused what your point is here.

Were did I outright said it?

The fact you play on KB+M, control or HH in itself shall not give extra or minus point to the game unless that really impact the game in a meaningfull manner.

Errr on the case of PS3 as far as I remember it was more common for late ports to sell better than worse, but that is irrelevant anyway.

Nope I don't expect better sales than any other consoles. I said that if the game do bad, there shouldn't be excuses. And also that the numbers you posted should mean a good success. But if the game instead do 200k (instead of 500k) and 500k (instead of 1M) that would mean it didn't do well, do you agree?

I disagree on portability. Portability is fucking awesome and it influences the way the game is perceived. But it depends on the game. I think I'll play Doom mostly docked, as this game resonates not too well with the portable mode. As it loses frames which is for such a fast game kinda important I understand the lower scores and agree. For Skyrim on the other hand I see that playing on the go is fucking awesome and if the game isn't broken or something I think it will be the best version of the game, simply because I can play it whereever.

You think different. That's your opinion. Strange enough though, that for graphic fidelity you just allow to take the platform into consideration, but for nothing else. That seems  random.

Also, I don't see PC-console multiplats not always as better on PC. Ports from console can be hampered by the control-mapping and feel worse on PC. Also mobile games for touchscreen might work badly on console and PC. I think control-scheme alone is a very, VERY important part of the platforms that heavily influences the perception of the game. If you think differently and think a game should get the same score although it was designed for other inputs than the platform it was ported to has - well then it is an opinion I disagree with.

My expectations are more or less based on nothing than feeling. But yes, if it sold lower than my expectations, I would be disappointed. If it sells lower than many persons expectations, then a general consensus of sales-failure will exist. If Bethesdas expectations are not met, the game will be considered a failure.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

DonFerrari on 10 November 2017
Mnementh said:
DonFerrari said:

Yep consoles have inferior ports, and no issue with they getting some discounts on the score (unless PC while having better specs end up showing worse due to bugs);

And which improvement have Switch brought to the game to warranty better score?

Were did I outright said it?

The fact you play on KB+M, control or HH in itself shall not give extra or minus point to the game unless that really impact the game in a meaningfull manner.

Errr on the case of PS3 as far as I remember it was more common for late ports to sell better than worse, but that is irrelevant anyway.

Nope I don't expect better sales than any other consoles. I said that if the game do bad, there shouldn't be excuses. And also that the numbers you posted should mean a good success. But if the game instead do 200k (instead of 500k) and 500k (instead of 1M) that would mean it didn't do well, do you agree?

I disagree on portability. Portability is fucking awesome and it influences the way the game is perceived. But it depends on the game. I think I'll play Doom mostly docked, as this game resonates not too well with the portable mode. As it loses frames which is for such a fast game kinda important I understand the lower scores and agree. For Skyrim on the other hand I see that playing on the go is fucking awesome and if the game isn't broken or something I think it will be the best version of the game, simply because I can play it whereever.

You think different. That's your opinion. Strange enough though, that for graphic fidelity you just allow to take the platform into consideration, but for nothing else. That seems  random.

Also, I don't see PC-console multiplats not always as better on PC. Ports from console can be hampered by the control-mapping and feel worse on PC. Also mobile games for touchscreen might work badly on console and PC. I think control-scheme alone is a very, VERY important part of the platforms that heavily influences the perception of the game. If you think differently and think a game should get the same score although it was designed for other inputs than the platform it was ported to has - well then it is an opinion I disagree with.

My expectations are more or less based on nothing than feeling. But yes, if it sold lower than my expectations, I would be disappointed. If it sells lower than many persons expectations, then a general consensus of sales-failure will exist. If Bethesdas expectations are not met, the game will be considered a failure.

You may think portability is awesome, I do like big screens, still that doesn't really change the game or how it's played. And in the case in point, the game plays and look worse, so people defending it should have a higher score because it is portable (only because of portability, not that the game is played different or allow better interaction or anything) would be wrong for me.

And I have no issue on how you enjoy the game or that you consider the must buy edition of skyrim the HH version. but the game is still the same.

And nope, graphical fidelity is independent of the platform. As I said, I have no issue with PS4 or X1 losing score because they have worse IQ than PC for the same game, even if the differences aren't that much impacting.

Yes, I said that if the game have more bugs or play worse on PC even if it looks better I accept a lower score as well.

Sure control scheme if impacting the game shall be considered, but how if any, does the control scheme favor Switch for Doom?

On sales yes... we can only talk about our personal expectations, unless the publisher come out and say it was good or bad.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

GhaudePhaede010 on 10 November 2017
Cobretti2 said:
GhaudePhaede010 said:

Me: It kinda hurts the portable aspect of the game.

You: That doesn't hurt anything.

 

Can you not see how you are incorrect? Also, changing my argument is not something I generally stand to endure (I normally do not reply) so please try to stay with my argument. If I say the joycon hurt the portable aspect of the game, do you somehow think you are going to change that by saying, "you have to get used to it"? Maybe me and the people that tried it with me (including the guy that actually bought the title) all agree that playing with the joycon in handheld mode was an unpleasant experience. The merit of the joycon is not based on the merit of the pro controller. That is a mistake I hope you do not make again in the future. I would complain about the joycon for FPS titles (after playing DOOM) regardless of a Pro controller existing or not. Fortunately, a pro controller does exist and that means there is a method of play that places emphasis on the weakness of the joycon and makes playing in handheld mode a far less enjoyable experience. That fact hurts the overall portable aspect of the game.

Wtf is this bullshit?

Add the word opinion to it and leave it at that. Saying he is incorrect is very ignorant and short sighted because you seem to think your opinion is fact that everyone should accept.

There will be just as many people who will say they find the controls natural as those who say it is unnatural and ruins the experience. 

Hell the first time I picked up an XBOX controller i thought it was weird but heck I got used to it and it felt natural after.

Why would I have to say it is an opinion? Reviews, the topic of this conversation are opinions. If I say it hinders the quality of something, And I am talking about MY EXPERIENCE with the title, then it is obvious I am talking about my opinion. He is incorrect because he tried to dispute my opinion by saying nothing was compromised when I clearly stated I felt something was compromised. I do not understand why you even added yourself to a conversation that had nothing to do with you. Especially to be rude when we were being rather civil.



01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01001001 01111001 01101111 01101100 01100001 01101000 00100001 00100000 01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01000101 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00100001 00100000

Teriol on 10 November 2017

Master piece, playing it right now.



34 years playing games.

 

Around the Network
Mnementh on 10 November 2017
DonFerrari said:

You may think portability is awesome, I do like big screens, still that doesn't really change the game or how it's played. And in the case in point, the game plays and look worse, so people defending it should have a higher score because it is portable (only because of portability, not that the game is played different or allow better interaction or anything) would be wrong for me.

For someone pushing the subjective viewpoint that platforms don't influence the gaming experience, you do have a preference so seemingly it does influence your gaming experience.

But whatever. I already said it is opinion, you still try to push your very subjective opinion as objective truth. And as you start to misconstrue my arguments (I never said anything about the control-scheme of Doom on Switch) it is obvious that you're not interested in discussion. So think your personal opinion, whatever. I see no point to involve myself into the discussion if this is the style.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

DonFerrari on 10 November 2017
Mnementh said:
DonFerrari said:

You may think portability is awesome, I do like big screens, still that doesn't really change the game or how it's played. And in the case in point, the game plays and look worse, so people defending it should have a higher score because it is portable (only because of portability, not that the game is played different or allow better interaction or anything) would be wrong for me.

For someone pushing the subjective viewpoint that platforms don't influence the gaming experience, you do have a preference so seemingly it does influence your gaming experience.

But whatever. I already said it is opinion, you still try to push your very subjective opinion as objective truth. And as you start to misconstrue my arguments (I never said anything about the control-scheme of Doom on Switch) it is obvious that you're not interested in discussion. So think your personal opinion, whatever. I see no point to involve myself into the discussion if this is the style.

If i'm not interested in discussion what am I doing here?

I prefer big screen, but I playing on 21" or 300" won't change the score even though I know that if I'm to close and the screen is very big I'm more likely to notice the issues, still changing the score of a game because the size of the screen I played changed is silly.

You include an argument in your post but wanted it to go unchallenged? If the point isn't pertinent to the debate you shouldn't bring it in.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Mr Puggsly on 10 November 2017
Cobretti2 said:
Mr Puggsly said:
In a nutshell, its great if you actually plan to use it in portable mode. But its also a medicore console version.

With that said this may affect how critics feel about it.

The only difference is graphics and fps. How does it make it medicore? It all depends on what you value in a game. I'd take any sub par graphics if the story in the game is awesome over something with leading edge graphics and has no story.

Take COD for example, on Wii to me the game was much more fun to play with he pointer controls even though the graphics were pretty much washed out compared to the other systems. I had the game on xbxo 360 and PS3 and to me yes the graphics were cool, but it just felt like a step backwards in game mechanics.

I feel like part of what makes Doom good is the graphics and frame rate. I mean that's why CoD and BF have an emphasis on 60 fps, that does make it more enjoyable.

I mean you could play Doom on a low end PC with all the graphics settings down and frame rate at 30 fps. Would that be an ideal experience though? Of course not, that's essentially what Switch is offering at a price point near or higher than X1 and PS4.

However, I do think this is an acceptable way to play this game and if you want portability. But as an owner of various platforms that can play Doom better, I would opt for anything but Switch. I'm not a graphics whore either, I tend to play X1 games even though I own a PS4 which often has higher visual fidelity. But Doom on Switch is a big step back from other platforms.

If you liked CoD with a Wiimote, that's fine. I think Nintendo was stupid for not pushing that beyond Wii. But that has nothing to do with Doom on Switch.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

shoichi on 10 November 2017
Mr Puggsly said:
Cobretti2 said:

The only difference is graphics and fps. How does it make it medicore? It all depends on what you value in a game. I'd take any sub par graphics if the story in the game is awesome over something with leading edge graphics and has no story.

Take COD for example, on Wii to me the game was much more fun to play with he pointer controls even though the graphics were pretty much washed out compared to the other systems. I had the game on xbxo 360 and PS3 and to me yes the graphics were cool, but it just felt like a step backwards in game mechanics.

I feel like part of what makes Doom good is the graphics and frame rate. I mean that's why CoD and BF have an emphasis on 60 fps, that does make it more enjoyable.

I mean you could play Doom on a low end PC with all the graphics settings down and frame rate at 30 fps. Would that be an ideal experience though? Of course not, that's essentially what Switch is offering at a price point near or higher than X1 and PS4.

However, I do think this is an acceptable way to play this game and if you want portability. But as an owner of various platforms that can play Doom better, I would opt for anything but Switch. I'm not a graphics whore either, I tend to play X1 games even though I own a PS4 which often has higher visual fidelity. But Doom on Switch is a big step back from other platforms.

If you liked CoD with a Wiimote, that's fine. I think Nintendo was stupid for not pushing that beyond Wii. But that has nothing to do with Doom on Switch.

I think preference just varies on person. I have various platforms (PS4Pro, Gaming PC, Switch) and sometimes do consider myself a graphics nut, but do have love for Nintendo products although pretty much skipped over the WiiU.

I'm going to get DOOM after work today on my Switch for the MSRP $59. When my gaming PC I built last year can handle 2.5k res with ultra settings on most if not all games I have tested it on like Destiny 2, Mirror's Edge: Catalyst, Tomb Raider, etc. (4k res is where it gets finicky). I could definitely get it on my PC especially with finding ways to get that game for $9-10 bucks but I'm opting for the Switch to support the game developer and portability is a huge plus for me. Sure I am giving up high fidelity, ultra graphic settings, cheaper price and the over 60fps my pc would be capable of...but I will probably just get the PC port later if I really want to play it again and enjoyed it that much.

Last edited by shoichi - on 10 November 2017

Rab on 10 November 2017
Pemalite said:
Rab said:

Technically it is also the best version because it can be taken with you and played anywhere 

False.
The PC can be portable on top of having superior visuals, controls and performance.

False

Not even close to the same degree, and miles ahead of other consoles, so yes it is still technically better because of the degree of portability it has