Environments in games today

#1 Yeah, I agree with you. It bothers me that so much emphasis is put on how things look rather than how they feel if you get what I mean. There seems to be no more inovation in the computer game field. Instead of pushing their own art or programming to fit within the limits of the hardware, they push the hardware to fit what they want to do with their art/programming.

#2 It depends on the genre. Doom didn't need it because you didn't have much time to look around and be impressed. But I hate empty RPG's. I hate rooms that have no purpose other than to add play-time to the back of the box.

#3 I personally like these added effects. With the extra detail, it adds more feeling to the game. It makes me feel more involved in the game. If you take a look at Doom III, there is an extreme amount of detail in each room, this is one of many reasons why it is such a scary game (IMO).

#4 I think Half life 2 was the most immersive game to date, due to the dynamics, the atmosphere, the sound, and the attention to detail in their level design. Makes up for unfun weapons and mostly uninspired monsters, I think.

True, the old games were fun, but it doesn't mean we can't improve on them.

#5 If you want to see extreme detail in your FPS, try SWAT 4. That game has so much misc junk filling up rooms it's unbelievable and adds so much realism despite having a less impressive engine. Still has the old bump maps etc. But the sheer amount of junk that you normaly wouldn't see is there :)

#6 I think that, for its time, Doom had the same level of detail in envirionment that Half Life and Doom 3 have today. I remember playing Doom, and it game me much of the same feeling that teh current incarnation gives me (although I admit that I like original Doom's game play a bit better :).

I do think that detailed, interactive environments are something to strive for. They shouldn't eclipse basic gameplay, they should complment it.

#7 I think Doom had quite a lot of platformer DNS in it, when it came to level design and that's where the abstraction came from. It's possibly also where the nostalgic attraction comes from even today.

#8 I guess I was thinking how games keep getting shorter as environments become more detailed. I think detail is awesome when it's needed, such as in an RPG or the slower parts of an FPS. It just seems developers are afraid to make a game in the style of Doom these days. Sure, it's old-school and graphics have come a long way, but aside from a graphical standpoint, Doom is still VERY playable today.

I just miss the old days I guess. This after playing a disappointing Pariah demo last night and the Brothers in Arms demo sitting on my hard drive only played halfway through.

#9 Duke nukem 3 had real world enviroment and I was very fun and you still had to kill alot of monsters.

#10 Heh, I'm not at all a fan of old school FPS and prefer something with more sophisticated controls than just mouselook these days. I think thats what impressed me most about Riddick. It had so much more, and it was done in an intuitive way that enhanced the gameplay above all other FPS I have played. And it had pretty nice graphics. Being able to se your character and his shadow cast on everything heightened the immersion factor.

Sneaking up on people and snapping their necks due to fun stealth gameplay. Great for an aFPS hand to hand fighting engine with combo's and counters. Like you can grapple with a guy who has a gun, turn his gun on him and shoot the critter. The fact that you have no guns through half the game, and have to rely on stealth. great Ragdoll, you can really see te power of the impacts with melee weapons. And nice transitions to 3rd person for climbing, shimmying and all that splintercell like sliding along cables etc.

Completely ruined Doom 3 for me, as Riddick came out about the same time on Xbox, and completely overwhelmed doom in every way. Slightly less detail, but even then, the shadows seem better than dooms generaly. Doom 3 has a lot of cheap tricks that just don't look good under scrutiny.