Decided to cheat a bit on the 4th episode of Doom 1 and BFG spam. The result was very loud. (on my part, Fraps likes turning things down). Oct 24, 2018  The following is from a GOG post I tried to make but GOG is acting up and refused to post the damn message so I'm trying again here: I got Brutal Doom 21 recently so i wanted to use it with the January 2 build of Extermination Day, which I think is the latest build, but I have no idea how to run the latter, let alone with Brutal Doom version 21. Doom 3: BFG Edition is a re-release of Doom 3 released on October 16, 2012 in North America, October 18, 2012, in Australia and October 19, 2012 in Europe for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360.The BFG Edition features enhanced graphics, better audio (with more horror effects), a checkpoint save system, and support for 3D displays and HMDs.

• Brutal Doom Bfg Edition Cheats Ps3

Apparently Doom 3 was good enough to get a new coat of polish and a fancy-title rerelease. Usb drive showing less space. I've played Doom 3 quite a bit and it's fun, but.

Not that great. About on par with the level of fun I get from Halo games. Good, but not super spectacular.Naturally, the fact that the BFG edition is nearly identical to the old version running on high-end hardware (I'm talking PC of course) and doesn't really strike me with any obvious improvements only salted the 'Doom 3 wound'. They mde everything way too easy and way too bright, big whoop.I have to ask myself though, why the worst received of any of the Doom titles was the one deserving of this 're-birth', if you will. Doom 2 is certainly the best Doom of them all, and you can look on Zandronum, Zdaemon and Odamex and see a total of 100+ servers running Doom2.WAD at any given moment. I think this speaks for itself.Doom 2 - Gameplay, level design, monsters - Re done properly in HD, with modern, cutting edge graphics. Fast paced, puzzle solving, blood splattering, all crystal clear but with that arcade-like action we just can't get enough of even 17 years later.What the fuck are you thinking, ID?

Just give us an FPS that looks amazing and is fun as hell! Is that too much to ask? Why do all modern FPS have to be slow and clunky? What's the friggin deal? I don't mind making Doom 2 HD but don't add puzzles.

I don't mind keeping it exactly the same but with updated visuals. Any new Dooms (like Doom 4) I'd prefer a more linear path similar to Doom 3.

Although like the original Doom games, more action, less horror, and more heavy metal. Key cards are and puzzle solving in shooters can stay in the 90s. I really don't want that trend to come back into shooters. Id is amazing at creating pure shooting action that we don't need more puzzle solving.

I don't mind open ended areas like Crysis or linear paths like Doom 3, though. Doom 2 - Gameplay, level design, monsters - Re done properly in HD, with modern, cutting edge graphics. Fast paced, puzzle solving, blood splattering, all crystal clear but with that arcade-like action we just can't get enough of even 17 years later.How would you go about doing that? It's practically impossible to do without completely changing everything about the game.What do you mean by cutting edge graphics?

Let's say something on the level of Crysis 3. But what does that mean? Breaking down the graphics of that game, you'll notice that a lot of it comes from the fidelity of the scene and the shader effects on top of that. In other words there's a lot of crap going on.

Brutal Doom Bfg Edition Cheats Ps3

Doom was extremely simple and this allowed the levels to be simple as well. You can't just take modern graphics and splash it onto Doom.Doing this will set off a chain reaction. Realistic looking water will give you the impression that it will behave realistically. What happens when you go into the water in Map01?

It will have to be swimable. We could just have it be shallow water, but that would still demand the player to slow down.Let's say we have awesome new graphics, this would leave the monsters looking extremely stupid as they zig-zag the halls. You'd have to improve on their AI, movement, etc. For them to fit in. The soundscapes would likely also have to be changed seeing as realistic graphics would leave you to expect environmental sounds.This would go on and on until you've revamped every aspect of the game from graphics to story. It's all intertwined. There is no such thing as successfully upgrading one aspect of the game.Also it's a misconception to say it has arcadish action or graphics.

The fact that it looks and plays a little on the arcade side today is a byproduct of technological advancements. And purposely cartoonish/arcadish is NOT the same as something that today SEEMS cartoonish/arcadish. Doom was cutting edge and so far away from arcade as possible for the 'genre(s)' back then.So you see, the reason Doom3 got an upgrade was because Doom3 wasn't entirely successful And more importantly it wasn't available for Xbox360 and PS3 while Doom2 doesn't get an upgrade because Doom2 is the best Doom2 there will ever be. They didn't give Doom3 the HD treatment because that wouldn't work either.I'm not saying you can't make something today without it being slow, grey and boring, but it would have to be its own thing. Made with today's hardware, state of games etc.

HD Doom on the other hand is a pipedream. Just play Doom2. It's 'perfect' as it is. This has been debated to death time and again.

THere already IS a 'Doom 2: BFG Edition': it's the Classic Doom port that comes with the bundle, and there's already a well-established host of answers to the questions that may arise. Yes, it's really just a rehash of the old, tired linuxdoom code, even though it's more like. Yes, that's really as far as ID will bother to go with it, as other re-issues of Doom/Doom II ports have shown so far. No, it's unlikely they'd try to make an official, advanced source port a-la Boom, ZDoom, Odamex or with enhanced 3D models etc. But keeping the same maps, gameplay, engine etc. No, it's VERY unlikely they'd risk an official attempt at a remake shoehorning Doom's gameplay into a modern engine a-la or even likeThey are just milking the 'Doom' name (and source code!) with a least effort strategy and that's it.

It's VERY unlikely their current owner/publisher would approve of a total remake or an officialized 'advanced source port' project anyway, with all of the competition from the super-mature and FREE advanced source ports.The above being said.Doom 4 is rumored to be the closest thing you'll get to a modern remake of Doom. It might just be what 'Doom remakeionists' were wishing for. We'll wait and see. What do you mean by cutting edge graphics? Let's say something on the level of Crysis 3. But what does that mean?

Breaking down the graphics of that game, you'll notice that a lot of it comes from the fidelity of the scene and the shader effects on top of that. In other words there's a lot of crap going on.

Doom was extremely simple and this allowed the levels to be simple as well. You can't just take modern graphics and splash it onto Doom.Crysis 3 looks average according to most sensible reviewers, the overwhelming darkness, lack of art direction and on-rail mapping making for dull and similar environments. 'Lot of crap' is a good way to put it, quantity rather than quality, only impressive on a purely technical angle and hence only appealing to fetishists. Not exactly an example you'd want to follow.Nonetheless, adding detail to a scene without disturbing the gameplay isn't that hard. It has been, and still is for some titles, a common way to build shooters for years, starting with a rough textureless layout until gameplay is right, and then adding the eyecandy.

Doing this will set off a chain reaction. Realistic looking water will give you the impression that it will behave realistically. What happens when you go into the water in Map01? It will have to be swimable. We could just have it be shallow water, but that would still demand the player to slow down.Ludicrous.

Better looking graphics aren't necessarily closer to reality. Even then, using realistic graphics doesn't imply having to stick to arbitrary rules fitting the perception of reality your average unimaginative person has.See: Serious Sam HD, Painkiller HD, New Super Mario Bros, DKC Returns. Let's say we have awesome new graphics, this would leave the monsters looking extremely stupid as they zig-zag the halls.

You'd have to improve on their AI, movement, etc. For them to fit in.More nonsense. Plenty of modern games have AI worse than Doom and work just fine. Chasing the player in zig-zags would be an improvement over 'move to specific cover point, alternate between shooting a few bursts and crouching until death by player ensues' script type you see in your average pseudo-military shooter.

The soundscapes would likely also have to be changed seeing as realistic graphics would leave you to expect environmental sounds.Again with assuming everyone shares your oddly contrived expectations based on a twisted sense of realism. This simply isn't true.You could make the case most people think like you do, CoD sales and the like proving it to an extent, and that to be successful commercially a Doom HD remake would have to follow your strange rules. That would be contestable, but that could be an argument you could make.However, the notion a Doom HD remake as explained in the OP could not be built at all and result in a coherent game is flat-out wrong. IMO, Unreal Tournament is much more Doom-like than Doom 3, if for no other reason than it's fast as hell. The maps are more abstract and totally built around gameplay.

It's a drop in, kill things as long as you want and you're done kind of game. That's the way a Doom sequel should be, plus single player maps, of course.My issues with Doom 3 as a sequel to Doom:- It's way too slow- Enemies are too few and too smart- They're supposed to walk toward you or shoot and that's it- Doom is made tougher by adding enemies or hazards, not smarter enemiesAlso, I've never played Doom 3. Crysis 3 looks average according to most sensible reviewers, the overwhelming darkness, lack of art direction and on-rail mapping making for dull and similar environments. 'Lot of crap' is a good way to put it, quantity rather than quality, only impressive on a purely technical angle and hence only appealing to fetishists. Not exactly an example you'd want to follow.Whether you (or I) personally like Crysis3's graphics is besides the point. It's the most obvious example of 'cutting edge graphics' in a modern game that people will present. You're free to come up with better examples.

Nonetheless, adding detail to a scene without disturbing the gameplay isn't that hard. It has been, and still is for some titles, a common way to build shooters for years, starting with a rough textureless layout until gameplay is right, and then adding the eyecandy.Could you go into depth on how you would improve the fidelity in without disturbing the gameplay? It's true that some titles start by making an empty level with only placeholder textures, but make no mistake. Props, movables and whatever is needed to make the scene look right are added.

If you don't add things like these, you'll end up with something that looks like a wall painting. Better looking graphics aren't necessarily closer to reality. Even then, using realistic graphics doesn't imply having to stick to arbitrary rules fitting the perception of reality your average unimaginative person has.

See: Serious Sam HD, Painkiller HD, New Super Mario Bros, DKC Returns.Nobody said they.have. to be closer to reality, but 'Doom 2 HD with cutting edge graphics' heavily implies graphics with realism in mind. You have to make assumptions when the pitch consists of 1 line of text and similar occurances in history point toward that conclusion.Are you disputing that realistic looking water invites the player to interact with it? Are you disputing that something like that is expected? How would cutting edge graphics work with not having room over room? How would zooming by with 50mph look? More nonsense.

Plenty of modern games have AI worse than Doom and work just fine. Chasing the player in zig-zags would be an improvement over 'move to specific cover point, alternate between shooting a few bursts and crouching until death by player ensues' script type you see in your average pseudo-military shooter.No. It's true that many modern games feature lacklustre AI, but the AI was made with that level of graphics in mind and having monsters slowly move forward in a zig-zag fashion makes no sense whatsoever.

It would look ridiculous. You could make the case most people think like you do, CoD sales and the like proving it to an extent, and that to be successful commercially a Doom HD remake would have to follow your strange rules. That would be contestable, but that could be an argument you could make.CoD has nothing to do with it. The failure of the modern FPS has absolutely nothing to do with realism and everything to do with bad design choices. The problem isn't that they're realistic or strive to be realistic. They're not and they don't.

The problem is that the developers behind them are lazy and in many cases the publishers won't let them evolve their concept because the old still sells.You seem to think that there is a scale where realism in graphics and play equals boredom. Are you forgetting that Doom was a huge leap forward in the sense of realism? Realism in games isn't about moving slowly through a cutscene filled linear corridor. It's about having the visuals, sounds and interaction have the kind of feedback you'd expect.

You don't.have. to follow the exact same rules that the real world does, but there has to be a logical connection between that and the context you're trying to establish. I agree with Shaviro completely.What do you think Doom 4 will be like anyways?

Ever since the release of Doom 3 which was a remake of Doom 1 essentially there's been chatter that the next game is going to take the obvious step and be a remake of the second game.With Rage perhaps id were trying out their capabilities for making bigger modern games.And there's NO WAY Doom II could be remade today with modern graphics. It could be like Quake, sure, and you could run around like a crazy bugger on steroids but not adapting to a modern standards would mean no one would play it because there's just not a lot of demand for playing a gameplay clone of a game that's near 20 years old already with better graphics.

Wanna play Doom II? Play Doom II.

Given the ubiquitous appeal of games like Call of Duty, I'd be wary of making such statements.Call of Duty is mainstream and always released less than a year ago due to two devs taking turns spitting out sequels annually. Which compares to playing an 18 year old game that you only HEAR about annually?

Sure thing.As an active, analysing and criticising video gamer for the last 10 years and online community member for at least 5 years with about 12000 posts during this time I think I have a pretty good idea about what sells and what does not. Doom 2 - Gameplay, level design, monsters - Re done properly in HD, with modern, cutting edge graphics. Fast paced, puzzle solving, blood splattering, all crystal clear but with that arcade-like action we just can't get enough of even 17 years later. /rantIt's easy to just ask for something like this but it's a naive, gross underestimation of what it actually takes to make a modern game.You can make some improvement by using high res textures, 3D models, etc. But the fact is that 'modern, cutting edge graphics' means levels that are designed that way. It also means animations being done in a completely different way. In short, implementing 'modern graphics' isn't something that is just skin deep.That's why I personally don't enjoy source ports that do enhanced graphics like this: no matter how much effort is put in, it's ultimately just a thin layer of chrome over the top of the original game.

Because of that it's never really comparable to a modern game: instead of being a great old game, instead it just feels like a lame modern one.So because of that I don't really care to see what you request. Doom is a great game, but it's great because of what it achieved in its time. Trying to pretend it can be a modern one is impractical. I'm glad that Id have kept a conservative approach when re-releasing their games. Doom is what it is; it doesn't need to be modernized. Hmm, very many good points here.First I'll start by saying, the puzzle-like nature of the Doom 2 maps was one of my favorite things about the game, in addition to everything else. I would hope that, if ever any sort of remake was to happen (which it will likely not) that aspect would be included.

I like having to explore around, for whatever reason. It was also one of my favorite things about Mario 64.Now, as far as a remake being 'impossible' with HD graphics, I think that's a bit of a stretch. I understand that simply throwing a new coat of paint on would look odd and out of place, given the A.I. And often mystical level design.

Clashing and whatnot would be accentuated tenfold by high definition textures.However, these are things that could be worked around. The AI can be updated to a degree, but would still have to retain key elements: They should be no more difficult to kill, and they should move at the same speed. The animations would of course not just be '4 frames of walking but 3D', it would be well animated and up to ID's current graphical expectations. I know it's not a simple thing to do, but it's not out of the question.Also I am well aware graphics aren't everything, after all I am a huge Doom/Doom 2 fan. I think the key elements of gameplay should be used in any new FPS titles they release. After giving it more thought, I suppose a remake isn't necessarily the best idea.But, a game that is Doom 2-like in gameplay and design being 'impossible' given the stupid expecatations from FPS these days?

Definitely not! Hell, I think it would serve to rejuvinate the genre for many players. I'm tired of games that are Slow movement + Sniper beats all + Boring level design. Doom and Doom 2 didn't suffer from these issues an there's no reason modern games with amazing graphics should either, but here we are, too focused on realism in design to retain the fun factor.I'm happy to see all the replies and opinions, very interesting discussion and a good way to hone ideas. I know of the HD texture packs, but is anyone aware which ones look the best? Also, are there any high-res sprite packs out there?

I have searched, but I havent really found anything.Once again, very interesting discussion. But, a game that is Doom 2-like in gameplay and design being 'impossible' given the stupid expecatations from FPS these days? Definitely not! Hell, I think it would serve to rejuvinate the genre for many players. I'm tired of games that are Slow movement + Sniper beats all + Boring level design. Doom and Doom 2 didn't suffer from these issues an there's no reason modern games with amazing graphics should either, but here we are, too focused on realism in design to retain the fun factor.This is a more reasonable request, but I'd much rather see a completely new game designed in this way, rather than messing with a classic one like Doom 2.

The kind of effort required to do a proper 'revamp' is the kind of effort required to make an entirely new game anyway, and once you reach the point where you're changing the AI, you might as well be.There are of course already games that have tried to do reproduce the classic feel: Serious Sam is often cited, as well as Painkiller. But somehow I found these games don't really resonate in quite the same way as Doom does.

I think these games tend to focus on particular gameplay components from classic shooters - specifically on killing lots of individual enemies. Doom to me is more like a blend of different gameplay elements: lots of enemies, puzzle/exploration and (to some degree) stealth. As someone who cut his teeth on the PSX version, I'm in agreement with Antroid here. While not necessarily slower paced than the PC versions, it conveyed better the sense of being alone in this world, with nothing but your wits and your trigger finger to guide you.

Having sections where the doors close behind you and the only way to progress is to kill everything is fine as part of an overall package, but when it's the sole gameplay mechanic it gets old fast.TBH I'd rather see the reverse of what's being discussed here - a new game in the series using the original visuals (think Mega Man 9). We almost got it with NRFTL, but an entirely new game using a (possibly upgraded) version of the original tech (keeping the.WAD format, of course) would be something that I'd be all over.

Flog it on PSN/XBL/Steam for ten quid.

Brutal Doom is a mod for the original Doom that, after three years of intense development, now offers a much bloodier and more refined experience (especially with regard to the shooting mechanism) compared to the normal game.You'll notice the increased goriness of Doom not just in the increased blood splatters on the walls and the bodies of enemies, but also in the new options that allow you to shoot people in the head or tear your enemies apart with bullets. Also, almost all of your opponents will now have completely new death animations.Doom's normal shooting system, which didn't use the mouse by default, has been updated so that it does.

Although the best part is that the weapons have been completely remodeled so that no one weapon is significantly better than the others. For example, the sawed-off shotgun is your best choice at short range, while the machine gun will prove to be your best friend against big groups of enemies.Brutal Doom is one of the best Doom mods out there because it allows you to enjoy all the levels of the original titles, with a bloodier and more entertaining facelift that also looks much better. How to play the original Doom on Android and modern PCsIn 1993 id Software released what would become one of the most influential titles of the decade, both for its revolutionary approach and the controversy it would cause. Not for nothing is the fourth installment of the saga coming out this Friday, 12 long years' wait after the previous one. But this doesn't mean you can't take advantage of the earlier titles and re-enjoy all of them just like the hormonal preadolescent you of yesteryear who filled his notebooks with pentagrams and pictures of Kurt Cobain.

Several Doom ports now allow you to enjoy classic id Software titles (as well as others that use its engine) on modern desktop computers and Androids. How to install Brutal Doom v20 and play onlineDoom is timeless and everlasting, and no matter how many years pass it remains just as much fun as many modern ‘successful’ action games. It’s true that parts of its gameplay are now a bit out of place, but to fix this problem there’s the so-called, a set of mods that improve (if that’s possible) the original game with new weapons, a better control system, and loads of gore—exactly what anyone who spent their teen years in the middle of the 90s could ask for. Here’s a tutorial on how to install it.Technical information.