I think that "high skill ceiling" is a bad interpretation of what is described. It's a different style of play, one where the skill isn't in aiming but in dodging. Dodging is more tactical and has more learning than aiming. A lot of the effect of this, level design and simply behaving enemies is that they require learning and memorisation.

So IMO the article hits on some good points, it just doesn't get what makes them important. It's that players who liked a certain type of challenge (analysing enemy styles and learning layouts) aren't served by current shooters.

That doesn't mean that current shooters need to be replaced by the old style, or even augmented by it, but clearly there's a void that needs to be filled.

So much this. Why are people so intent on dumbing down FPS games? Yes, that's right, I think Doom is incredibly simplistic, limited, and boring.

I'd take FC3 and new Shadow Warrior over frickin Doom any day.

Thanks for reminding me that any discussion with you is impossible.
But much like many artists are overrated so is Doom. Artists create 1 maybe 2 groundbreaking works, the rest is perfecting their craft and cashing in on their wave of succes.
Ehrm, most levels in Doom can be completed by just fetching the keys and running to the exit. While I do appreciate you have a hobby, maybe you should play something else too from time to time.

It's not impossible, I just don't tolerate these sorts of ill conceived arguments. You didn't have a leg to stand on at the outset and you're somehow surprised that I'm calling you out for it.

I was more than happy to concede that you might not have liked them, but it's ridiculous to suggest that they didn't represent a relative high point for the genre.

The popularity of Doom isn't necessarily evidence that the level design was masterful, but if you listen to the commentary about the process by which those levels were designed, it's astonishing to me that you seem to think that this is the typical amount of effort and attention being paid.

OMG, well please forgive me for disagreeing with you your highness.

I played Doom upwards and downwards and backwards and sideways but I disagree with that article on all 3 accounts.

1.) I don't think monster readability is paramount. Now I wouldn't go as far as to say pure shooters have to force you to identify each and every target every time as in tactical games like Rainbow Six but thinking before shooting is generally not a bad idea and I like it when a game rewards and occasionally requires this. Also, I'd rather have quality than quantity, hordes of enemies are fun for while but if I can choose between a few enemies in NOLF and endless streams of frontally attacking Serious Sam bestiary, I'll choose the former even if the A.I./scripting isn't all that great, either.

2.) Skill ceiling...I don't think the range between novice and expert players is higher in Doom than it is in other games. I can't speak for the newest FPS's because I haven't played any of those but even Duke 3D makes difference in skill level way more noticeable than Doom, especially in levels with open spaces like L.A. Rumble where you must learn to master the jetpack and have to manage a lot more at the same time than in Doom. This isn't just theory, I used to play both Doom and Duke 3D against the same human opponents and I noticed that the scores were always closer in Doom than they were in Duke 3D. On one infamous occasion, I lost 1:49 in Duke 3D against this one guy who was clearly a psychopath. No one else wanted to play against him, he was decidedly too good. I like those kinda opponents because getting massacred is more fun. When I scored that one point, you should have seen his disappointed face, he boasted he could beat me 50:1 and well, he almost did it! But in Doom the scores were always quite a bit closer.

3.) Level Design: I enjoy abstract levels but I prefer well designed themed levels. Duking it out (literally) with ugly aliens in a porn theater is way more fun than running through space base 08/15 and don't even get me started on the epic levels of Jedi Knight that would be impressive even without the Star Wars flair. And my personal favorite, No One Lives Forever: The variety and quality here is astounding. In which other game can you snipe around in Morocco, explore a 1960s German disco, jump out of an airplane with a gun but without a parachute, go up against sharks in a sinking ship and get aboard a 2001 Space Odyssey styled space station? I'll take that over Doom any time of the day, seriously!

Well, good luck trying this in Final Doom Grandmaster mode... And then another go with 100% kills 100% secrets.

As for something else - I haven't touched Doom in many years (I go for a round of Quake once in a while). I mostly play RPG...

Let's say beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

Don't make an ass of yourself. You're the one who has the burden of proof here, you're the one that turned this into an argument. So don't give me this crap. I've been far more civil about this than you have.

Look who's talking, you're the one saying my oppinion is ridiculous based on the oppinion of the creator of levels himself, that's like advertising his own wares.

I found the levels in Doom's first episode to be a tad monotonous as well, but it's a great pity that you skipped Doom 2 because of it. Doom 2 imo had far more impressive and varied levels. Consider giving it a go again, with something like the Brutal Doom mod.

Here's the link to a video by TotalBiscuit which I think is relevant to the discussion:

Have single-player FPS gone backwards?

Heh, that's almost the article in video format, with a great playthrough of Shadow Warrior to boot!