PC gamers in the mid-to-late 90s apparently started turning up their noses at turn-based strategy games in favour of the new hotness of the Command & Conquers and Warcrafts of the day

A review of X-Com Apocalypse from the time:

"to be honest, the new real-time combat is so good I really can't see why anyone would want to play the much slower (and often infuriating) turn-based tactical game"

:kitty-cri-screm:

spoiler

That's like preferring Diablo over Fallout

  • edwardligma [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    remembering that famous review of the original doom that marked it down because you couldnt talk to the monsters

    edit: here it is, peak liberalism - why cant you just debate the literal helldemons in the free marketplace of ideas?

    • UlyssesT [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      lf only you could talk to these creatures, then perhaps you could try and make friends with them, form alliances... Now, that would be interesting. [7]

      Didn't the UAC do exactly this by Doom Eternal?

    • CanYouFeelItMrKrabs [any, he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I don't see a score attached to this (due to it being on the wayback machine probably) . If anything it seems their criticism are that there is low enemy variety and that the gameplay seems lacking once you get over the stunning graphics

      • edwardligma [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        pretty sure its the [7] at the end, which is like the kiss of death in g*mer numbers

        lf only you could talk to these creatures, then perhaps you could try and make friends with them, form alliances... Now, that would be interesting.

        is more the bit that people have focused on, because a) theyre literal helldemons (imagine hed written this review about wolfenstein) and b) it fundamentally misunderstands the type of game that doom is trying to be and there is no way that shoehorning in talking to the monsters to fulfil some lib fantasy adds to that experience

        • CanYouFeelItMrKrabs [any, he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          yeah but in the context of the whole review it sounds like someone who does not like the gameplay that much. Which is fine to think

          But the gameplay is as narrow as it gets: you run along beautifully parallaxed corridors and through stunning 3D rooms shooting at a near endless supply of green lizards. That’s it.

          As it is, once the power of Doom's graphics has worn off (they're amazing, so give that at least a week or two), you’lI be longing for something new in this game.

          That said, though, there are problems with the game (Edge has no intention of joining the rabble mindlessly praising Doom beyond its worth). Yes, it is good in fact it’s a very, very technically impressive piece of programming but where's the genuine 3D (look up and down) of Ultima Underworld? Where’s the variety in the gameplay (it’s all just kill, kill, kill)? And looking at it coldly, what is there really in Doom (apart from the graphics) to set it above even the most average, most highly repetitive and tedious 2D shoot ‘em up?

          Like I think issue they had with the game is more the lack of variety more than literally not being able to befriend the demons

          This person probably preferred playing System Shock since you make more choices in that about what kind of playstyle you want.

          Edit: Hopefully this author later played the Shin Megami Tensei games if they really wanted some demon alliance action

    • BeamBrain [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      lf only you could talk to these creatures, then perhaps you could try and make friends with them, form alliances… Now, that would be interesting. [7]

      Sounds like they would've preferred Xenologist /shamelessselfpromotion