Jump to content

Talk:Development of Doom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Making of Doom)

pretty comprehensive article

[edit]

This is a pretty comprehensive article. Why not move it to the main namespace and out of your user pages? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 20:37, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to fill in some more gaps first. Fredrik | talk 20:38, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Awesome article - I didn't really hear the Metallica in the original soundtracks but the Pantera and Alice in Chains are definitely there!

E1M1 music

[edit]

Slayer - Behind the Crooked Cross at 1:08 is more similar than Metallica - No Remorse.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.2.69.153 (talk • contribs)

Find a reliable source that makes the comparison and cite it.--Drat (Talk) 13:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here is not exactly reliable but somewhat useful compare of these songs. These tracks where found from 911tabs and I put them on line to point out differences: http://www.edu.lahti.fi/~aaspinen/kuvat/kuvankaappaukset/xp/e1m1_how_to_play.png
I personally think as a hobby musician that it's based on Behind the Crooked Cross. It's not as well known as Master of Puppets or No Remorse but it's obiously the best block in to this small puzzling thing. --Dekonegawa (talk) 19:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Forums aren't reliable sources anyway, so until a reliable source pops up that makes the analysis and compiles a list, most of the info can go.--Drat (Talk) 02:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. It's just pointless to make the list without seeing the notes played. Human ear can deceive sometimes really badly. I guess this is a thing we should ask from John Romero or Bobby Prince. --Dekonegawa (talk) 07:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here you can hear some of the cuts which fit into E1M1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToZaC8WyIow —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.44.211.71 (talk) 21:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I showed this article to a friend and he remarked that the level design from the Doom Bible reminded him of level 1 in Doom II. He also told me that the Eager Beaver chainsaws are explicitely identified in Doom 3. I haven't played Doom 3, but I find both comments worthy of posting here. --193.43.89.206 19:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More information about the making of DOOM II should be introduced into the article, because the DOOM Bible refers to stuff that ends up in DOOM II, including a level, a "super shotgun" concept (the spray rifle described in section 14) and, most importantly, part of the story and general game progression. Thus, the making of both games is part of the same process, while a separate and additional "Making of DOOM II" article would make little sense in the Wikipedia, which does not specifically specialize in gaming content. DOOM and DOOM II are one game split into two products, and the idea of selling the series with shareware and then commercial releases was planned from inception (check the DOOM Bible.) So the level design in "the making" is not just by Romero, Hall, and Petersen, for example. McGee and Green also participated, through DOOM II. The article is already agreeing with what I'm saying here by mentioning the models for some of the DOOM II monsters. Who is like God? (talk) 10:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hubs system

[edit]

It doesn't seem to me that in the Doom bible there are any indications of a hub system like the one used in Hexen. In "An Overview of DOOM Features" it says "[t]he environment in DOOM is one big world", but assuming that means hubs like in Hexen is pure speculation. That a division into levels much like in Wolfenstein 3D was assumed seems pretty clear from all the descriptions, and as far as I can tell there aren't any notes saying that you would be able to return to previous sub-levels (or "hubs"), or that their data would be saved like in Hexen for when you return. The "one big world" seems to just be referring to the fact that you can have separate building-like constructions in the levels (arguably enhanced by the sky texture), as opposed to only square tunnels and but a hazy view of the horizon at the start, like in Wolfenstein 3D. It does seem that there would have been more exit choices (eventually implemented in a limited fashion with the secret levels), but not hubs as we know them (which aren't in Quake either, which the article seems to be implying). Any thoughts, or references I may have missed? Who is like God? (talk) 20:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Doom 02.png

[edit]

Image:Doom 02.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Doom Tei Tenga.png

[edit]

Image:Doom Tei Tenga.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:YangShuo.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:YangShuo.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:YangShuo.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Development of Doom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Development of Doom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Development of Doom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead sentence

[edit]

The lead sentence breaks MOS:BOLDAVOID, so it needs to be changed. Otherwise, nice rewrite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzzoom (talk • contribs) 16:36, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, fixed. Thanks! --PresN 16:53, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Development of Doom/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 16:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


If I don't get back to this in four days, please ping. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]
  • The lead has multiple cases of the developer names being linked in the first paragraph, then being repeated in full in the second paragraph. You might also want to check the rest of the article for this.
  • It's on purpose, unfortunately- with 2 "Carmack"s, I've been asked in prior articles to specify which one I mean, even if the context (programming vs art) would make it clear. Note that it's "Hall" and "Romero", but the Carmacks always get a first name.
  • and it was immediately met with a rush of players. - I take it this means it was successful? Or were the players running? Elaboration needed.
  • Fixed.
  • ...Doom would be "Wolfenstein times a million!" - Italise Wolfenstein.
  • Fixed.
  • Yes, that citation (video) covers the whole table- Romero/Hall walk through the development year and show off videos of those 5 builds as part of it.

That's all that stood out. Putting on hold for now. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ProtoDrake: Replied. --PresN 16:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@PresN: I understand the issue with the names. I don't see any reason to keep this article any longer. I'll give this a Pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Development_of_Doom&oldid=1206950444"