What does Yea Forums think of the new gameplay for Rage 2...

it was confirmed shit for mad max too, it turned out to be great
journos aren't reliable for these things

Doom Eternal, faggot. A game thats going to be infinitely better than this, what a waste of money.

I just googled "Rage 2 bad driving" and what came up was literally a ResetEra thread complaining how the driving is terrible in Mad Max and how they don't want it to be the same in Rage 2.

Vehicle combat looks meh but the gunplay looks amazing. Can't wait to play it.

Attached: 1554829770028.png (644x1237, 242K)

oh yeah, can't wait for hundreds "nudoom is shit" threads

>A game thats going to be infinitely better than this

Let me guess, your dad works at id software?

don't know if it's funny or sad.

Vehicle combat looks like a futuristic version of Mad Max and that game had great vehicle combat, it felt very weighty. Hopefully they can translate that same feeling here.

Why do Avalanche always brag about their engine and the "unparalleled view distance* its able to create when their actual games have constant noticable pop-in?

Seems to have the same visual problems as JC4.

in the last video two things got confirmed motorcycle and tank, tank shooting felt good on video

isn't it id tech engine? avalanche did only cars as far as I know.

donsquilibohiingus binko tonhobo amy poelher down retard hole retard retard votes coters south park! funky piss uh oh jeez oh fuck retard pisss asss titties

Attached: high_jew_and_laci_green__proud_fenimist__by_high_jew-db34rxc.png (1024x731, 152K)

What's better than a console fps? Another console fps. Yeah right can't wait for both of these, because I'm a filthy casul afraid of challenge.

You can have a 5 mile draw distance and still have small objects pop in. Not saying that as an excuse for pop-in but no game actually loads high-detail props from miles away. The whole thing with draw distance is loading lower detail models when you're miles away then smoothly transitioning to higher detail ones as you make your approach.

>console fps

Just because a game is coming out on consoles doesn't make it a "console fps". If the controls are actually good and it runs smoothly, what's the problem? Does your autism get triggered because people who own consoles also get to play it? Boo fucking hoo.

Nope, it's the Apex Engine they used for JC4.

I know that but in most games it's barely noticable, but my god was it terrible in JC4.

>avalanche did only cars as far as I know.

Sadly no. That's what I thought too, but Avalanche is actually doing pretty much everything. I guess id is too busy with Doom Eternal and have pretty much taken a back seat with Rage 2.

Why not both

>That casual as FUCK vehicle combat with plays-itself autoaim.
There goes any interest I had in this. When are this retards going to understand that stripping any sort of challenge or gameplay out of games makes the game boring for everyone?

>implying fps made for a console release in mind can be any good
I own a ps4 and a switch too, but you're just being retarded.
Just look at the video OP posted, gunfights look boring and not fun. You can't have fun gunfights when playing with a pad, because people struggle to aim correctly, everything else is dumbed down so pad players can play too. Imagine console players playing a fps with actual recoil and a challenging AI, most of them wouldn't get past the first level.

>autoaim

Not exactly autoaim. In Mad Max, there was slowmo when aiming but it never tainted the experience and it wasn't easy at all, especially if you encountered cars that were a level above you. If they went for some soft lock on instead of slowmo this time, I'm okay with that.

dude when i come back home from work i just wanna sit on the couch and look at some nice explosions

fuck off with your challenge meme and let me have fun

Actually gunfights look fun. Doom came out on consoles too and it never hurt the experience on PC. You're just being a contrarian faggot for the sake of being a contrarian faggot.

looks fun and Mad Max was the only open world game I enjoyed.

Attached: 1537243900353.jpg (400x388, 36K)

It will go on sale after 1-2 months.

>Doom came out on consoles too and it never hurt the experience on PC.
Kek I'm gonna stop here, no point in arguing with a shill.

What's even the point of that gravity gun other than to have a half-baked gimmick gun that'll get tedious after the first couple of kills?

>hurr I have no arguments therefore m-muh s-shill

Just as I thought, retard.

Fuck off shills.

>sit on the couch and look at some nice explosions
watch a movie, heard Micheal Bay made some that might interest you

The point is to have fun.

Looks like avalanche know what they are doing unlike modern id

Fuck off retard

>Doom came out on consoles too and it never hurt the experience on PC
Doom feels like shit on PC. Way too floaty and guns feel like ass.

>Doom came out on consoles too and it never hurt the experience on PC
you're not serious right?

or maybe I'll just play one of those new video games while you cry on Yea Forums

AIN'T IT FUNNY HOW IT HAPPEN?

>implying Doom, the absolute golden standard for first person shooter video games for decades is bad on PC

Fuck off retard.

>no challenge
>boring guns
>stupid executions
>stupid enemies
>stupid & boring level design
>slow movements
I could go on. You ever played any other fps on pc that wasn't released on consoles too? You should try it, you might be surprised.

Shooting in nuDoom seems a lot tighter and more refined than here, though. I don't see how modern id doesn't know what they're doing. Still looks decent though, and if the vehicle combat is good that'll be a bonus

I am 100% serious.

Attached: doomps1.jpg (261x266, 29K)

ah i thought you meant nuDoom which is consoleshit
>I don't see how modern id doesn't know what they're doing.
you are blind then

Enlighten me. What's wrong with nuDoom? Let me guess, you're about to post "arguments" which have been proven wrong many times over and will just show that you haven't even played the 2016 game? That's unironically how most of these discussions go.

>it's okay if original Doom was on consoles
>it's shit if new Doom is on consoles
>OLD GAME GOOD NEW GAME BAD

Yeah ok.

You can see that it's not fun in the trailer though, it literally does nothing other than force you to shoot a wall after you shot the guy, after which he just goes splat instead of doing something cool or useful. I'm starting to believe that the >shill posters are onto something here.

>isn't it id tech engine?
They can't fit 70 petabytes of MEGATEXTURES on consoles yet.

OlDoom was a pc game first, console version is a port
NuDoom was made for a pc and console release

>it's okay if original Doom was on consoles
the game's design wasn't comprised for retard console audience and gamepads unlike the new game
>which have been proven wrong many times over
nope, you'll figure it out eventually though

>trailer

It's not a trailer, but I'm not gonna play semantics over here. The gravity gun thing opens up interesting possibilities in gameplay. Launching a guy into the skies is about the most uninteresting thing you can do with it, so I agree the usage shown in this gameplay is pretty stupid and inefficient. But you could use it to launch a guy into another guy, taking 2 guys out at once. You could attach explosives onto one guy and launch him into a group of guys and then detonate the explosives, etc.

So? My argument is that a game isn't inherently hurt just because it gets a console release, which is proven by the original Doom. The order in which the platforms got the game is irrelevant if the developer is at all competent

>no arguments at all against nuDoom
>pure shitposting

Wow, imagine my shock

Attached: holy.jpg (377x524, 57K)

>The gravity gun thing opens up interesting possibilities in gameplay.
Oh yeah really, like what? Shooting them at another guy? I bet that'll be fun one time if you've never played Just Cause etc.
Your posts read like marketing talking points from someone who's never played a video game.

Read the rest of the post you dense fucking retard faggot

Your posts read like you literally don't like fun. Would you prefer it if every weapon just fired regular old bullets instead and offered literally no variety in the gameplay? Wow man, sounds AWESOME!

Attached: nofun.jpg (874x916, 247K)

I dunno based on the cover it looks like a game for trannies

>game lets you shoot tranny-looking degenerates
>game for trannies

I dunno man, looks pretty good to me

This looks like a better bulletstorm.

Exactly what I was thinking. I liked Bulletstorm even though it was objectively just a slightly above average game. If this is slightly above slightly above average that's good enough for me. I'll probably wait for it to be at least 50% off though.

Yes it is, because you're limited when playing with a pad. So devs have to dumb shit down for pad users, those playing with kbm suffer from it. When you talk about OlDoom NO ONE ever thinks about the ps version, because it's irrelevant compared to the pc one.
And yes the order is relevant, you're just proving you have no idea what you're talking about. Or do you really think you just code a game and then export it to any device you want? Console games are made to be used with pads, pc games are made to be used with kbm and mobile games are made to be used with touch screens. Somes genres export better to other input devices, some don't. Shooters are some of those that don't.

There's absolutely nothing fun about lame gimmicks like shooting guys at guys or explosives at guys, if that's seriously the best the game has then it's about 20 years behind the 8ball.

>Would you prefer it if every weapon just fired regular old bullets instead and offered literally no variety in the gameplay?
No, I'd prefer it if the trick weapons actually did something interesting and practical like Just cause, HL2, Bioshock, Dishonored etc. instead of being lame gimmicks that clearly had zero effort put into them.
Why would you even defend weak ass shit like this trash? Are you seriously marketers or what?

>generic open world pew pew

>Yes it is, because you're limited when playing with a pad

This is a flawed argument. If they could make the original Doom game work on both PC and consoles by competently modifying the controls, then clearly having a console release needn't necessarily hurt the PC release. Again, the order is irrelevant because the point is - both PC and consoles got the game and it was competently made for both.

Not him but developing for PC and porting to console is infinitely better but more difficult than vice versa. Typically if a game is available on both PC and console, they design it FOR console and then port it to PC.

>shooting and blowing guys up isn't fun

Maybe this isn't the genre for you then? Just a thought.

>There's absolutely nothing fun about lame gimmicks like shooting guys at guys or explosives at guys
So what kind of videogames do you play user? Arma?

>Not him but developing for PC and porting to console is infinitely better but more difficult than vice versa

Not him but clearly you are not a game developer and don't really know what you're talking about

Oh, I wasn't aware you were a game developer. Would you kindly point out where I was wrong?

Why? Let me guess, because you said so?

You are wrong in assuming that the order of which platform gets a game is inherently relevant to the quality of the game. If you were able to read you would have already noticed that point in my previous post.

I just told you buddy - Bioshock, HL2, Just Cause, dishonored, crysis as well. You know, games that have well designed game mechanics that don't need unpaid grassroots community members to promote and defend their lackluster gameplay on message boards.

What's this game's genre again? Cause I'm seeing garbagey open world vehicle gameplay, lackluster shooting and a some lame looking tonics all rolling into one B grade looking shitfest.

It's a first person shooter with some elements of vehicle combat. I thought it was plainly obvious for anyone who actually plays video games. But clearly the discussion so far has focused on the FPS elements. It still sounds to me like you simply don't like fun. All the games that you listed also had gimmicky weapons and combat options that were fun. Nothing sets them apart from the gimmicky weapons and combat options in this game.

>All the games that you listed also had gimmicky weapons and combat options that were fun. Nothing sets them apart from the gimmicky weapons and combat options in this game.
I feel bad for you if you can't see the difference between something like dishonored or bioshock and this. Good luck with your game.

>defibrilation
>4 button pattern qte
>110% health gained
man what will consolefags ruin next
wow so modern and inclusive, I cant wait to play this /sarcasm

>This is a flawed argument
How so? You're way less precise when aiming with with a pad, meaning you also have much less control on your movements. Also there's less buttons, meaning less gameplay options.
When the most popular input device is a pad, devs are gonna take that into acount when making a game. If they don't they're just bad devs. If you can't see why this affects kbm users then you're just a lost soul.
You have to learn the difference between working and how it plays, just because it works doesn't mean you play them the same. Watch some OlDoom pc gameplay and some pad gameplay and you'll see that they play differently, hell it is true for NuDoom also.

>Bioshock
Wow they copied the gravity gun mechanic from HL2 and you can also set people on fire and freeze them
>HL2
Wow you can pick up objects with a gun and hurl them at enemies
>Just Cause 2
Wow you can tether stuff together with a rope
>Crysis
Wow you can grab a Korean by the throat and throw him into another Korean

Out of all the games you listed, only Dishonored offers some really creative solutions. All the other games simply have fun little gimmicks, just like the ones in Rage. You're delusional if you think there's a world of difference between the dumb gimmicks in those games and the dumb gimmicks in this game.

>How so? You're way less precise when aiming with with a pad, meaning you also have much less control on your movements

Again, this doesn't mean that the PC controls are necessarily bad. All you're arguing is that fps games are shit on consoles. Everyone and their grandma knows that. You're simply assuming that it will be a bad port, and it needn't INHERENTLY be one, as I've said. There are games that were developed for a multi-platform release but had the controls revamped completely for the PC version, to avoid things like the same button being used for multiple actions, having to hold buttons down to do something, etc. This is what sets a good developer apart from a bad one. Now, I'm not claiming that Avalanche will do a great job with the PC version of this game, all I'm saying is that a game getting released on consoles does not HAVE to taint the PC experience.

Like I said, if you're seriously trying to argue that those game are similar in quality to what's on display in that trailer, I feel bad for you.
You guys should have made bulletstorm 2 instead of this shit, bulletstorm wasn't great but it at least tried.

>no arguments

Absolutely shocking right there.

The fact that you're listing Bioshock as an example of good gameplay while saying Rage 2 looks bad is absolutely laughable. Bioshock had some of the worst shooting ever to be put in an FPS. Funny how you're now trying to shift the conversation away from the gimmicks in those games after being the one who started that whole conversation. It's almost as if you can't refute a single one (1) of my arguments. Stay mad.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 147K)

fpbp

I hope it's the last of the pink pussy (FagCry/Rape/Borderlined) shooters.

This is what a real shooter should look like in 2019:
youtu.be/-zqjNkdXT94

>muh grimdark brown "aesthetic"

Yeah dude, I also like playing games that are literally the color of shit.

>a game getting released on consoles does not HAVE to taint the PC experience
But experience showed us that it WILL taint the pc experience. When you know the game you're making is gonna be played by both kbm and pads you have to adapt it so it can be played by both equally.
Since pad users struggle much more to get good performances on fps, you have to dumb the game down so those aren't lost along the way. Like for instance guns having no recoil in any console fps and enemies not being challenging enough so pad users don't get rekt at the first gunfight they come across. Those are consequences of choosing to develop a game for both input devices.

No, you are shit and your taste has the looks to prove it.

Bitches like you should go back to sucking dick, it's the only place you are welcome.

>But experience showed us that it WILL taint the pc experience

In some cases yes, in other cases no. The thing is, you don't know for certain. I'd like to hear about some recent games that you think were dumbed down because they got a console release. But don't just list them, tell me how they were dumbed down. For example, how was nuDoom hurt by the console release?

why are these people defending an unreleased game so hard

If you think I'm going to bother engaging someone so contrarian and biased that they're prepared to pretend that those games are as shallow as this game looks, you're going to be pretty disappointed. Nice try though.

>Bioshock had some of the worst shooting ever to be put in an FPS.
Who was talking about shooting? The shooting in this also looks mediocre as fuck, though, sure. Either way, the point is that bioshock is just one game that did the powers thing better a decade ago and this game just looks like a mess.
It's not exactly a secret that Avalanche has been going down hill fast and by the looks of this garbage and JC3-4, everyone who was responsible for JC2 has moved on from the company. Damn, shame but what are you going to do?

Other than shilling for a shit looking game anyway.

>your taste has the looks to prove it

lmao what does this even mean? Imagine unironically wanting your games to have a fully brown color pallet and an edgy grimdark design

Attached: laughin_bitches.jpg (640x573, 80K)

>I have no arguments and I must post

Yeah okay man. You don't have to keep confirming it, I am fully aware you have absolutely nothing of value to add here.

What's the point of the game? Why should I give a shit about shooting these mutated monkeys?

RAGE's problem was that beyond the opening cutscene, the player was given absolutely no reason to give a shit about anything that happened. The environments were pretty and the shooting was fun, but I cannot recall a single meaningful thing that happened through that entire god damn game. I think I fought a giant at one point.

Games aren't DOOM anymore. Mere technical prowess isn't enough -- you either have to give people a chance to crush other people with their technical mastery, or give them a narrative to remember the game that lives beyond a competent shooting mechanic in a market flooded with technically competent shooters.

Attached: 53155834_2258861271021024_6953052453038194688_n.png (699x435, 235K)

why are these people attacking an unreleased game so hard

>What's the point of the game?

Are you new to video games? The point is to have fun. It's an entertainment product.

Someone saying, "hey this looks good" isn't going to get replies from someone whon fundamentally agrees with them. The only people that are going to reply are going to be the ones who want to tell them that they're wrong -- and then, they're only going to be the ones who felt strongly enough to open the thread and type out a reply. Essentially, it's selecting out for only people who want to disagree with the OP, aka: people attacking the game.

I can shoot monkeys in any number of technically competent shooters. From Saint's Row, to Far Cry, to Just Cause; I can have a jolly time launching ragdolls. What does this thing have to set it apart from the pack? What's the point of this game? All games want you to have fun playing them -- that's not really a talking point. What about this game will make it especially fun, apart from all of the other games that will try the same?

Attached: 1524211776395.jpg (3132x5428, 1.65M)

You're the one alleging that classic gameplay is actually bad because your new game looks like shit, bro. Whenever you want to get an honest argument people will be interested in engaging with you, otherwise you're just background noise.

Look at it from a customer's perspective. Your studio has released five or six games since JC2 and all of them have been broken dogshit or barely medicore and gen zero is the worst so far. Now you're trying to tell people that Rage 2 is going to be good, despite it clearly looking pretty bad in the scripted gameplay being shown off? Nobody is that gullible, buddy.

>What does this thing have to set it apart from the pack?

Vehicle combat, giant bosses, weapons that weren't in those other games.

>your new game

Stopped reading right there. Do you have a single argument or just pure shitposting? I think we both know the answer to that question.

All of the videos remind of me of "What if DOOM was Borderlands"

>What does this thing have to set it apart from the pack?

If a game has satisfying mechanics, gameplay and level design then it doesn't really need that much else, IMO. Of course you might disagree with me on that, it's all subjective, but I don't need a story as an incentive to play a game that's good to begin with. I'm fine with the story being bare-bones and just giving me an excuse to engage in good gameplay. Before anyone gets triggered, I'm not saying this game will necessarily have good gameplay, but if it does, I'll be perfectly fine with it being basically a fun shooting gallery of "monkeys".

>From the developer of Just Cause series
No thanks.

I just prefer to imagine you as a dev or a marketer, because the idea of some guy frothing at the mouth to defend a game that he hasn't played that not only looks medicore as fuck, but is coming from a studio that hasn't released a good game in nearly a decade is to sad to really bother thinking about. You're ok if I keep pretending that you have some vested interest in defending this shit, right?

Maybe you'd be taken more seriously if your whole post didn't come down to >muh shill and you were actually able to explain how the mechanics in the games you previously listed are not gimmicks.

Have you beaten nudoom on ultranightmare or are you just shitposting?

>frothing at the mouth

Nice projection, since you're probably getting mad due to your inability to actually give a retort to any of my posts. You listed a bunch of games with gimmicky mechanics and when asked how they aren't pure gimmickry compared to this game you resorted to absolute pure shitposting. Terrible evasion tactics, my guy.

Why would anyone care if the guy trashing some of the most well regarded games around is "taking them seriously"? It's pretty obvious by the replies in this thread that there are only two of you defending this game and the other 90% think it looks like shit.

ahhh hell yea ready to get my RAGE on with my bros

Game is slower, because you're slower when using a pad. Guns have no "firing feeling" (dunno how to express this properly) because it's harder to aim with a pad. Enemies are much less agressive, outright stupid and in lesser numbers, because you struggle to move around and shoot at the same time with a pad. To compensate for the enemies being useless they have tons of hp, again because it's harder to aim with a pad so they have to make it so you don't move your reticle too much while still conserving some sense of difficulty. You have kill moves, that do nothing of value in a shooter except slowing the game even more. Arenas are all big, don't change and enemies are dispersed through it, so pad users have time to react. Weapons have tons of useless upgrades that you don't even have to use since you can kill everything pretty easily, because they have to compensate for the fact that they are boring to use in the first place.
I mean seriously, just replay Doom I or II and see how much more visceral and dynamic it is to play than NuDoom.

>still zero (0) arguments
>calls to authority

This is getting pathetic. I'm having trouble keeping up with all the logical fallacies you're trying to rely on. Are you going to refute a single point I've made? No? That's what I thought.

>I know you are but what am I?
Seriously? If you want anyone to care, be specific about why those games as shallow as the gameplay in this trailer looks. Trying to be a contrarian with "muh tether" "muh fire and ice" isn't ever going to cut it.

If you want anyone care, explain how the gimmicks in those games aren't gimmicks. Oh wait. You can't.

Oh yeah, shooting something from a vehicle. Or maybe from a turrent on the vehicle? Haven't ever done that before in a game. Real innovative shit right there. Big ol' bullet sponges? Also pretty new. Haven't ever shot at anything bigger than my player model in a video game before -- no siree.

A gun with a gimmicky mechanic? Unless you're going to go whole-hog with a portal gun or Gravity Gun and give me something to sink my teeth into gameplay wise, then an inefficient gimmick blaster will be entertaining for all of 10 minutes until I've thrown my 50th body and gotten bored again.

The reason that games push narrative so hard these days is because that's all they really have to set them apart. everything else has mostly been done to death by now.

Shooting monkeys for an hour can be fun, but every hour after that you're pushing against the endless tide of other monkey-shooters that offer the same fundamentally satisfying hit of gameplay-seratonin. When it comes to gameplay, you either need to allow for a wide enough array of interactioons to maintain novelty -- which is essentially impossible outside of a multiplayer space based on the limits of game AI, or give people something that will take longer to lose the novelty. A good story, for instance. The reason games lean so hard on plot these days is because it's easier to engage with a philosophical theme for hours on end than it is doing rote monkey-shooting. Evoking emotions is simply more effective.

You won't remember the 4327th time you pressed X to bash an enemy with an Axe in, say, God of War. You won't remember the 79th enemy you throw into the air with the gravity gun in RAGE2. But you might remember an insightful point of philosophy, or a moving piece of plot or dialogue.

RAGE1 was entirely forgettable because they thought they could rely on the novelty of monkey-shooting. I don't think they will have learned their lesson, given what I've seen.

Attached: WBnRRgS.jpg (558x879, 277K)

colograding / colors make me puke.
Game looks like shit desu

Attached: 1516538756001.gif (280x296, 1.61M)

>Game is slower
Slower than original Doom, sure, but to claim it's slow is just being disingenuous. It's still pretty fast and if it was old Doom levels of fast, it wouldn't really fit the busier, more detailed level design. You'd just get stuck on geometry every 3 seconds.

>Guns have no "firing feeling" (dunno how to express this properly) because it's harder to aim with a pad
I don't really know what you mean. The guns felt very satisfying and impactful. The old Doom games were no better in this regard. I'd argue the guns have a better "firing feeling" than in the old games, but that's just me.

>Enemies are much less agressive, outright stupid and in lesser numbers
Enemies were actually a lot more aggressive and mobile than in old Dooms, at least on UV and Nightmare. Imps are able to reach you in seconds wherever you go, hell knights and barons can leap basically half way across the arena to hit you, revenants and mancubi are constantly hurling projectiles at you and if there's even a single pinky in the fight you might get fucked real fast. A lot of the enemies that weren't even real threats in the classics are now very dangerous on Nightmare. As for the number of enemies, nuDoom never reaches Doom II insane levels of enemies on screen, but people tend to forget that Doom I was pretty tame in this regard. Pic related is the number of enemies on screen for the entirety of Knee Deep in the Dead. As you can see, it never goes over 15. The highest it ever goes in any of Doom I's episodes is around 22-23, a number that's matched by nuDoom's late game levels.

>You have kill moves
Those moves are a crutch for bad players, that much is true, however they become increasingly useless on higher difficulties because you're likely to get killed or lose a lot more HP than you get from the kill as soon as it ends. You're invincible during the animation, but everything keeps moving, so projectiles that enemies shoot during the kill will hit you when the kill ends.

Attached: WexqNTD.png (884x473, 72K)

>calls to authority
I think you mean 'appeal to popularity'.

>gimmicks in those games aren't gimmicks.
They are gimmicks though. The difference is that they're fun gimmicks that have some depth and complement the the gameplay. Meanwhile that gravity gun does nothing except finish off enemies in a different way and if you pay attention it doesn't kill enemies any faster than shooting them with the regular assault rifle. Plus the bodies don't even fucking ragdoll, they just disappear, come on.

You losers need to get a new job.

...continued
>Arenas are all big
Not all of them. Some of them are pretty big but still have very tight spaces and are challenging to move around. The late missions on Mars come to mind. Some of the hell levels were pretty uninspired though, I'll give you that.

>Weapons have tons of useless upgrades
I found a lot of the upgrades very useful. Nightmare mode is pretty fucking hard even on PC and the upgrades are a godsend, especially in the early game. The game becomes a bit too easy after you get the Gauss cannon, sadly. But it never becomes a walk in the park on Nightmare, let alone UN.

looks like Destiny

Attached: 1523775190047.jpg (360x360, 29K)

>The difference is that they're fun gimmicks

The gimmicks in Rage 2 are fun too. Well that was easy. Also you're again ignoring the other possible uses for the gravity bullets in this "argument" of yours. Apparently launching a guy with explosives into a group of guys using the gravity ammo and then detonating him isn't fun in this game but would be super fun in the games that you listed. lmao

>6 demons in a tight room: The Game
Zoomie go away.

Attached: 1464356566095.gif (250x250, 1.76M)

>Also you're again ignoring the other possible uses for the gravity bullets in this "argument" of yours.
Which part of the trailer does that happen in?

>muh 6 demons

Has there ever been a bigger non-argument in the history of the universe?

How do i get paid to post in threads like these?
Whats the rate per positive post?>

Attached: 1553160973468.png (1354x784, 869K)

Give them some slack, they're just nervous about the fact that nu-doom2 has already BTFO of their game so hard that people forgot this even existed.

Explosives that attach to enemies were shown months ago in the gameplay footage that was released. Put two and two together, you brainlet. Does the game have to literally spell everything out for you?

Actually I'm fairly excited for both of these games, to be honest. Much more hopeful for Doom though, obviously. But this looks like it might be fun and fill the time before Eternal is released.

So you're genuinely just hoping that the gravity gun can move objects even though they didn't do that even once in the trailer they made to show off the gun. Come on buddy.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot that they're both published by the same company. I'm guessing being "excited" for Nu-doom will be a bit easier than this job.

>So you're genuinely just hoping that the gravity gun can move objects

What the fuck are you on about? Are you quite literally braindead? IT CAN MOVE THE GUYS AROUND AND YOU CAN ATTACH EXPLOSIVES TO THE GUYS. What part of a. attach explosive to guy b. launch guy into crowd of guys c. detonate explosive isn't crystal fucking clear to you? Christ almighty you're retarded.

Looks like console shooter.
Why would Id made competitor for their upcomming Doom Eternal?

Id isn't making this game.