Ok, wow, I did not know people actually pull off no block run in NG. My bad. I just did not search enough
I guess we can agree on NG just strongly suggest you to block, not forces you. NG's system does rely heavily on blocking, but you can still beat the game without using a block. I accept that XD
I thought you were saying 2016's enemies are better than DE, but as I slowly read through your previous post again, I realized you actually have not said that. My bad again on that part as well. Thanks for another long post!
> Forced playstyle
I think now I get more clear sight on what your opinion is. Yes I think we can agree on DE forcing a certain play loop(combat loop?). You shoot for like 30~40 secs and chain saw and shoot 30~40 secs again and repeat that process. Because of the ammo restriction, you have to weapon switch constantly. Even though you would choose to not uses a certain weapon, you still have to weapon switch.
Personally, I don't like UT chain run on NG 2 and even on NG 1(not insulting JTB by any means. I love his guides, and have learnt a lot from them when I was younger. I admire his enthusiasm as a gamer.), so I actually think restricting the UT chain gameplay will make the game better. Of course I would not add a cool down to it, because I don't think CD is good for action games, but I would make an adjustment such as 'enemies killed by UT won't give you any essence'. This will prevent you from doing UT chaining over and over again. I actually think this will make the game better, because NG really shines when you are not using a UT(At least in NG 1, because UT is very important in NG 2 because of how it gives you time to turn the camera.).
And I think this is where we think differently. Even though you don't play NG with a playstyle of JTB, you think at least allowing that kind of playstyle adds a value to the game, and makes the game more 'free'. While I actually agree on the later point('allowing it makes the game more free' point), I don't think allowing a less interesting playstyle adds any value to the game, if not subtracts it.
Here is what I think about Doom 2016. I think it is a great game. It revived FPS genre. I won't say it is as good as NG 1/2, but I think it's foundation inspired lots of game developers, to make a better FPS game. It ended Half-life era of FPS. But because of the 'freedom' it had, freedom that allowed you to play in any way you want to, such as just using a single weapon(SSG mostly I guess) to beat the entire game or using every weapon like Clockner, the game actually lost some values, because lots of players won't even use anything else than a SSG. What I think is that allowing only an interesting playstyle and forcing you to use more options that game provides makes the game more tight and well directed/designed, because it leads every player to play in interesting way and forces them to consider using other tools more often. And because it leads every player to play in interesting way, it 'forces' the player to grow as a player and be better. Yes, some players might like sticking to a single weapon more, but I don't think it is something that should be allowed in the game like Doom Eternal, or even in Doom 2016.
I am not trying to force my opinion, but this is what I think as a great game design. I freaking love Nioh, and it is one of my favorite game(I don't think it is one of the best games at all, but still, it is my favorite), but it allows so much shitty options such as magic and farming. I guess you think allowing magic and farming adds more freedom to Nioh, but I think disallowing those tools and forcing the players to beat the game with changing the stance constantly and utilizing flux I and II would make Nioh a way better game.
>Cooldowns in action games
I hate CD in action games as well XD I kinda think if DE removes the CD mechanic from grenades, and make them charged by how many enemies you've killed or something like that would make the game better. But if the game ever wants to add CD mechanic to an action game, I think DE is the way to go, even though it would be better without it. The reason I think CD in DE is the best way to implement CD in action games is because:
a. Enemies are very aggressive and gives you less breathing time, so CD actually is really threatening. The reason I hate CD is because it lets you spam it at the start of the battle and allows you to play very passively and wait for CD to finish.
b. You can actually decrease it's CD by using it more efficiently, so it is kinda combination of meter system and CD system.
Again, I still think if we remove it the game will be better, but DE implements CD in such a good way so I don't think it is that big of a deal.
>cannot chainsaw an Archvile
I don't think you should be allowed to chainsaw Archvile, Cyber Demon Baron of Hell. They should be very threatening, so letting you chainsaw them right away would make the game less interesting. I think they should actually remove BFG and Crucible as well, but at least ammo for those weapons is rare.
Continuing on that point, I think the only problem DE's later levels have is the fact that you can just erase bunch of enemies with BFG and Crucible. I actually think presenting tons of enemies and forcing you to fight them is a great game design especially in DE. It reminds me of Doom 2. I have beaten the game without using any BFG and Crucible, and the game felt so good to play.
>difference in weapon
Yea, I guess DMC 4 can have more unique movesets by combining some similar moves, but I think current weapon/move lists are good enough to make the game's combat unique. My point is that, you can make DMC 4 and DE a better game by making some adjustment here and there, but even without those adjustment, those games are good enough. DMC 4 is not a perfect game at all. The campaign is worse than DMC 3 IMO with worse bosses and enemies, but the changeable styles in real-time and very unique weapons such as Lucifer makes the game very unique and innovative. No games that mimick DMC 4 comes any close to how good DMC 4 is. Even the direct sequel, DMC 5 is worse than 4. DE's campaign can be fixed as well, especially the later part(I think first half is perfect), but even without those adjustments, I think DE is good enough. Yes, weapons can be more unique, but current weapons are unique enough, at least that is what I think.
I am not saying DE cannot be a better game. Well, yes I think it is a perfect game, but some parts can be better. I might sound very silly right now, because I am saying 'it is perfect' and 'it can be better with some adjustments' at the same time. What I mean is that, some parts of DE can be better, but I think those parts cannot be considered as a 'flaw'. I think SM 64 is a perfect game. Sure the camera work can be designed more elegantly, but I don't think it can be considered as a flaw because SM 64 was designed around that restrictive camera, and compensate a lot of it's flaws with great level design.
I agree if we meld some weapons and make some adjustments here and there, we will end up with more unique and better weapons. But I think weapons as of now are good enough, and unique enough. Mods make those weapons different enough with each other, even though they can be 'more' different. I haven't played Painkiller so I cannot say much about how unique those weapons are, but as I am reading through your descriptions about those weapons, I can see how they are more unique compared to DE's weapons.
Thanks for the long reply! I actually did not counterargue with your points directly on this post, because I can see why you think DE's weapons are not unique enough and is a step back from 2016 as a whole. I think we should just agree to disagree. Our fundamental philosophy about games are quite different, even though we both think NG 2 is one of the best game ever created XD