I was cautiously optimistic for DOOM 2016 (I've finally made peace with that stupid name) and really satisfied with it. I was really hyped for DOOM Eternal and it delivered in spades, even thought the DLCs kind of lost me. I wasn't really sure what to make of DOOM The Dark Ages at first, but I think it's still a solid entry into the DOOM franchise.
Let's talk presentation: idTech has always worked well and looked great, and this game is no exception. The artstyle is dripping with style and care, the environments are varied and amazingly done, and the models are crisp and detailed. But the move to a ray-tracing only engine I feel already alienates a LARGE part of the audience that are still on older or modest hardware purely on a technical level, without even discussing any of the game's content. And this would all be well and good if the game really did look way ahead of Eternal in terms of texture quality and lighting, and while the latter has arguably improved, this is a fast(ish) paced shooter where you're blazing left and right constantly, and I would wager a lot of people (myself included) would have preferred high framerates on modest hardware to pretty lighting. Don't even get me started on the lack of official FSR4 support (I got by with OptiScaler 0.9), but I'm not sure if that's an id problem or an AMD problem. Suffice to say that playing this game on 100 FPS with dips to the mid 70s felt a lot less satisfying that constantly sailing smoothly near my monitor's 180 Hz refresh rate in Eternal.
The sound design is amazing as ever, however, so that remains a staple of id game design. The gun sounds are meaty, the shield parry CLONG is satisfying and never gets old. Even the music seems to have taken a step forward. It will never reach Mick Gordon heights, but at least it's not bad or forgettable.
The devs really want you to care about the story in this game for some reason. What started as a half-joke in DOOM 2016 has now evolved into fully-fledged cutscenes and monologues, and I'm glad they're skippable (though I didn't skip on my first and only playthrough any because it's not how I roll). They're not long, they're well-made enough but IMO they are still ultimately completely unnecessary. Just let us at the demon hordes, will ya?
Speaking of which, the gameplay itself is actually a lot better than people give it credit for. Yeah, it's not run and gun madness like DOOM 2016. It's not the crazy dash-jump-weaponswap carnage ballet like DOOM Eternal, and I can understand why dedicated fans of both those games would dislike the changes made here. Regardless, the gameplay loop is still well executed, highly tweakable, and most of all, instantly distinguishable from the previous two games, and this is where I think the Dark Ages should be given a lot more credit. People complain that the game is too easy now - you can make it harder on a very detailed level using the custom difficulties. People complain it relies too heavily on the parry mechanic - I tend to agree, but I think giving the player a shield 'just because' and not incorporating it into the shooting would've been a lot worse. What it aims to do, as Eternal did (and let's please remember how many haters that game had), is to encourage you play the game as DOOM The Dark Ages should be played, whatever that means to you. They could've easily made DOOM 2016 II, or DOOM Eternal II, but they made a game that has its own identity. The shooting still feels satisfying, the weapons are fun and plentiful, the enemies varied and interesting, the arenas are well-designed and while I expected the lack of classic Glory Kills to really irk me, I ended up not missing them half as much as I thought. You want to rip and tear, you most definitely can and will.
Another rather key feature of this game is the larger, slightly more open-ended maps. I feared they would feel padded and drawn-out, and to my surprise, they didn't because the density of encounters and things to do and find felt just right. What [i]does[/i] feel padded and drawn-out, however, are the mech ("Atlan") and dragon sections. It's cool the first time, and there are some attempts at mixing the dragon in a little more smoothly later in the game, but I felt these two types of level were ultimately half-baked and, like the cutscenes, completely unnecessary. If the shield worked, unfortunately these additions, like the cutscenes, fell flat on their face for me.
As far as length goes, this is a pretty hefty single-player campaign, clocking in at around 25 hours for me after 100% everything on Ultra-Violence. There's a lot of content. Not worth 80€, to be clear (I don't even want to open [i]that[/i] can of worms...), but I'd be lying if I said I didn't spend some quality time in this game. That said... maybe this will change as time goes on, but for some reason, while I dip into 2016 and Eternal every now and again, I feel a lot less inclined to go back to this game. I can't really put my finger on why, I just feel like I've "one and done" it. I haven't tried the Ripatorium yet, a canned arena challenge mode, but it doesn't interest me in the slightest. If you want more of this game, either get the DLC, or accept that this is the only replay value this campaign offers (outside the usual Ultra-Nightmare challenge runs).
Ultimately, would the gaming world be a lesser place without DOOM The Dark Ages? I think so. Despite some choices that didn't really land in my book (the cutscenes, the boring Atlan and the tedious Dragon sections), it does ultimately set itself apart from the other two neo-DOOM games enough to have its own identity. If anything, it's a testament to id's consistency in making quality games. It looks good, it feels good to play, it offers a lot, so in the end, while it doesn't reach the heights of Eternal or the impact of 2016, it's definitely still worth playing.
