Because RotT used the Wolf3D engine. Stop being a cartoon of yourself.
Printable View
I was referring to gameplay.
Non-orthagonal map design means that you probably won't get lost in Doom.
Doom also plays much, much better than Wolf3D or ROTT. Which, again, shows the discrepancy between "best" and "most influential/important/innovative." Which rears its head AGAIN when you consider that Doom II was better than the original in pretty much every single way, apart from missing the somewhat creepy vibe of Episode 1.
Doom was a big leap in style more than substance. That definitely makes it a much better game than Wolf3D, but I don't know that it "plays" all that differently.
Sure it does, given the much wider variety of enemies and smarter level design.
ROTT used a greatly enhanced version of the Wolf3D engine from what I remember. I also don't remember it playing differently in any meaningful way from Doom, which is why I'm wondering how Doom saved us from FPS'es that play like ROTT.
Better gameplay isn't really an issue of style. I do agree, though, that Doom is no vast evolution over Wolf3D.
Yeah, it had more meaningful weapon variety and such too. I know it was much better, but I just don't get saying it was the game to really take FPS into 3D. It just wasn't. Descent and Quake were much bigger titles in that regard, as far as the modern genre as we know it goes.
What? Wolf 3D was completely flat, locked to a single plane where you essentially thought only in four directions, in a series of rooms composed of boxes. Doom completely broke that mentality wide open, with rooms that had something other than 90 degree angles, a ceiling that wasn't directly above your head the entire time, and brought in the concept of up and down. Quake was far more a stylistic change. Did it even have true aiming yet? I remember that in Quake II, but it could have been in Quake and I'm just misremembering. I don't really see Descent of adding anything. It was more like an experiment that was rarely repeated.