'Doom' Is Not a Title, It's a Name

"Doom" is no longer a generic video game title. It's a name, a job description, and a promise.


Publisher: Bethesda
Developer: id Software
Rated: Mature
Players: 1
Release Date: 2016-05-13

I totally dismissed Doom before it came out. I took one look at it during Bethesda's E3 press conference and knew it would be a disaster of a game. I was, perhaps, a bit presumptuous. As it turns out, Doom is a better game than it logically has any right to be, and one of the ways in which it's so surprisingly, shockingly good is in its characterization of the so-called "Doom Gu,," the faceless, voiceless, hyper-violent hero of the game. What's amazing is that he's still a faceless, voiceless, hyper-violent hero, but not in the bland, generic way that defined early shooters. He's been given just enough background and a personality to elevate him from "generic" to "iconic".

On this note, there's a great Jimquisition video that examines how the animation helps with this characterization. I want to touch on some of those same points, but I also want to look more closely at the opening minutes of the game, as this is where the game does a majority of its subtle yet integral characterization. This is where the game turns the Doom Guy from a space marine into a deity -- a supernatural harbinger of destruction.

The character work starts right away. We see a hellish looking symbol fade in from the darkness, then the world fades in around it, and we realize that we're chained to a medical table. The game is playing with us at this point, leaning into images of examination, experimentation, and victimization, encouraging us to see ourselves as the generic soldier thrust into an extreme situation. Doom is playing into our expectations.

But then we break free, shoot up the demons in the room, and when we take a moment to actually look at the table that we were chained to, well, it's obviously not a table. It's a stone sarcophagus surrounded by demonic looking symbols. There's a panel nearby that plays back a hologram recording of the past: People bowed low around the sarcophagus in worship, a woman walks by, deep in thought, and worries out loud, "We have to contain this".

In less than a minute, the game changes us from a generic space marine into a mystical, possibly divine being. We may not know who we are, but the world knows who we are. It worships and fears us. We're not just a guy trying to survive, we're on the offensive this time, someone -- something -- to be feared.

Soon we find another panel, and Dr. Samuel Hayden starts talking to us, trying to make a deal. "I think we can find a way to resolve this problem in a way that benefits us both," he starts to explain, but we don't hear him through. We grab the panel and throw it aside in obvious disgust. Later, he tries to further justify the exploration/exploitation of hell in an elevator. "It was purely for the betterment of mankind," he argues as we glance down at the mangled human remains on the floor before smashing the comm.

We may be some frightening, mystical being, but we're not cruel. These reactions portray us as empathetic, someone that's saddened by the death and violence around us, and angered at those who caused it. If we're really a divine being resurrected into this world, as it seems we are, then we have a clear role to play. We're a punisher, someone who delivers justice to those who deserve it. We're not a protector, as we awaken after the horror has occurred, and we're not a judge, as we're not trying to be impartial to the evildoers who opened hell. We're just here to, as a voice in the darkness tells us before we wake, "Rip and tear, until it is done."

The "Doom Guy" is no longer a space marine. He's become an icon to the gaming world and the game itself reflects this by turning him into something like the Grim Reaper, a personification of a force of nature. The Grim Reaper is Death, and the Doom Guy is Doom. That word is no longer a generic video game title. It's a name, a job description, and a promise.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.