DH Review: Day Of Defeat Source

Zardon

Day of Defeat is one of the most popular Half Life 1 mods available today, but with the release of Valve’s Source engine gamers everywhere could see that DoD was in great need of a makeover. Day of Defeat: Source is a remake of the hit HL1 mod, but this time around it has a completely new look while still delivering the intense close quarters combat that WWII fans fell in love with. With a price tag of only $20 for Half Life 2 owners, Day of Defeat: Source is the perfect title for anyone seeking WWII multiplayer mayhem.

read here

SFOSOK

It is quite awsome in my opinion also. One of the best Multi-player games in a while. As soon as I got this I have not played CS:S since. Also I would like to add that the Rifleman class is probably best for all around as the rifle's ironsights are just as accurate as a snipers scope. Against a novice sniper you can strafe slowly around a corner so the get anxious and shoot you in the arm (not wasting all your health) while after you simply completely strafe out and judge where the shot came from by the sound and the ideal camping positions around the map. A good sniper will either wait to see your torso or guess where your head is by the position of your arm and simply shoot your head through the wall. Also for those who haven't played, with the most powerful classes you can shoot through walls. This comes in handy for an MG under sniper fire because they can expend enough bullets through the walls at a position where they shot may have come from. An MG rarely survives from an coo-ordinated attack of two master snipers though.


It has very great moments in the game, like when you capture all but the spawn flag of the enemy team and everyone shouts "Go, Go, Go" only to realize when you turn the corner that there are 3 MG's waiting to here your chants and wipe out your entire team. The tides can turn very fast if you have no defense but with no offense you don't advance. I have seen many games create choke points goin from spawn to spawn.


In short this is a great game, if you loved the original or any WWII game you should love this.

Poppi

How come I have HDR support with my X800 XT PE? IE. Brightly lit walls dimming when I look at them for a bit. What other effects can I expect to enjoy with this "pseudo HDR" in DOD: Source? Has anyone else noticed this in other Source games with "non supported" graphics cards? What have you seen? Thanks...

MaRa-23

I don't like the fact that many weapons have been removed and that there are no bayonets and no buttsmack. Brits, fallschirmjaegers and us airborne are nowhere to be seen either, I hope they add them in future updates, though.
I never use ironsights, they're so clumsy and it takes ages to enter the ironsights. Reloading on the sniper rifles is weird, apparently if you reload with some bullets still in the gun, they will disappear since you always reload five bullets.

Ubergrendle

woah i have to disagree with 91/100 score. i recognise the review is trying to be balanced and evaluate the game on its own merits, but I think DoD:S is a huge disappointment.

1. Its a remake of the old DoD, but inferior since it has less maps @ launch and they've nerfed alot of the classes. Less machinegunes, m1 carbine is a backup weapon with limited ammo now, no bayonnets (?!?!).

2. glitchy as heck. i've gotten caught inbetween walls twice already, and fell into map holes where the only escape is suicide.

3. laggy as heck. 32 player servers lag horribly. and these are servers where they were previously running 32 or 40 player CS:S games w/o incident. contrast this netcode with that of, say, BF2 (64 players, huge maps) and you know its a weak offering.

Before people say "Its the first release, give it time" be advised that IMHO HL, CS:S, and BF2 had much better inital releases than this game. For $20 it might be considered good value, but not by me. BF2 outclasses this game in many ways, and if I want tight Source-engine based online combat CS:S is a much better bet. Call of Duty 2 will be out shortly and is a much better bet.

Thanks DH and Vesper for your review, but I respectfully have to disagree with your assessment. This game is more like a 7/10, if you're a DoD 1.0+ veteran more like a 6/10 or 5/10 ... nothing new to see here.

Ubergrendle

1. Agree that not including bayonets and buttsmacks was a huge gameplay mistake.
2. No brits or fallschirmjaegers, coupled with only 4 maps (what is this, a demo!?!?) make this a joke of a release.
3. Ironsights are a good idea, bad implementation in game. Waaaay too slow to utilise effectively... they've turned riflemen into snipers. No point being a sniper anymore in this game.

I bought the "Silver" package online almost a year ago, waited an extraordinarily long time to finally get DoD:S, and I played it for barely 2 hours. Feels like a Beta to me, very disappointing. The first night was funny, everyone was complaining non-stop on voicechat, it was hard to get a DoD veteran to stay online for more than 2 map changes. Usually people were logging off in disgust.

Probably the last release that disappointed me this much was Masters of Orion 3 -- and that game was a DOG.

cswiger

For me, the key test for how good Day of Defeat is, is how it compares with Call of Duty. I think CoD beats DoD: Source hands down in most areas, although some of the DoD maps were pretty interesting, and sometimes the fancy Source graphics and HDR provide some good visuals.

However, the weapon sounds in DoD sound quiet and muted, even the grenades are tame in terms of sound (although a nade will scatter nearby players in an amusing fashion, as the review notes) whereas in CoD, you hear everything from the *ping* of the stripper clip of a Garand to the woosh of a panzerfaust, to the screaming rumble of incoming arty. Using iron sights in DoD takes way too long, as does shooting itself-- firing a gun seems laggy compared with CoD.

SFOSOK

Well it was a welcome relief to CS:S. CS:S one of the worst designed games ever.

pr0digal jenius

CS:S = 4 year olds with machine guns(never anythign but that assault rifle)

so ANYTHING is a welcome step in the right direction, IMO

Ubergrendle

Yeah, CS has gotten that bad...its so ubiquitous it tends to draw the noobs in. Hacking is very advanced for CS as well, both 1.6 and CS:S.

That said the maps in CS:S are gorgeous...de_trainyard or compound are particularly pretty. The ingame animations are slick, there's a large skin community out there, and if you get a well administered server you can have some epic battles of skill.

nevertheless, I moved on from CS 1.6 to DoD and really enjoyed it at the time... the teamplay, varied strategies and weaopns, atmosphere...all very slick. But where CS:S improves upon the strengths of CS 1.6, DOD:S is a step backwards for DoD 1.3 in many many ways.

All said, I suspect BF2 + Quake 4 + CoD2 will probably be the uber FPSes for the next year or two, at least for online play.

Vesper

Ubergrendle, I've read what you've had to say and do agree with you to some extent, but I still belive that DoD:S is a valuable game that will be around for years to come.

The current release is buggy like we both mentioned, such as the characters getting stuck, and I'm sure Valve will do what they can to sort out these issues. Only having 4 maps for the release is also a little on the weak side, but in the long run more and more maps will become available from Valve and the modding community, so this isn't something that should be stressed about too much.

Overall, you're still getting a great online game for only $20, and although there is still a lot of work to be done, DoD:S is still a hell of a lot of fun. As it stands now the areas you mentioned certainly need improvement, but as long as Valve supports DoD:S as much as it supported CS:S, this game should be around for a very long time.

Rasta Monsta

I'd like to hear how people think this game runs...HL2 runs like a$$ on my rig, and I have gotten ZERO help from Valve in getting it straightened out. I can't say I'm willing to shell out additional money for Source releases until the engine issues are sorted.

rasta

SFOSOK

How is that so? my old rig (currentl using) owns it. Blame Steam.

On my old rig without HDR (cause it won't let me enable it) I get about 40 fps constant. New rig full everything I got about 130-140 constant.


Edit: would also like to note some bugs in it (probably with the source engine and hitboxes though). I will shoot a guy in the head (dead on in between the eyes) and he will not take any damage. What is worse is when I hit a person in between the eyes with a sniper and they take 10 damage. Also I have had people do 100 damage to me in one hit with a pistol with the last bullet in their clip. Damage and hitboxes need to be a bit re-worked.

The_Neon_Cowboy

It's only $10 for those ati vouchers to upgrade to the next level
package and get this game, thats what I did

Well it should as all cards R300 and up support HDR despite others "claims".
I just think it doesn't support all forms. AS there was a ATI tech HDR demo for
the 9700 pro for those who remember as well as the recent humas HDR
demo runs fine and dandy as well.

Rasta Monsta

Yeah, my old one did as well. I went from i850e/3.06c/x800 to i875p/3.4g/x850 and it now runs like crap, when it used to run great.

Guess my rig's too fast.

rasta

SFOSOK

Lol, u broke Source : (

Rasta Monsta

Yeah, I am pretty pleased about it, too. It runs at 16x12, 6/16 at pretty high framerates, but has these 'stops' or 'hitches' that totally kill the game.

rasta

P.S. Sorry to highjack thread, rasta bummed.

No_Style

Did you try setting the autosav files with read-only? I did that and my hitching and stuff went away. I also disabled autosave via sv_autosave 0 in a autoexec.cfg. Kinda weird how HL2 is the only game which has autosave issues.

I agree that, 91/100 seems high for a facelift of a mod which has been trimmed (feature wise) slightly.

Poppi

Thanks Neon. I can always depend on you for some real answers. It is very appreciated. Cheers, Poppi.

Matt

I agree with Ubergrendle if your an Hardcore old skool Half-life Mod fan their really isn't anything new here. In fact its prob a step back in terms of DOD game play and a step forward in looks.

Only thing i liked was the MG can be now setup anywhere more or less.
They need to add more maps and sort the blance issues out. Looks like they also rushed it out before COD2.

MythicaL

Don't forget the crashes, lockups, and other bs Steam randomly throws out at users.

hawk16

Day of defeat source is so SICK, I have been waiting for this game for a year and it was well worth it.

Ubergrendle

Just a quick update... several months later I've returned to DoD:Source to give it another chance. Fortunately the numerou updates since the launch have improved things quite a bit... map glitching has been minimised, and performance has greatly improved.

Also the launch of some new maps (argentum), and a redesign of one of my old favorites (kalt) has given the game a bit more legs... 6 maps is a heck of alot better than 4.

In short, its probably worth the $20 to get this game as an upgrade, if you already have HL2. I'd be willing to upgrade my personal rating to 8/10.

bobbytomorow

Anyone like the 4 towers map. Its my favourite ATM.

BulletTheory

I think its one of the worst map ever made for a game. lolll