Compare Doom: The Dark Ages vs Absolum

Accessibility options were consistently praised, especially difficulty sliders, color customization and tuning tools, with minor caveats around clarity or audio-cue gaps.

Accessibility was a strong point thanks to assist settings and damage modifiers, with some online limitations noted.

AI behavior received limited but positive support for enemy responses that punish careless play.

Animation quality had a mixed single assessment, criticizing reduced or less refined glory-kill animations.

Animation quality drew strong praise for smooth, expressive motion and lively character/enemy animation.

Art direction was generally praised for techno-medieval style and fresh locations, though one reviewer found the direction less Doom-like.

Art direction was one of the strongest consensus positives, repeatedly described as gorgeous, striking, or beautifully stylized.

Atmosphere was praised in the supporting review for dark fantasy locations with a Demon’s Souls-like feel.

Boss design was more negative than positive, with reviewers citing missed opportunities, underwhelming finales and recycled boss ideas despite one positive mention.

Boss design ranged from memorable and mechanically strong to harshly criticized for an instant-kill final-boss gimmick.

Bug frequency was mixed: some saw glitches or falling-through-world problems, while another reported no bugs.

Bug frequency was limited but mixed, with one pre-launch freeze fixed and another reviewer reporting several bugs.

Camera behavior was criticized in the supporting review for a baffling dragon-control scheme.

The character roster was praised for distinct heroes, but some reviewers wished there were more than four playable characters.

Class balance had limited mixed evidence, with at least one broken build described as trivializing the game.

Co-op was usually praised as fun and easy to access, though reviewers wanted more than two players and noted balance limits.

Combat drew the strongest agreement, with most reviewers praising shield-led, melee-heavy gunfights, while a minority felt the defensive shift weakened Doom’s flow.

Combat was the clearest strength, with reviewers repeatedly praising its feel, depth, combo freedom, and beat-em-up fundamentals.

Content variety was split: multiple play styles and set pieces added variety, but gimmicky diversions hurt some reviewers’ impressions.

Content variety was praised for new encounters, paths, and discoveries, though some reviewers still wanted more areas or variation.

Controls were generally praised for responsive shooting and melee feel, though one reviewer criticized slow weapon switching.

Controls were generally praised as responsive and fluid, especially with a controller, with only a few platform or precision caveats.

Reviewers found the main loop engaging when the shield, parry and resource flow clicked, but some felt it became simpler or repetitive over time.

The core loop was often described as addictive and replay-friendly, though a few reviewers found the loop slowed by structure.

Crash stability was mixed across platforms and review periods, from flawless stability to dashboard crashes and freezes.

Difficulty balance varied widely by reviewer, with praise for parry generosity and sliders but criticism that the game could feel too easy or unfair.

Difficulty balance was mixed, ranging from adjustable and fair to overly grind-dependent or punishing in co-op.

Mech/vehicle-style sections were mixed to negative overall: some enjoyed the spectacle and scale, but many found them shallow, repetitive or underpowered.

Resource balance was split between praise for easier ammo sustain and criticism that ammo pressure became irrelevant.

Endgame content was a recurring concern, with reviewers describing it as thin, anticlimactic, or lacking meaningful progression.

Enemy variety was generally positive, with many demons and variants noted, though one reviewer found some repetition.

Enemy variety was usually positive, with several reviewers praising distinct foes, while one found variety lacking.

Environmental detail was strongly praised for vistas, lighting and rich scene composition.

Environmental detail was praised for highly detailed locations and memorable, secret-filled areas.

Exploration and secrets were commonly praised as rewarding, though some reviewers disliked backtracking or losing the old teleport/backtrack convenience.

Exploration was a major positive, supported by alternate routes, secrets, handcrafted spaces, and reasons to revisit paths.

Facial animations received a positive single assessment as solid.

Faithfulness to franchise was mixed: some reviewers felt it still felt like Doom, while others called it the least Doom-like modern entry.

Dragon and flying sections were the most repeated weak point, ranging from acceptable spectacle to dull, half-baked or mechanically thin segments.

Frame rate stability was often praised on tested platforms, with one review reporting unstable PS5 performance.

Frame rate stability was usually praised, especially 60 FPS reports, though one Switch review noted occasional drops.

Fun factor was strongly positive overall, even in mixed reviews, with reviewers repeatedly calling the campaign fun, rewarding, or charismatic.

Fun factor was very high overall, with many reviewers calling the game addictive, joyful, or a favorite.

The shield saw and revised mechanics were often praised as a major new layer, though a few reviewers found the system one-note or overly dependent on the shield.

Reviewers praised the mechanical depth and expressive systems, especially once combos, rituals, and enemy responses opened up.

Graphics quality was consistently strong, with reviewers praising models, crisp visuals and cutting-edge presentation.

Graphics quality was praised for hand-drawn detail, strong locations, and appealing fantasy presentation.

Grind level was one of the most common complaints, though a few reviewers felt it avoided becoming a total grindfest.

Handheld suitability was positive, especially for Steam Deck and Switch, despite small-text and co-op screen caveats.

Haptic feedback integration had a mixed single assessment, with DualSense features noted but controller-speaker output called obnoxious.

Haptic feedback support received limited praise for selective controller jolts reinforcing hits.

Immersion was praised in the supporting review for subtle audio and environmental feedback.

Immersion was praised when reviewers felt pulled into the magical world and its escapist atmosphere.

Innovation was broadly praised for reinventing Doom’s formula, though some reviewers saw the simplification as a tradeoff.

Innovation was praised where reviewers felt Absolum advanced or changed expectations for the beat-em-up genre.

The supporting review found the vehicle controls easy to grasp quickly, reflecting a low-friction learning curve.

The learning curve can be frustrating early, but reviewers said mastery and focused builds make the game more rewarding.

Level design received mixed praise for larger arenas, secrets and vistas, but some reviewers found open spaces flatter, bland or less tightly paced.

Level design earned praise for criss-crossing paths and route variety rather than a purely linear brawler flow.

Lore depth was praised where codex material and broader Doom world-building were assessed directly.

Map and navigation design drew complaints about navigation difficulty, excessive map checking, or secrets already revealed on the map.

Map and navigation design was praised for making routes and playthroughs feel meaningfully different.

Menu usability was mixed, with one reviewer criticizing melee switching and another wanting clearer difficulty-slider explanations.

Menu usability received positive support for sleek, easy navigation.

Mission design was praised in the supporting review for making the core demon-slaying missions feel exciting.

Mission structure worked best when story events and run transitions surfaced naturally during exploration.

Mission variety was praised for wider spaces, linear sections and open objectives that changed pace.

Movement was divisive: several reviewers liked the heavy but mobile feel, while others missed the faster, more acrobatic style of earlier entries.

Movement feel was split: some found it exceptionally fluid, while others struggled with 2.5D positioning and precision.

Narrative quality was highly divided, ranging from Doom’s strongest story to self-serious, confusing, bland or unnecessary storytelling.

Narrative quality split reviewers: some enjoyed the world and evolving story, while others found the plot bland or slow.

Onboarding was praised for welcoming new players and easing them into the revised systems.

Online stability had limited evidence, but one co-op review reported no crashes or bugs during Steam play.

Semi-open design was praised for broader spaces, optional content and player choice in objectives.

Originality received positive support for its fresh beat-em-up and roguelite hybrid approach.

Pacing was split: some liked the measured rollout and breathless campaign, while others disliked the ending, reduced momentum or open-map slowdown.

Pacing was praised by some for compact run lengths and momentum once the systems clicked.

Performance optimization was mostly positive, especially on capable hardware, though some reviews noted high requirements or drops.

Performance optimization was positive overall, especially on Steam Deck and Switch 2, with some Switch caveats.

Platforming was judged more limited than earlier modern Doom games in the one review that assessed it.

Polish was praised in the two supporting reviews as polished and technically clean.

Polish was widely positive, with reviewers calling the game polished, crafted, and high-quality despite design caveats.

Progression was the most divisive system: some liked the steady growth, while others felt it over-relied on grinding and numbers.

The protagonist’s power fantasy was praised in the supporting review as strongly delivered.

The playable leads were generally appealing, with reviewers highlighting fun fantasy archetypes and standout characters.

Puzzle design was lightly covered, with reviewers describing simple exploration puzzles as enjoyable but rarely demanding.

Quest design was divisive, with some side-quest gating and RNG requirements described as tedious.

Replay value was mixed, with secrets and challenges helping, but some reviewers doubting long-term appeal or completionist-heavy longevity.

Replay value was highly divisive: many found it addictive and varied, while others felt repetition and forced replay hurt it.

Sandbox freedom was praised for giving players meaningful freedom in larger maps and objective order.

Side character depth was usually criticized, with reviewers calling supporting characters forgettable, unmemorable or impossible to care about.

Sound design was generally strong, with praise for heavy feedback and crunchy effects, though one reviewer found effects too soft.

Sound design was praised for punchy hits, crunchy feedback, and strong audiovisual pairing.

Soundtrack quality was divided: several reviewers loved the metal score, while others found it less memorable or a downgrade from earlier entries.

The soundtrack was a standout strength, repeatedly described as excellent, phenomenal, varied, or among the year’s best.

Tutorial delivery was criticized in the supporting review for interrupting pacing despite gradual mechanic introduction.

Upgrade systems were mixed: some liked streamlined and useful upgrades, while others wanted more depth or disliked passive-feeling progression.

Upgrade systems offered build variety and experimentation, but reviewers split over random, temporary, or underwhelming upgrades.

User interface design was mostly fine but received a handheld-specific caveat around small text and lack of font scaling.

Value for money was criticized in the supporting review for the price and perceived lack of content.

Value for money was positive in the limited evidence available, with reviewers calling it inexpensive or good value.

Visual effects were praised for making spells, explosions, and combat impacts engaging.

Voice acting was mixed, with several reviewers praising performances while others found some delivery weak or uneven.

Weapon balance was broadly praised for useful, varied weapons, though some reviewers felt guns were simplified or overshadowed by the shield.

World-building was widely praised for its magical setting, history, culture, and lore hooks even when the main plot lagged.

World interactivity stood out when player actions produced new dialogue, events, enemies, and persistent changes.

Writing quality was mostly criticized for dull cutscenes, cliched dialogue and disjointed storytelling.