Optimized for Your Editing Pleasure

CodeImp has undertaken the task of optimizing Doom Builder's user interface by removing extraneous options. For more info, look at his forum post, or if you just want to cut to the chase (assuming Doom Builder is configured to your liking), submit your builder.cfg file here.

.cfg submitted.

I see he's traveling 180 degrees from the direction of DeepSea lol.

Scuba Steve said:

I see he's traveling 180 degrees from the direction of DeepSea lol.

That can only be a good thing. :)

Indeed.

I don't see how forcing people to do something in a specific way is more user friendly than giving them a choice in how to accomplish the task, but never mind.

NiGHTMARE said:

I don't see how forcing people to do something in a specific way is more user friendly than giving them a choice in how to accomplish the task, but never mind.

Choice is usually good, but it should be a choice where you can reasonably expect that different people will have different preferences.

Would you complain because DoomBuilder does not have an option that randomly replaces monster sprites with purple elephants and inserts them into your WAD? Probably not. :) So that's one example where more choice wouldn't be a good idea - you'd gain literally nothing, but it'd make everything, including the preferences dialogue and all that, more complicated and cluttered.

CodeImp did say that he's only looking to remove options that everyone (or at least most everyone) has set the same way, anyway, so I'm definitely giving him the benefit of doubt here and assuming that he's gonna make good choices until it does turn out that he didn't - only then will I complain. And chances are that if enough people do, he'll listen to the criticizement and reimplement them.

And hey, even if he does not, it's GPL'ed software, so you're free to produce a version with the extra options you want restored.

as long as the option to show/hide the Details Bar is kept, i'm happy :)

File sent.

*sends file and then hunts down some demons*

Schneelocke said:

And hey, even if he does not, it's GPL'ed software, so you're free to produce a version with the extra options you want restored.

Same problem as WinTex - it's in VB - not a language for which there is a free compiler. Hmm. Would the MS VB Express compiler handle DB, assuming MS actually do eventually make it possible to get hold of?

Config sent. I always loved the old editors for their simplicity (DEU, DETH) and have always wished DB was the same way.

Sent mine in. Hope the extra sector/line/thing types I had to add doesn't mess up your parser program (I'm guessing that's what the screenshot is of in the other thread).

I sent my config in. I haven't changed much from the defaults, so I hope that doesn't adversely affect the final tally on Codeimp's end.

Martin Howe said:

Same problem as WinTex - it's in VB - not a language for which there is a free compiler. Hmm. Would the MS VB Express compiler handle DB, assuming MS actually do eventually make it possible to get hold of?

no problem at all... vb 6 is so easy to get

robindegen said:

no problem at all... vb 6 is so easy to get

Not legally.

w4r3z0r