Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Guest Kevin

Favorite Source Port? (Multiple Choice Poll)

Favorite Source Port? (Multiple Choice)  

369 members have voted

  1. 1. Favorite source port?



Recommended Posts

Gez said:
Mods, demos, multiplayer, all these things come later once you've played a bit through the games to familiarize yourself with them.

Demos, yes, because they aren't such a common thing in gaming, and mod making is somewhat esoteric, but multiplayer is different. A good deal of people only play games online and it's something many similar or somewhat similar games already familiarize them with. It's certainly a more usual incentive than playing DOOM-derivative games, which, comparatively, few people pay attention to.

The idea that PrBoom/+ "is just good for demos" might come from its popularity for demos here, but it's also good as something in between Chocolate Doom and ZDoom, more or less. It roughly guarantees a classic playing experience with a broader range of add-ons.

Easy to use features, you guys say? One drawback with practically any DOOM engine is that they tend to be made for advanced users and have many options, mixing more critical ones with more optional or obscure ones. Less savvy players can mess up settings and then not know how to fix them or simply feel a bit afraid to touch things at all. It would be interesting to have something like a "beginners mode" in an engine, by default, for example, with no more menu options than the original game except a few more to ease some necessary functions, like disabling and enabling OpenGL or changing screen resolution, an option to choose between vanilla and "source port" behavior to make sure PWADs work properly (too bad source port WADs aren't marked internally by a different marker or something, or this could have been automatic) and an informative way to enable the "advanced mode" with all the settings.

After all is said and done, the more reasonable way to recommend an engine is to ask the potential user what they know about the game, expect from it or want to try, and to inform them of suitable options clearly enough. This should narrow down the options and not put us in a position to suggest some supposedly statistical best, some preference of ours, or a mix of these.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

multiplayer is different. A good deal of people only play games online and it's something many similar or somewhat similar games already familiarize them with. It's certainly a more usual incentive than playing DOOM-derivative games, which, comparatively, few people pay attention to.

Sure, but jumping directly in the fray against experienced players who have all the maturity of the typical ZDaemon/Skulltag player is not necessarily a way to create a good first impression. :p

myk said:

an option to choose between vanilla and "source port" behavior to make sure PWADs work properly

ZDoom automatically applies appropriate compat settings to mods that are known to require them.

Other features, such as jumping or crouching, might potentially make mods too easy or allow to get into an area of no return; but they are not bound to any key by default. So it's not really a problem for the newbie afraid of "complicated" menus.

myk said:

(too bad source port WADs aren't marked internally by a different marker or something, or this could have been automatic)

MAPINFO, EMAPINFO or its equivalent?

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

Sure, but jumping directly in the fray against experienced players who have all the maturity of the typical ZDaemon/Skulltag player is not necessarily a way to create a good first impression. :p


That's why Skulltag and ZDaemon have built-in bots. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Gez said:
MAPINFO, EMAPINFO or its equivalent?

Imagine the TeamTNT guys in 1998 giving Boom the ability to read WADs with the marker BWAD instead of PWAD. Always enabling full Boom behavior (as Boom has a "Doom compatibility" option) when a BWAD is detected. More or less the same idea applied to demo lumps but used for add-on WADs. Granted, the first difficulty would have been incorporating it to existing WAD editing tools, but I think it would have simplified some things.

Perhaps the marker could also have included a version or extra identifier method. The engine could then compare and suggest downloading the latest version of the engine if the PWAD did not seem to be supported.

Share this post


Link to post

When I got Doom collectors edition I was a bit disappointed to see that it only came with the shitty Doom95 executables. So for playing any non-sourceport wad I prefer to use chocolate Doom since it most closely replicates vanilla doom. If a wad calls for any limit removing source port I go with Zdoom unless of course they specify otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post

Eternity for very nearly all general playing and testing.

Chocolate Doom and Chocorenderlimits for KDiKDiZD development.

ZDoom, Skulltag, or GZDoom from time to time for testing or otherwise playing wads that require them.

Share this post


Link to post

This question has never been asked before. This is a unique thread with a unique topic, and here is my unique response. I hope you appreciate it.

Share this post


Link to post

PrBoom for nearly anything, ZDoom for specific [I|P]WAD.

Share this post


Link to post

Yawn.

My custom builds of GZDoom for just about everything. Sometimes my custom builds of Eternity. Sometimes custom builds of ZDoom when developing some possible feature.

Other ports out of curiosity from time to time.

Share this post


Link to post

In principle, whatever port a wad that I'm interested in requires. However, wads that use advanced-port features over the years started to generate a "WTF?" response more and more until the point where I stopped bothering to look at them unless there was a very strong reason to. Not saying that these features can't be used well (e.g. wads by Tommy Quick, Bryant Robinson, Kaiser and others), but it seems to be becoming rarer and rarer. With Graf Zahl saying something similar, I don't think I'm just imagining it.

So basically, Prboom+ for everything I am likely to play, or vanilla (most likely the "-plus" versions), Chocolate or Eternity if I'm testing or comparing something.

Uh, and for Hexen, it's uHexen, of course.

But I'm happy that all the ports exist, as they each offer something of value to portions of the big happy family that is the Doom community, and very often one port will benefit from development and ideas from others.

Share this post


Link to post
Never_Again said:

I suppose you meant prBoom-plus. Running prBoom has been pointless since 2005.


No, I run PrBoom because it’s packaged for Debian.

Share this post


Link to post

I really only play ReMooD when I develop it, which hasn't been very recent at all.

ducon said:

No, I run PrBoom because it’s packaged for Debian.


DEBIAN!

Share this post


Link to post

prBoom for single player.
Skulltag for multiplayer.

Share this post


Link to post
Never_Again said:

That makes as much sense as running Doom95 because it's packaged with the Collector's Edition. Even less, with the latest prBoom-plus tarball available for download.


PrBoom is really the only Doom source port that's actually in the Debian archive.

Share this post


Link to post
Grazza said:

In principle, whatever port a wad that I'm interested in requires. However, wads that use advanced-port features over the years started to generate a "WTF?" response more and more until the point where I stopped bothering to look at them unless there was a very strong reason to. Not saying that these features can't be used well (e.g. wads by Tommy Quick, Bryant Robinson, Kaiser and others), but it seems to be becoming rarer and rarer. With Graf Zahl saying something similar, I don't think I'm just imagining it.

Right. The problem I see with ZDoom, and making Doom maps for it (instead of Heretic and other games) is that you can do pretty much more under the level design department by using Eternity instead, provided it gets working linked portals and a scripting language in time.

Doom ZDoom seems saturated somehow of ideas that couldn't be done even in PrBoom more compactly. You can use MBF features in PrBoom, and everyone who uses PrBoom(-Plus) will be able to play them. Codepointers like RandomJump, Spawn and PlaySound exist in PrBoom too, allowing some nifty monsters and effects to be designed using DEHACKED.

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

Right. The problem I see with ZDoom, and making Doom maps for it (instead of Heretic and other games) is that you can do pretty much more under the level design department by using Eternity instead, provided it gets working linked portals and a scripting language in time.

Doom ZDoom seems saturated somehow of ideas that couldn't be done even in PrBoom more compactly. You can use MBF features in PrBoom, and everyone who uses PrBoom(-Plus) will be able to play them. Codepointers like RandomJump, Spawn and PlaySound exist in PrBoom too, allowing some nifty monsters and effects to be designed using DEHACKED.

I do not understand your argument.

Linked portals can be faked to some extent in ZDoom (using silent teleports, something even vanilla Hexen did use). Linked portals are a better way to do something that's already possible as far as level design go; not something entirely new.

Then you say that scripting lets you do more in level design, provided it is available. ZDoom has ACS (and GZDoom also has FraggleScript). EE currently has Small, but it's deprecated and not compatible with x64 builds so you can say it's not actually there.

So I don't see how those things support the point you seem to be making.

But then you reverse the argument completely by saying that ZDoom-specific features cannot be played in PrBoom. Whereas obviously, linked portals and scripting language can. I guess.

So you are there arguing that something is better than something else if it can do something that everything can do. And I fail to grasp the logic in your reasoning.

Not saying that people should map for ZDoom instead of Eternity; people are free to map for whatever port they want to; just saying that I don't see your point when you say people should map for Eternity instead of ZDoom.

Share this post


Link to post

Never_Again said:
Besides ignorance and inertia, is there a single good reason to use prBoom over prBoom-plus?

On my regular (Windows 98) system, I use PrBoom for coop and deathmatch because PrBoom+ has a mouse lag bug in multiplayer and Chocolate Doom has a bug that makes it terminate. Neither port developer has a system to debug these nor has anyone with sufficient expertise stepped up to find them, so they remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

I do not understand your argument.

Linked portals can be faked to some extent in ZDoom (using silent teleports, something even vanilla Hexen did use). Linked portals are a better way to do something that's already possible as far as level design go; not something entirely new.

Then you say that scripting lets you do more in level design, provided it is available. ZDoom has ACS (and GZDoom also has FraggleScript). EE currently has Small, but it's deprecated and not compatible with x64 builds so you can say it's not actually there.

So I don't see how those things support the point you seem to be making.

But then you reverse the argument completely by saying that ZDoom-specific features cannot be played in PrBoom. Whereas obviously, linked portals and scripting language can. I guess.

So you are there arguing that something is better than something else if it can do something that everything can do. And I fail to grasp the logic in your reasoning.

Not saying that people should map for ZDoom instead of Eternity; people are free to map for whatever port they want to; just saying that I don't see your point when you say people should map for Eternity instead of ZDoom.

My problem is that I can't have a ZDoom project idea and appear like a cool kid afterwards. If I use the full extent of the ZDoom engine, it probably results in another gameplay than Doom's and it'll fail to interest avid Doom players that seek the same old thing but more.

If I only use parts of ZDoom, it risks blending too much among similar projects that are made only with DEHACKED and changed graphics, and someone might be tempted to recreate it to prove it's possible just with vanilla Doom, as it is happening right now with (KDi)KDiZD.

Mixing teleportation lines with regular portals isn't very cool, and it has definite telefragging, among other difficult problems that are probably going to be fixed after a while from the LPs.

All this only applies to Doom. With Heretic, Hexen and Strife, ZDoom is still the best, as their more-complex-than-Doom base IWAD gameplays blend much better with ZDoom's stuff. On the other hand, Doom is too basic and I don't expect too much philosophy from its custom levels.

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

If I only use parts of ZDoom, it risks blending too much among similar projects that are made only with DEHACKED and changed graphics, and someone might be tempted to recreate it to prove it's possible just with vanilla Doom, as it is happening right now with (KDi)KDiZD.

Wouldn't that depend on how much the project is advertising itself as a "awesome project that makes full use of the ZDoom engine"? After all, KDiZD back in the hype days was commonly advertised as being a mod that uses ZDoom to it's fullest extent (at least from what I can tell).

Share this post


Link to post
InsanityBringer said:

After all, KDiZD back in the hype days was commonly advertised as being a mod that uses ZDoom to it's fullest extent (at least from what I can tell).


It depends what you consider the 'fullest extent'.

It uses complex custom monsters, it uses slopes, ACS, DECORATE and most other features but on the other hand there's one thing it does not to: It does not use these features to create a new game.

Share this post


Link to post
Grazza said:

But I'm happy that all the ports exist, as they each offer something of value to portions of the big happy family that is the Doom community, and very often one port will benefit from development and ideas from others.


It seems that the reason for all these source ports are so Doom can be played on a modern OS and so modders can overcome vanilla limitations.
On another note, for Heretic, Hexen, and Strife I run the original executables under dosbox for the iwads and vanilla pwads.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

On my regular (Windows 98) system, I use PrBoom for coop and deathmatch because PrBoom+ has a mouse lag bug in multiplayer and Chocolate Doom has a bug that makes it terminate. Neither port developer has a system to debug these nor has anyone with sufficient expertise stepped up to find them, so they remain.


Does ReMooD 0.7a have this bug? When I tested it on (a real) 98, it did not.

Never_Again said:

That's the first good reason I see anyone list, although the case is marginal at best. How many people run Win98 these days? You, me and Ledmeister? How many run Win98 as their main platform? I know haven't since 2003, after losing a 100 Gig+ video collection, painstakingly put together over several years, to the LBA-48 bug. Of these, how many play DOOM online? Because for LAN or dial-up play under '98 you might as well use vanilla.


Me

Share this post


Link to post

GhostlyDeath said:
Does ReMooD 0.7a have this bug? When I tested it on (a real) 98, it did not.

I doubt the mouse bug affects it unless you took mouse code from PrBoom+, which is the only place I've experienced that, of all the engines I've used online. If you mean the Chocolate bug, I don't know, although it does affect Strawberry Doom. In this demo, Chocolate and Strawberry terminate right after I get the plasma gun and open the door leading to the cavern area.

Share this post


Link to post

I use GZDoom for almost everything G/ZDoom related, and haven't found anything ZDoom only. But... I suppose there may be a handful of mods that are.

For Vanilla / Vanilla deh, I use Chocolate Doom.

I'll occasionally use a port of ADoom to the Sony PSP. I have also messed around with the really old ports to the iPod Classic, and Dreamcast as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×