GZDoom Builder not previewing slopes?

I'm trying GZDB for the first time and checking out some udmf things with a test map. But for some reason neither 3d mode is showing slopes. The slope does show up in gzdoom itself.

Any ideas why slopes wouldn't show up in the editor?

Here's the map, if that gives any clues. http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?ns55vf2qxbg13q1

It never does, the only way to see slopes is to test/play the game. That's my understanding at least.

GZDoom visual mode plugin lets you see slopes in the editor.

Make sure GZDoom visual mode is checked.

Next set your key to enter visual mode.

Thanks for the reply. GZDoom Visual Mode already was checked, and Q already was bound to it (I checked those before asking, and just double checked again now).

Pressing Q doesn't show slopes despite those being set that way. Nor does clicking the GZDoom Visual Mode button (with the Z on it) show slopes. Everything else seem fine, but no slope. I'm very confused why they aren't rendering.

Ahh I see why now, your using thing 1500 (Line slope floor) some of the slope things don't render correctly for instance slope floor/ceiling to here produces strange results.

In Doom Builder



In Game



You can clearly see there is a big difference. I would recommend using linedef action 181 for most slopes and copy/floor ceiling plane

Do this instead of using thing 1500 which in my opinion is a lousy way of doing what your trying to do to begin with.

Use slope references with line 181 and copy floor/ceiling the reference sectors should line up along your slope plane.



Wad Link:

http://www.mediafire.com/?roa6f6bfa1vliga

As an aside, the flat stretching on those steep ceiling slopes and the sharp cutoff on the sloped bricks look really, really bad.

I think I have to agree with you fortunately that map is still being worked on and it can be fixed fairly easily thanks for the observation.

The GZDoom plugin is a bit outdated and no longer maintained. For those who are still using it, you may be interested in using MaxED's GZDoom Builder: http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=32392

For some slopes I try to put a kind of "railing" sector that would cover the bad texture cutoffs, on either side of the slope. It really depends on the texture you have for either side of the slope.

Well I don't like updating this here but.....

Thanks Essel I addressed those issues you pointed out and ya I'm lot happier with the outcome now.

It's too bad walls can't have their textures rotated but that definitely look much better. The only thing that stands out now is that the shadow above the light seems unnaturally tall.

Pottus said:

thing 1500 and other useful stuff

Thanks, that explains why it wasn't previewing right.

Being new at using slopes, I was wondering why it's a lousy idea to be using thing 1500 the way I did (besides not it not previewing properly in the editor). From my newbie perspective the line based slope method seems slower to set up and more complicated, yet has the same end result anyway, which makes it seem kind of pointless to use in a situation where it isn't specifically needed.

Does thing 1500 lead to mapping complications that the line method doesn't?

I'll be honest the line method is the best way, using thing 1500 probably won't lead to complications apart from not being able to see your slopes in the editor. I could see you playing around with it a lot more trying to get the slope correct where I think with a line slope you can achieve the result you want a lot quicker in the editor. Also keep in mind remote slope referencing is generally not used on most slopes the only reason I used it on your map was because it was the easiest way to get the same result that you had. I'll provide a few examples of good use of line 181.

http://www.mediafire.com/?dw3u11d836okn85

Did this in about 20 minutes just for you =)

That's a very useful example of how to use line slopes. The ceiling slope copy you used is a particularly interesting technique to know about for how to get a seamless slope where it would otherwise be hard to.

Pottus said:

Also keep in mind remote slope referencing is generally not used on most slopes the only reason I used it on your map was because it was the easiest way to get the same result that you had.

Okay, that makes a lot more sense now :P