How to Add a Text Screen?

Hi

i'm working on a WAD And i need to Add a Text screen during the intermission like the Levels 7, 12, 21 from The Original DOOM 2

Is there anyway i can do this?

i'm using GZDOOM Builder UDMF

If you are making a Vanilla Doom 2 wad, short answer is you can't do it. Long answer, you can do it by editing your wad with Dehacked or any program that creates .deh patches. Then loading your map with the patch file. It's really complex and don't know what program that runs on windows can create patch files these days.

If you are making a boom/zdoom/gzdoom compatible map you can do it with a MAPINFO lump, I don't actually remember how to do it, but it remember it as being simple.

3 hours ago, DJVCardMaster said:

boom

Boom doesn't have mapinfo.

Boom also doesn't have UDMF; so MAPINFO should be fine.

7 hours ago, ElfishMender894 said:

i'm using GZDOOM Builder UDMF

https://zdoom.org/wiki/MAPINFO

6 hours ago, Edward850 said:

Boom doesn't have mapinfo.

My bad, then, I really thought it had. Since so many boom compatible maps had it

Including a MAPINFO with Boom maps gives the player a little bit extra when he uses a port that supports it.

9 hours ago, Edward850 said:

Boom doesn't have mapinfo.

I mean, not until UMAPINFO takes off, that's correct (and it hasn't, yet, so).

On 1/15/2019 at 7:54 PM, ElfishMender894 said:

Hi

i'm working on a WAD And i need to Add a Text screen during the intermission like the Levels 7, 12, 21 from The Original DOOM 2

Is there anyway i can do this?

i'm using GZDOOM Builder UDMF

Intermission texts and graphics are usually set up by constructing the maps as clusters, as was done with HEXEN.

https://zdoom.org/wiki/Cluster

https://zdoom.org/wiki/MAPINFO/Cluster_definition

http://www3.telus.net/kappesbuur/INTERMISSION/IntermissionText.htm

This is an example of how DOOM2 would have been set up with a MAPINFO lump

https://zdoom.org/files/examples/mapinfo-doom2.txt

The tool to use for making the text lump MAPINFO would be either use a text editor,

such as Notepad++ or the lump editor SLADE3.

11 hours ago, Shadow Hog said:

I mean, not until UMAPINFO takes off, that's correct (and it hasn't, yet, so).

"Boom" will never have support for MAPINFO, in any form or another because Boom development stopped many, many years ago. The feature set we call "Boom-compatible" is set in stone, even if a Boom-compatible port like PrBoom+ or Eternity becomes a spiritual continuation of Boom. If it doesn't work in Boom, then it is not Boom-compatible.

I disagree with that assertion; despite the name, I've always taken the term as not that it literally works in Boom, but more that it's the highest baseline above vanilla Doom that all the major current source ports support. Many modern "Boom-compatible" WADs wouldn't fit such a limited definition, anyway, as they actually use features introduced in MBF, whether it's utilizing the Sky transfer linedef special that Boom doesn't have, or using DeHackEd features that Boom doesn't support like the beta Thing states or new Thing flags like MF_TOUCHY. Besides that, they're often so big and detailed that Boom itself might have trouble running them on the DOS/Win9x/XP computers required to even get that running (or DOSBox I guess, but that's a performance penalty of its own). Thus, if you have a feature that you can convince said major current source ports to implement, I'd argue it'd be fair game for "Boom-compatible". (Unless you'd rather call that a tier above "Boom-compatible", which, well, that's actually fair. It'd fill a similar niche, though, being the new highest baseline above vanilla Doom that all the big players support.)

All that said, I'm aware it's not likely to happen, either. I know ZDoom already supports UMAPINFO, but I'm not sure about Eternity. Most importantly, though, PrBoom+ is far-and-away what I think of when I think "Boom-compatible", and it doesn't implement it (ignoring that the DW thread brainstorming it had a PrBoom+ fork Graf made that does, because that's not the main branch) - in fact, I recall entryway was at best disinterested or non-responsive, or at worst actively against implementation thereof. Might've been something about demo playback, but then I might be mixing it up with genuine concerns posited in the related-but-decidedly-separate thread on a standard above Boom-compatible. (Kinda wish that discussion hadn't died off, else this one'd be moot...)