Best Format For Compatibility?

Would it be Doom 2? Or Boom? I want something with a decent amount of features but something that will run with most ports. UDMF is great but I want to limit myself for creative reasons and I like the simplistic map designs; how you can create something fun and interesting from less options,

I'd say Boom all the way, since 99% of people here will likely either be playing on PrBoom+ or GZDoom which are both compatible. Boom general actions and voodoo conveyor belt scripting are extremely powerful, and Boom format also means people will actually be able to record demos of your maps if they want. If you want to be absolutely bare bones there's always vanilla format, but it's pretty restrictive unless you want to directly copy the design of the original games.

1 minute ago, BoxY said:

I'd say Boom all the way, since 99% of people here will likely either be playing on PrBoom+ or GZDoom which are both compatible. Boom general actions and voodoo conveyor belt scripting are extremely powerful, and Boom format also means people will actually be able to record demos of your maps if they want. If you want to be absolutely bare bones there's always vanilla format, but it's pretty restrictive unless you want to directly copy the design of the original games.

Yeah Boom sounds good, I'm just trying to keep it relatively minimalistic in terms of form and function. I'm still learning map design and I feel it's best if I nail gameplay design elements before diving into any more complex mapping and mechanics. The compatibility is attractive to me because it means it can be played in more source ports, and like you say, Boom is capable of demo recording/playback which is nice. Would you say it's best to stick to Ultimate Doom Builder or Doom Builder 2?

I don't have too much experience with different editors so it's tough for me to say (other people will know more), but in my experience UDB does everything very well and is stable unless you try something really screwy with sector geometry and cause a corruption. If you have a weak PC, DB2 might still run better though.

To be honest, In my opinion: go with regular Doom/Doom II format. stick with Doom Builder 2, Ultimate Doom builder, wadauthor, or even DeePsea!

Alot of people use GZdoom, its more popular, but there's also a pretty big chunk of Doomers that prefer other and older ports without the extra fancy. If you would like your wads to be more "universal" and while retaining the simplicity you seek, I'd go with Doom builder for sure. Every time I'd make a wad and test it on all kinds of ports before sending it out, I'd test it on every one just to see, and Doom Builder proved to be more universal in that aspect. GZDoom builder is nice for beginners though, I will admit.

But I'm sure someone who's been mapping for 10+ years will have a more technical, better thought out response to this topic. But if that's what your looking for, I suggest Doom builder for sure.  The wads would be more compatible and could attract a bigger audience.

Good luck, make some cool wads!

Limit-removing 100% You can do so much with just the regular Doom actions and limit-removing obviously allows for bigger maps in the vanilla spirit. I use Ultimate Doom Builder. I haven't really fucked with Boom tbh, I like the idea of limit-removing maps being playable on Crispy (for the most part). Note: This is all my subjective opinion

42 minutes ago, xvertigox said:

Limit-removing 100% You can do so much with just the regular Doom actions and limit-removing obviously allows for bigger maps in the vanilla spirit. I use Ultimate Doom Builder. I haven't really fucked with Boom tbh, I like the idea of limit-removing maps being playable on Crispy (for the most part). Note: This is all my subjective opinion

Is Limit-removing a format?

Boom or limit-removing,* depending on how many features you want. Boom introduces a ton of little things that can make mapping easier and certain things possible but will cost you Crispy and -cl2 compatibility. Limit-removing can fake or hackily perform many of those Boom actions, but you'll have to use your brain a bit. One appeal of limit-removing ports is that I believe most support sky transfers, even though Doom 2 format will not recognize it in the editor.

2 hours ago, Thorogrimm said:

I want something with a decent amount of features but something that will run with most ports.

If UDMF is 10, 1 on the scale of those two criteria, then I'd say strict vanilla is 1, 10, limit-removing is 5, 8, and Boom is 7, 6.

^{*That is, Doom 2 format without concern for the vanilla limits}

1 minute ago, Thorogrimm said:

Is Limit-removing a format?

It's not a format per-se, it's Doom 2 format with limits removed. You don't get any line actions but you can have more than 10 moving platforms or whatever. Think of it as Vanilla Doom with more freedom. Bigger and more complex maps.

https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Limit_removing

7 minutes ago, xvertigox said:

It's not a format per-se, it's Doom 2 format with limits removed. You don't get any line actions but you can have more than 10 moving platforms or whatever. Think of it as Vanilla Doom with more freedom. Bigger and more complex maps.

 

https://doomwiki.org/wiki/Limit_removing

How would I go about making a limit-removed map?

1. Make a map in Doom 2 format.
2. Pay no attention to the vanilla limits (such as visplane overflow or drawseg limit - these are the things that limit the amount of detail a vanilla map can have).
3. Don't say it's playable in Chocolate Doom.
4. Test it in Crispy Doom and/or PrBoom+ -complevel 2

A map in Doom 2 format is basically limit-removing by default. It takes effort to keep it vanilla, not the other way around.

2 minutes ago, HAK3180 said:

1. Make a map in Doom 2 format.
2. Pay no attention to the vanilla limits (such as visplane overflow or drawseg limit - these are the things that limit the amount of detail a vanilla map can have).
3. Don't say it's playable in Chocolate Doom.
4. Test it in Crispy Doom and/or PrBoom+ -complevel 2

 

A map in Doom 2 format is basically limit-removing by default. It takes effort to keep it vanilla, not the other way around.

Aaaah, I see. Thanks, this helps a lot!

BOOM format best format. There's tons you can do without there being so much you don't know where to start. DOOM format is good but you'll find yourself wishing there were a few more trigger types.

I think you got the best answers already, but I'll pitch in by breaking down your message and giving a suggestion based on an individual desire.

5 hours ago, Thorogrimm said:

I want something with a decent amount of features but something that will run with most ports.

This makes Boom sound like the best bet, since it has many of those quality of life features like voodoo conveyors that, like previously mentioned, are really powerful and give plenty of control over setup design (and make possible some really neat light effects).

5 hours ago, Thorogrimm said:

I want to limit myself for creative reasons

Depends on how you want to limit yourself. Limit-removing limits you (heh) to the vanilla Doom line actions and some other behaviour like not being able to trigger more than 8 actions per tic without leaving some actions untriggered. Doom 2 format limits you mostly visually but also functionally, which I'll talk more below.

5 hours ago, Thorogrimm said:

I like the simplistic map designs

Visually simplistic? Doom 2 format is a great at making you better at prioritizing your use of detail, and guides to a less "wasteful" mapping style, so to speak. You have certain static limits that you can't cross, which range from visual things (like no more than 256 drawsegs, 128 visplanes or 128 sprites in sight at a given time) to functional thing (like aforementioned moving platform limit). You learn to take everything out of each line and create the details from the macro-architecture. You also cannot make really large, slaughtery encounters with hundreds upon hundreds of enemies.

6 hours ago, Thorogrimm said:

how you can create something fun and interesting from less options

This again kinda depends how far you want to go with limits. Do you want those limits to be mostly gameplay and functionality related, or visual? Limit-removing for the former, vanilla for the latter.

Overall, I'd lean towards limit-removing in your case. I'm not quite sure about your mapping experience, but if you're not familiar using Doom 2 format, I'd say go for limit removing so you can focus on squeezing the most out of the available line actions and lack of voodoo conveyors (at least ones that are easy to set up). Once you have a grasp of that, you can try to visually limit yourself by going down a notch to vanilla.

Basically dip into Doom 2 format, make a map that you like and test it with Crispy or PrBoom+ cl2, then out of curiosity test it out with Choco afterwards and see if it runs.