ZDoom 2.0.63 (custom monsters!)

http://www.zdoom.org/files/lars/63.cab

Changes from 2.0.62 are a couple random bug fixes and some neat additions to the new custom actor lump (which is an extension of DECORATE), which was added in 2.0.62. I don't see a thread about it here, so here's a brief rundown:

ZDoom (starting with 2.0.62) now allows you to make any kind of custom actor, from simple decorations to projectiles to new monsters. You can even make the new monsters fire the custom projectiles, and now (with 2.0.63) you can give monsters random states and have them fire any number of different projectiles (custom or otherwise) in any direction.

The random states (based on an assigned chance) is a pretty cool thing too, because you can give a monster more than one death sequence (or any sequence for that matter) or have him randomly shoot a type of projectile. For those that might be interested in doing these sorts of things, check out the ZDoom wiki docs on the subject here: http://www.zdoom.org/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Creating_new_monsters_and_other_complex_actors

or you can read the thingdefs_doc.txt file that comes with 63.cab. enjoy!

Come on and join the ZDoom revolution!!!

(all we need now is custom weapons and we have the perfect source port)

Not 'perfect'. It's missing demo compatibility, among many other things.

i agree,it lacks the 16 or the 32 bit pallete support,but it has potencial for improvement.Keep going!

I meant in mapping terms.

Sweet!

Now all it needs is custom weapon editing support :)
(thinks of porting cdoom to zdoom).


Why isnt this in the news?

Slick!

The Ultimate DooMer said:

Come on and join the ZDoom revolution!!!

(all we need now is custom weapons )

But unfortunately that's not as easy as adding new monsters... :-(

The Ultimate DooMer said:

I meant in mapping terms.

3D floors and moving sectors.

pfft, it's compatable with its own demos, and usually across most versions

and do any ports have moving sectors?

The claim under dispute was the one (by UD) about it being close to "perfect". No one was claiming that there are other ports are already perfect (whatever that means in this context).

well speaking personally as a level editor, this is one of the few things I felt zdoom really lacked, the current list being 32-bit color and open-ended weapons (along the same lines as monsters now are). once (if ever) it gets those two, I can't think of anything I'd really want added (and no, I don't really care for true3d or moving sectors :P )

Moving sectors would be great, but no-one has them so it's probably not possible. Although it's possible to fake them with 2-sided polys, you have to use crossbeams and you can't jump on them while they're moving. (which like defeats the point of having them)

And true 3D of course, can be faked with bridges and Transfer_Heights. And to a pretty good extent, too.

So in mapping terms it's just about perfect apart from not having new weapons yet. (and we already have that in a way, with the Heretic/Hexen ones, the only problem being they're not customisable)

Moving sectors is perfectly possible.

Transfer_Heights doesn't let you make platforms and similar stuff. See-through bridges don't count.

Let's add 3D floors, diagonal walls, 3D things and we're fine :)

Diagonal walls were added after Wolfenstein 3D :P

You can fake diagonal walls with slopes (although you'd probably have to mess around with the texture scale to make it look right.)

chilvence said:

You can fake diagonal walls with slopes (although you'd probably have to mess around with the texture scale to make it look right.)

Uh? What do you mean by diagonal walls exactly?

Slanting, like for example the trek style walls in Goobermans space station omega.

chilvence said:

Slanting, like for example the trek style walls in Goobermans space station omega.

I thought that was what you meant but I wasn't sure - mainly because I wouldn't call them "fake" myself.

Well, technically they aren't walls, but visually they are, so were both right :)

heh moving sectors would require a massive renderer rewrite or some sort of super-duper hack, and I dunno if that's even possible because surely legacy would have them then :P

I dunno. I'm not an expert, but I think moving sectors wouldn't be impossible to do if you restricted them to move within one subsector like polyobjects.

Surely making "fake" moving sectors by using 3D models would be a lot easier? :) It'd also make them able to affected by physics, should a certain someone one day decide to add more realistic physics to their port... ;)

NiGHTMARE said:

Surely making "fake" moving sectors by using 3D models would be a lot easier? :) It'd also make them able to affected by physics, should a certain someone one day decide to add more realistic physics to their port... ;)

Did Dark Forces have this?

Yeah I think it did.

You can do that in jDoom, create a new thing then assign a 3D model to it. You can walk both over and under it. It also works with the physics but monsters can see you through the "floor".

Fredrik said:

I dunno. I'm not an expert, but I think moving sectors wouldn't be impossible to do if you restricted them to move within one subsector like polyobjects.

polyobjs are a lot less complicated that moving actual sectors though. polyobjs are just 1s linedefs that get moved around, and even for them a part of the rendering had to get rewritten and they're still hardly perfect.

moving an actual sector (or the 2s linedefs that make it up, to be more precise) would be a lot more of a pain mainly because you can see over and under it which will surely cause a lot of los and node type errors since the bsp tree needs to remain very rigid.

Cyb said:

polyobjs are a lot less complicated that moving actual sectors though. polyobjs are just 1s linedefs that get moved around, and even for them a part of the rendering had to get rewritten and they're still hardly perfect.

moving an actual sector (or the 2s linedefs that make it up, to be more precise) would be a lot more of a pain mainly because you can see over and under it which will surely cause a lot of los and node type errors since the bsp tree needs to remain very rigid.

Well it's possible to move sectors in a way, as if you make a self-referencing sector that's 32 units higher than the ground and make it a 2-sided poly, you can actually jump on top of it like it was a sector. The trouble with it is that you can't jump on it when it's moving, as you just get thrown off like you would normally if you hit a poly. It has limited uses, but not really that useful without being able to stand on it while it's moving. And it's a bit unreliable visually. (as it uses crossbeams and bleeds in places even though it's in the same sector at all times)

If we had a way of being able to walk through polyobjects without being pushed away (even if it was just a property that could be set), that would make it possible to do fake moving sectors.

Hmmm, I wonder it it's possible to have ejecting shell casing using this new feature?