Has anyone registered deepsea? I really only want to make 99 level iwads, and deepsea seems like the easiest editor to use...

Your choice. If you are really comfortable with DeePSea's stuff I don't see why not. It's your money, after all. However if this is just a "think it's easiest" type of thing then I suggest working with DeePSea for a little while before making a descision. One thing to bear in mind is that you only have to register once: Updates come at no charge.

I have registered deepsea a long time ago once I got the hang of it and I don't regret it, but I haven't really tried to learn DoomBuilder and WADAuthor.

I was only really interested in it for the ease of making a 99 level iwad, which is why I briefly looked for a c***k for it...

You can make a 99 level wad with Doombuilder.

I use it all the time. I find it invaluable. I like the map editor, the lump handling tools and other stuff (texture editing, sprite offsetting, script handling, etc etc etc) are all done in ways I like and find very usable.

BTW, I'm pretty sure you could compile a 99 level WAD with the shareware version by using the import tool - which is unlimited in the SW version.

I knew it was a matter of time before you showed up. :P

invictius said:

I was only really interested in it for the ease of making a 99 level iwad, which is why I briefly looked for a c***k for it...

haha warez haha

Linguica said:

haha warez haha

Heheh.

/me looks at deepsea.zip

Linguica said:

haha warez haha

Well, it would be nice to get an honest answer from the author as to how easy a 99 level iwad is to compile, but for some first-hand experience, well... and it sure isn't worth $40 for someone that doesn't edit... actually I was suprised that there weren't any cracks for it, anywhere, this was before I realised the community was pretty tight-knit...

Meh. If its what you like to use the most then I guess its worth it. Slade + XWE or Doom Builder + XWE is pretty much as functional (certainly for standard tasks) as DeePsea, however if you like DeePsea, go with it.

I registered it and I don't regret it the least bit. It really is a great editor, despite many of the negative things people say about it. Bloated. Disorganized. Whatever. It's extremely functional with lots of different ways of doing multiple tasks. It has pretty much everything you need to make a wad and manage its contents (although the lump management part is hard to grasp at first).

TheDarkArchon said:

Updates come at no charge.

Since when has it been like this? I've been wanting to upgrade for quite some time now, but I always remember it costing like an additional 25 USD.

invictius said:

Well, it would be nice to get an honest answer from the author as to how easy a 99 level iwad is to compile, but for some first-hand experience, well... and it sure isn't worth $40 for someone that doesn't edit... actually I was suprised that there weren't any cracks for it, anywhere, this was before I realised the community was pretty tight-knit...

Not sure what "compile" means, but you can combine an unlimited number of levels using the shareware version for free (F7 - Import/Merge).

The difference between the DS tools and others is a different approach to safety, for example, optional check for duplicate names and protection from screwing with things you shouldn't be touching :) [no not that kind]; some very specialized tools; and a splitting up of functions right up front, for example, export and import are 2 different dialogs since they require quite different screens.

Changing (or creating) a file is NEVER done until you say "save". Backups are always made of the original. All this stuff is fully functional and unrestricted in the shareware too.

For editing a PWAD, the limit is 200 levels. IOW, you instantly switch between any of 200 levels and save all of them too.

Updates are $20 via email (hence no shipping cost - possible now since I don't know of any account that can't accept > 1MB attachments). Just haven't had time to add a page with that info, although it does mention to email and ask.

Free updates vary from 6 months to years. So after 2 times it's 1 year and so forth. Really depends a bit on time gone by and also sometimes a version requires a few updates when a radical change is made and those are also free. I ask people to just email me for the update. Sometimes they don't know, so even the first time can be a year. So some people might think it's free!

[Sorry been too busy to finish newer version, might do it anyway with what's there since the 3D thing editing can now add and delete objects as well as set attributes]

F7!!!!

copy textures.wad torelease.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad music.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad map01.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad map02.wad
.
.
.
deusf -join torelease.wad map98.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad map99.wad
cleanwad torelease.wad

Throw it in a .bat file and you can just double-click it to build your WAD. It's also free.

deep said:

Updates are $20 via email (hence no shipping cost - possible now since I don't know of any account that can't accept > 1MB attachments). Just haven't had time to add a page with that info, although it does mention to email and ask.

Well, gmail support attachments just under 10megabytes...

And as for level editing, then Doom Builder is my choice as compared to Wad Author I used before. But when you get the hang of Doom Builder, you won't switch to anything else. :P

Afterglow said:

copy textures.wad torelease.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad music.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad map01.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad map02.wad
.
.
.
deusf -join torelease.wad map98.wad
deusf -join torelease.wad map99.wad
cleanwad torelease.wad

Throw it in a .bat file and you can just double-click it to build your WAD. It's also free.

Sure, that old-skool works, but let's get real - that's a REAL PIA.

A GUI is much friendlier and way faster to find files. I think both DS and XWE let you multi-select ALL the files at once in the open dialog, saving much error prone typing. Not to mention you can easily hop-skip to any directory and make NO typos.

Plus it's much easier to verify that indeed the right pwads were selected by previewing the data - in DeePsea anyway.

The other problem with deusf is that it doesn't merge multiple texture wads correctly and doesn't do duplicate checking. If deusf really requires "cleanwad", also apparently has offset mistakes??

Usually people find a solution to a problem and stick with it since it's easier to repeat old learning vs learning something new. Almost everybody does that, including myself. Change occurs to most of us since the very nature of computer technology actually forces change on most everyone :)

DS and DB are pretty easy to interchange though since the -basic- way DB operates mimics DS :)

deep said:

Sure, that old-skool works, but let's get real - that's a REAL PIA.

Seriously though, why would you pay money for deep when better free alternatives exist?

deep said:

Sure, that old-skool works, but let's get real - that's a REAL PIA.

A GUI is much friendlier and way faster to find files. I think both DS and XWE let you multi-select ALL the files at once in the open dialog, saving much error prone typing. Not to mention you can easily hop-skip to any directory and make NO typos.

That's not really true though. If you keep consistent naming conventions, like all your maps are map01.wad, map02.wad, map03.wad etc, and you have a wad_gfx.wad (which is what I usually do) then you only have to write out one batch file/script or you could even whip up a quick script output it for you in php or python or whatever. Once you have that wirtten out it's a matter of clicking a batch file to build the entire wad every time which is a lot easier than opening an editor, getting to the proper location and selecting each wad to merge each and every time you want to compile a new build.

For small scale projects or simple mergers then a GUI is just fine, and probably better, but to shrug off command line stuff entirely is just silly.

Zips rule! No more messing around with some more or less crappy WAD manager. :P

I find the GUI very easy for large numbers of files. Because DeePsea uses standard Windows open dialogues, you can select multiple files for importing. So, click the last file, hold shift and click the first file and you can have 1000s of files selected for importing in seconds.

It's not quite the same dialogue, but here's a brief video I made a while back of me importing 2, maybe 3000 BMP images and converting them to textures in a matter of seconds.

http://www.zen64060.zen.co.uk/bmp2tex.wmv

The same basic principle applies to importing anything in DeePsea. I'd like to think I could do that many, many times in the space of time it would take me to write a batch file to do the same thing even if once the batch was done everything would be automated.

deep said:

Sure, that old-skool works, but let's get real - that's a REAL PIA.

A GUI is much friendlier and way faster to find files. I think both DS and XWE let you multi-select ALL the files at once in the open dialog, saving much error prone typing. Not to mention you can easily hop-skip to any directory and make NO typos.

Usually people find a solution to a problem and stick with it since it's easier to repeat old learning vs learning something new. Almost everybody does that, including myself. Change occurs to most of us since the very nature of computer technology actually forces change on most everyone :)

Did you just seriously try to promote a campaign for using a GUI to run a direct batch process? Then you insult anyone that wishes to use a batch file? Are you simply trolling here or what's your deal? Generally salesmen don't insult potential customers in order to convince them to buy their products. Sticking a smiley in there doesn't change the fact you attempted to call people like me retarded. How is a batch file that takes 2 minutes to write one time a "pain in the ass". I bet you love WYSIWYG HTML editors too; they're just fucking brilliant!

Also, if I had any issues with conflicting entries in two WADs, I would use Fredrik's Python library to write my own script. Now call me stupid for not using an existing solution.

deep said:

DS and DB are pretty easy to interchange though since the -basic- way DB operates mimics DS :)

Except Doombuilder is a non-bloated editor for a 12+ year old game that was modeled after DCK and is free. Irrelevance Town, population you.

Thank you for reading "Why Does Deepsea Cost Money?" thread #4893849. Remember to scrub your taint and please tip your waiter.

Enjay said:

I find the GUI very easy for large numbers of files. Because DeePsea uses standard Windows open dialogues, you can select multiple files for importing. So, click the last file, hold shift and click the first file and you can have 1000s of files selected for importing in seconds.

It's not quite the same dialogue, but here's a brief video I made a while back of me importing 2, maybe 3000 BMP images and converting them to textures in a matter of seconds.

http://www.zen64060.zen.co.uk/bmp2tex.wmv

The same basic principle applies to importing anything in DeePsea. I'd like to think I could do that many, many times in the space of time it would take me to write a batch file to do the same thing even if once the batch was done everything would be automated.

actually deutex can just grab all bitmaps in a directory and you don't have to specify each individual file, just the directory in the batch file, so it's trivial to make a texture wad from a directory if bitmaps and you wouldn't even have to edit the batch file if you wanted to add more textures and rebuild it.

Afterglow said:

Did you just seriously try to promote a campaign for using a GUI to run a direct batch process?

Similarly, do you seriously try to promote a BATCH file when that's been superceeded for years? Do what you want, but it's obvious that is not the easiest way to merge files for the average user. It's only valid for repeating the SAME thing over and over and that's not what people do. Go ahead and ask around - people not in the computing field never mention batch files as a merging solution.

Then you insult anyone that wishes to use a batch file?

Since when is disagreeing an insult? That's your own sensitivity at work. XWE and some other GUI less known programs also offer a much simpler method to merge.

Are you simply trolling here or what's your deal? Generally salesmen don't insult potential customers in order to convince them to buy their products.

Are you trolling? I simply explained that batch files are just a PIA. Sure for a single project that's done over and over, it might be worth the time to go to all that work. However, even then it's usually not worth it since once the file is built and there are changes, all one needs to do is replace or add the change.

How is a batch file that takes 2 minutes to write one time a "pain in the ass". I bet you love WYSIWYG HTML editors too; they're just fucking brilliant!

Since you ask:

1. Because most people do NOT KNOW how to write a batch file.
2. If you do, it can get quite tedious and error prone typing in the COMPLETE path/file names
3. People do not name files in the manner you think they do. For example, resource PWADs.
4. The batch file probably has to be changed as the project changes -- find that batch file, edit, type in the new name, etc etc.

Also, if I had any issues with conflicting entries in two WADs, I would use Fredrik's Python library to write my own script. Now call me stupid for not using an existing solution.

What has that got to do with the average user? I bet not 1 out of a 100,000 users in the general population would know Python from a hole in the ground.

And why bother if a free and fast solution already exists?

Except Doombuilder is a non-bloated editor for a 12+ year old game that was modeled after DCK and is free. Irrelevance Town, population you.

Sorry, it's NOT modelled after DCK. At least know both programs. Hint, look at the KB shortcuts - not an accident.

As to "bloat", ALL the features in DS have been asked for in DB. In particular, the blending of XWE and DB into 1 package. The need for this becomes obvious when you edit and manage resources. There are countless posts that warn about running DB and XWE at the same time - for a good reason.

nvictius said:

Well, it would be nice to get an honest answer from the author as to how easy a 99 level iwad is to compile,

If you READ, the thread owner ASKED the author -ME- to reply. So I answered his question :) He can do what he wants for FREE using DeePsea.

-----------

PS: Yes I use -split screen- WYSIWYG html editors. Has the best of BOTH worlds. Also supports auto uploading. But it costs money :)

Cyb said:

actually deutex can just grab all bitmaps in a directory and you don't have to specify each individual file, just the directory in the batch file, so it's trivial to make a texture wad from a directory if bitmaps and you wouldn't even have to edit the batch file if you wanted to add more textures and rebuild it.

We weren't discussing texture PWADs, but since you ask, same reply as for the others. Only valid for repeating the SAME job sort of stuff (assuming the user know how to make a batch file).

Usually what people do is make a texture resource PWAD, then tinker with it, adding or deleting resources. This is not something deutex can do and yet another program has to be used.

Even then, deutex can't handle the new port limits (last I checked) - so not worth learning.

Also doesn't check duplicates.

fraggle said:

Seriously though, why would you pay money for deep when better free alternatives exist?

Because thankfully not everyone agrees with you.

What I don't get is why the arguing is in regard to Deepsea's lump editing part, which is free anyway, and not bad, preferences aside. The "free alternative" stuff counts in regard to making maps, and the fact that there are updated free alternatives would, one expects, make people relax a bit.

That is, in the recent past the only updated "enhanced" mapping tool was not free, so that annoyed people kind of feeling forced to pay for it since there was no other easy-to-go-by free alternative, but now, with Doom Builder and Slade, you pay for Deepsea only if you want to, not because you have to.

I know what Deepsea needs! More icons!!!11oneone

myk said:

What I don't get is why the arguing is in regard to Deepsea's lump editing part, which is free anyway, and not bad, preferences aside. The "free alternative" stuff counts in regard to making maps

So in this situation at least, it isn't worth registering.

deep said:

We weren't discussing texture PWADs, but since you ask, same reply as for the others. Only valid for repeating the SAME job sort of stuff (assuming the user know how to make a batch file).

Adding a new bitmap to the textures directory and then rebuilding the entire texture wad is what I'm saying. On a modern computer even with hundreds of bitmaps (unlikely unless it's a large project) it will only take a couple of seconds after clicking the batch; roughly the same amount of time it would take to open up XWE/DeepSea/Wintex/whatever, select the correct file, import it (possibly add it to texture/pnames lumps, since that has to be done manually with XWE and Wintex, I don't know about DeepSea though) and save it.

deep said:

Usually what people do is make a texture resource PWAD, then tinker with it, adding or deleting resources. This is not something deutex can do and yet another program has to be used.

See my above statement. Plus I never claimed deutex could do that, just that deutex's building process is just fine. I'm not advocating it for everyone either, just saying shrugging it off entirely as useless or a pain in the ass is silly, since it obviously has its merits.

Nor am I advocating use of deutex for everyone. I know as well as anyone that these sorts of operations are not for everyone. A GUI is much more user friendly, but they tend to be slower and a lot harder (if not impossible) to automate down to one click compared to a command line utility.

When I need something automated at work, I don't putz around with a GUI on a weekly or daily basis, I use command line utilities and write a shell script or batch file. Even without some kind of scheduler it's still much easier to run that than it would be to do it manually with a GUI. It's a lot faster and less of a hassle.

It's the same general idea; GUIs are fine and great and I love them with all my heart, but sometimes a command line is just quicker and easier. They both have their merits.