Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Qaatar

Compet-n and port nuances [split from misc]

Recommended Posts

vdgg said:

Regarding ToD's AV29, Skepticist's RQ24, dew's AV02, etc. I don't see any problem. One records stuff the way they like it.

- Slayer (true Plutonia legacy, small action-packed maps)


I don't see any problems with anyone's decision to record however they like either. I was just saying that such a quality demo like Tod's AV29 won't have that little "C-N" tag next to it in DSDA. Deserved or not, in my opinion a demo recognized by C-N just seems to carry a bit more weight in a figurative and subconscious sense. Of course, I fully understand Dew's points about people really not caring in this day and age about C-N, especially when it concerns pwads. Who am I to judge this anyways?

As far as Slayer goes, I totally agree. The only blemish is the map 02 caco teleportation problem.

Edit: typo

Share this post


Link to post

Qaatar said:
Deserved or not, in my opinion a demo recognized by C-N just seems to carry a bit more weight in a figurative and subconscious sense.

That sounds a bit mystical. Let's see if we can pinpoint more practical aspects... The two things Compet-n guarantees are:

* To concentrate on certain WADs while giving space for different WADs. By extension, Compet-n may have helped up us get the habit of doing this even outside the Compet-n WADs. I paid a bit of attention to Quake running, where originally it was ID-only, more or less, and now even custom map submissions are controlled but new maps are regularly added, and they don't seem to have as much focus and activity. DOOM running puts more control in the center (IWADs and a few PWADs) and has more spontaneity elsewhere, which can take that center as a reference.

* Demos recorded with the bare Doom functionality. Arguably, even what PrBoom does is influenced by this, which gives perspective of "what the game is" so the existence of "traditional speed running" also helps in general even if and when people choose to use PrBoom+, as they still have certain standards in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

That sounds a bit mystical. Let's see if we can pinpoint more practical aspects... The two things Compet-n guarantees are:

* To concentrate on certain WADs while giving space for different WADs. By extension, Compet-n may have helped up us get the habit of doing this even outside the Compet-n WADs. I paid a bit of attention to Quake running, where originally it was ID-only, more or less, and now even custom map submissions are controlled but new maps are regularly added, and they don't seem to have as much focus and activity. DOOM running puts more control in the center (IWADs and a few PWADs) and has more spontaneity elsewhere, which can take that center as a reference.

* Demos recorded with the bare Doom functionality. Arguably, even what PrBoom does is influenced by this, which gives perspective of "what the game is" so the existence of "traditional speed running" also helps in general even if and when people choose to use PrBoom+, as they still have certain standards in mind.


It is rather irrational, because otherwise, a demo recorded in comp level 2 that essentially replicates vanilla doom behavior has no differences in actual quality when compared to a demo recorded with the original exe. Especially since a player, in ToD's case, only chooses PrBoom for its key configuration.

After all, the whole premise behind why C-N sticks with the original exe is primarily due to the cheating issue. Yet, most of the demo recorders today have been recording for some time, and the best ones like ToD have already "proven" themselves. Therefore, any long time demo watcher already knows what to expect, and any aberrations in playing behavior will be detected immediately. Thus, the cheating issue isn't much of an issue at all unless it concerns relatively new players who we haven't seen much of.

However, it's just that something which IS recognized by C-N and uses C-N's original parameters in recording, I tend to see as slightly more organic perhaps?

It certainly sounds like argumentum ad verecundiam...but we all have our illogical moments.

Share this post


Link to post

edit: I read again and didn't understand anything so I just say that prboom+ doesn't force your resolution and you can use hud with more information which is only 2 things that makes huge difference imo.

Share this post


Link to post

Just to clarify, I've used the Boom HUD for all of my prboom/+ demos ever since I started using those ports in 2006 (and I use the automap to check the monsters killed stat in zdoom before exiting). I like the HUD, I like using 640x480 resolution, I like uncapped framerate, I like higher mouse sensitivity, and I like binding weapon keys. The binding weapon keys issue is the only thing that's stopping me from ever trying doom2.exe (I haven't used the default weapon keys since I played casually in the 90's on the iwads with cheat codes and keyboard only - I'm not used to them).

I know the HUD gives you more info, but I think it's unfair if someone thinks a player's skill is based on using the HUD. The HUD doesn't make you run faster, dodge monster attacks, etc., and I think it's logical to assume that a player who uses the HUD will adapt without the HUD.

I don't play 320x200 or whatever resolution but I think that can also be adaptable. To be honest, it doesn't sound very fun to play like that. ;)

I haven't proven myself the way others have, like the guys who have gone to LANs to play. The one video I posted showed some rocket jumps but no gameplay against monsters, and I posted a super mario kart video to try to show that I take gaming seriously and have a good reputation in another community.

Share this post


Link to post

Qaatar said:
It is rather irrational,

I don't think the habit of still valuing Compet-n and the original executable is irrational, just that you said it in a vague or speculative way, so I added what I see as the main reasons.

Especially since a player, in ToD's case, only chooses PrBoom for its key configuration.

That's perfectly acceptable, and a non-issue outside of Compet-n, although it does make some tiny bit of difference if the keys are in easier-to-reach places than the 1-7 keys. Drawing your weapon one tic later might mean a dead marine. Not that I'm really sure that Compet-n would disallow such remapping. Perhaps Adam would have allowed it, as the IntelliMouse and some drivers allowed remapping during Compet-n's heyday. It's uncertain without arbitration.

After all, the whole premise behind why C-N sticks with the original exe is primarily due to the cheating issue.

Nowadays, I think the main value of Compet-n and the original engine is to keep standards in mind (see my previous post for more details). It answers "what is DOOM?" in the strictest sense. The cheating-avoidance aspect has kind of been overstepped now because PrBoom+ has made it very easy to fake a v1.9 (or Boom) demo.

Yet, most of the demo recorders today have been recording for some time, and the best ones like ToD have already "proven" themselves. Therefore, any long time demo watcher already knows what to expect, and any aberrations in playing behavior will be detected immediately. Thus, the cheating issue isn't much of an issue at all unless it concerns relatively new players who we haven't seen much of.

It's not much of an issue because we understand anyone can do it but that we have a generally optimistic environment here where the main drive is self-perfection with friendly competition rather than defeating each other at all costs.

TimeOfDeath said:
I know the HUD gives you more info, but I think it's unfair if someone thinks a player's skill is based on using the HUD. The HUD doesn't make you run faster, dodge monster attacks, etc., and I think it's logical to assume that a player who uses the HUD will adapt without the HUD.

The HUD with extra data, such as remaining monsters or secrets, saves time by warning you of missing stuff. Especially in levels where monsters roam more, the guy without a HUD might have to rerecord in a case where the guy with the HUD may not, or might not otherwise be aware as quickly that something is missing. Thus, given equal time for recording, the HUD guy will tend to have better times, assuming their skill is otherwise equal.

Otherwise, and on a minor note, the HUD itself gives you ammo, armor and health data while letting yo see the whole screen. Without the HUD, you have to resort to changing screen blocks from 10 to 11 and back (with two keys that are not too close to the usual weapon and movement keys) as if the marine were temporarily taking his helmet off to see better, when you want to see something at the very upper edge of the screen.

PS: I split this since we were getting theoretical amid the demo posting. Thanks TOD for the divided demo and comment posts, for easy splitting.

Share this post


Link to post

The binding weapon keys issue is the only thing that's stopping me from ever trying doom2.exe

Well, you can remap easily if you are using dosbox. I don't know if that is acceptable though. I understand that dosbox has problems with framerate in bigger fights which I think is reasonable excuse for using a port. At least I can't play some maps but it might be my computer too.

Don't get me wrong, your and other peoples prboom demos are pleasant to watch indeed, but there's always voice in my head saying "too bad this isn't vanilla", be it rational or not. Especially in iwads.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry, I just didin't notice the split thread. My opinion about HUD which I wrote in the misc thread is a little similar to myk's.

TimeOfDeath said:

I know the HUD gives you more info, but I think it's unfair if someone thinks a player's skill is based on using the HUD. The HUD doesn't make you run faster, dodge monster attacks, etc.

Certainly it was not wrong, but HUD still has a lot of unfair advantages. You can notice easily that you miss some enemies while recording demos. For example, when you know that you miss an enemy before room by HUD, you can stop recording and retry this map soon. However, the players who don't use HUD (or use DOS's exe) push forward without noticing it. Moreover, you can know the now time easily. For example, when you notice that time to enter a room is 20 sec slower than time of your average or time of the fastest record holder, you can also stop recording and retry this map soon. Like TOD said, HUD doesn't make you run faster. However, the frequency of attempts in per-time increase, and it makes a lot of chances to get faster records. It seems efficient, but it's unfair from non-HUD player's side. By the way, most of compet-N's Max movies can be beat easily by using HUD.

However, I can't completely deny using HUD. Actually, I recorded cc29 demos with HUD. Of course, it intend to be mentioned in the text file if I do a max of cc29. This map is really hard and very long, so I want to avoid the situation that although I manage to finish this map, this demo would be fail max demo.

Now, I don't even have motivation to try cc29 again. Time Of Death, can you deal with it?

Share this post


Link to post

Timer: to use a timer in doom2.exe, listen to the music. Use parts of the song as "checkpoints" so you can tell how fast you're going. I use this method as well, even with the timer. This might be harder for non-musicians, though.

HUD info: In my scythe2 map02 max demo I didn't even realize that one of the secrets didn't trigger when I was playing, and I use the HUD with the default loud noise and message on the screen when a secret is triggered.

On AV map29, the HUD monsters info barely makes any difference at all. Yes, I use it after I get the blue key, to check if there are 3 monsters left (2 archviles near blue door, 1 cyber at exit). But, you don't even need the HUD for the route I take. After you get blue key, clear that room, check in the two rooms after red door for stray monsters (always monsters in those two rooms because of slow teleporting monsters - I make sure archvile, cacodemon and pain elemental are killed before leaving that room with teleporting monsters after red door). Whether you use the HUD or not, you will check those two rooms for roaming monsters.

During the past few days I was recording on av map29, there was only one time I could have chose to re-record because of a missed monster. But, instead I roamed through the map all over again searching for it without iddt or re-recording.

Seriously, do people actually like finishing a map without the HUD only to find out later that you missed a monster? Why doesn't everyone use the HUD for pwads anyway? Didn't Boom come out in like '97 or something?

Edit: I really don't see it as unfair either. The non-HUD players choose to unnecessarily waste their time by not using HUD.

Share this post


Link to post

This is how I view it. I always have kills/secrets HUD disabled and I didn't use automap in my (very few) ZDoom demos.

Listening to music? YES, and it's cool to know you're doing well in a Max demo this way.
No advantage in AV29? PROBABLY YES, but try e.g. MM2 MAP11. In the final area there's an inner square, an outer square, they are connected to each other by 4 passages, there are 4 teleporters in and out 2 small rooms, to exit the map first you have to go inside a small building in the center of the inner square, then outside the outer square. Eugene did a 6:12 demo recently and he claims kills HUD would give him 30 seconds extra. This is more than 5% faster. Or take any map with slow monster teleporter...

Why doesn't everyone use the HUD for pwads anyway?

1) I like all my Max demos to be recorded the same way. I record some of them in vanilla where I don't have such a possibility.
2) Call me a masochist, but I like this form of "obstacle" (5 runs in a row with missed monsters) and the feeling when I overcome them.

Share this post


Link to post

For me, HUD is a big advantage because I have the memory of a goldfish when it comes to Doom levels and so I'll never remember which monsters I killed or not, which secrets I found or not during a max run. For that matter, remembering routes is already hard enough, heh...

Plus, as myk said using the HUD lets you see the whole screen. That's why I use it, it's more immersive to me.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned *against* the HUD is, unlike the normal status bar, it doesn't let you see how much ammo you have on each weapon, nor the doomguy face going left or right as he is hit.

The non-HUD players choose to unnecessarily waste their time by not using HUD.


Part of me agrees. Part of me also says "the non-TAS players choose to unnecessarily waste their time by replaying the same part over and over rather than use saves" (assuming TAS would be just used for saves here).

Anyway, I don't know about anyone else, but playing in 1680x1050 GL mode compared to 320x200 software does a lot more for me than HUD/no HUD.

Share this post


Link to post
TimeOfDeath said:

Why doesn't everyone use the HUD for pwads anyway? Didn't Boom come out in like '97 or something?

Boom was '98, but it wasn't really stable until the second half of the year. And by then we'd already had two demopacks for HR, two for Requiem, three for MM2, plus packs for Eternal3, Icarus, MM, Strain... all recorded with Doom2.exe.

Boom-era ports couldn't reliably record Doom2-compatible demos either, and with all the different flavours of ports there was never really a standard for demo recording. And being unable to accurately emulate Doom2 means Boom doesn't quite feel like Doom2 either, even with all the compatibility settings on.

Share this post


Link to post

TAS is a different category, though, and I think there's much much less of a difference between HUD/no-HUD and port/no-port than TAS/no-TAS.

It's not like I submitted my time for Compet-N while using a port with HUD - that would be unfair. I didn't submit my time for Compet-N because I didn't follow their rules. I recorded a port demo, and if someone thinks that's unfair because they don't use port/HUD themselves, and come up with lame excuses like resolution or "spending less time to get faster times because of the HUD" in an attempt to justify a port player's demo as being less impressive, then that's their problem. It's like keyboard-only players complaining about players who use mouse.

I don't see anything wrong with Compet-N and their rules. I also don't see anything wrong with port demos. If you want to compete with Compet-N, follow their rules. If you want to compete with a port demo, then use a port. The ability to reliably record doom2-compat demos with port/HUD has been around for several years, right? I only hope that this attitude that some people have about ports/HUD being unfair/less-impressive will stop one day.

Share this post


Link to post

As someone who uses GlBoom+ with HUD exclusively and couldn't care less about competition, I'm curious to know why am I supposedly coming up with lame excuses. I stand by what I said, higher res and HUD (among other things) are advantages to me, significant ones even. A vanilla demo in x:xx will always be more impressive to me than a port demo in x:xx (or would if I cared enough to check which port it was recorded on when watching demos).

Besides, if as you say port features offer no meaningful advantages and if you care as much as you seemingly do about what other people think about your demos, then surely you could just use vanilla Doom.

What's the difference between using one save to avoid running the same map three more times, or using HUD monster count to avoid running the same map three more times, other than a semantical one ? The end result in this situation is the same in terms of advantages over the original, intended behavior.

Otherwise, good luck changing everyone's else opinion, but telling people their arguments are lame excuses doesn't make a strong case for your point.

Share this post


Link to post
Phml said:

Besides, if as you say port features offer no meaningful advantages and if you care as much as you seemingly do about what other people think about your demos, then surely you could just use vanilla Doom.

wrong. you're forgetting the greatest, most important advantage of ports: you can run them on today's systems without additional hurdles like dosbox. i can click a batch file on my desktop and i will immediatelly start recording a demo. this fact alone beats any vanilla discussion for me personally. the c-n guys in the old days didn't have to go through this martyrium and i'm not dedicated enough to perform obscure dosbox rituals every time i want to play to 'not have advantages', when in fact i'm inflicting a serious disadvantage on myself with that. i absolutely loathe dosbox mouse, it fucks up my settings. dosbox slows down my crap computer in horde levels. ports are a godsend and i won't participate in compet-n until it comes to terms with modern times.

now if you said 'use chocolate', i might partially agree with you. shame it isn't allowed in compet-n either, eh? :p

Phml said:

What's the difference between using one save to avoid running the same map three more times, or using HUD monster count to avoid running the same map three more times, other than a semantical one ? The end result in this situation is the same in terms of advantages over the original, intended behavior.

absolutely wrong. your argument only applies to a limited number of levels where it's easy to overlook a missing monster and checking the hud means you won't necessarily ruin your max attempt. segmented recording allows anyone to get perfect results easily on any category. with 2segment re-recording i got 18s on map03, 'beating' sedlo's c-n record. i doubt hud would help me with that.

Phml said:

Otherwise, good luck changing everyone's else opinion, but telling people their arguments are lame excuses doesn't make a strong case for your point.

well.. a player circling through empty areas looking for a non-existant straggler, or camping a teleport spot for 20s even though all monsters already ported in... as much skilled the rest of the demo might look, these parts always look lame.

Share this post


Link to post

Phml, I didn't mean you specifically, I said "if someone thinks that's unfair..."

The thing that bothers me is if someone sees a demo was recorded with a port/HUD and they automatically have a negative opinion about it, solely based on the fact it was recorded with a port/HUD. Nevermind the playing in the demo. If it ain't vanilla Doom, then it's not as good. Same goes for people who ragged on me when I used to play every wad with infinite ammo. Same goes for people who see a demo with deaths allowed on a coop wad "wtf, what a lame demo if it has deaths". Nevermind that the deaths are used strategically with more aggressive playing to get a faster time than a non-deaths demo.

I recorded a demo on a port with port features. I'm not trying to directly compete with vanilla Doomers. I know there are some differences with ports/doom2.exe. I don't want to waste my time with a missed monster and nobody else has to either, but they choose to. I'm not going to give someone bonus points for wasting their time in 2010 outside of Compet-N.

The HUD is better for competitive demo recording and I urge more players to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
TimeOfDeath said:

I recorded a demo on a port with port features.

another interesting point to make would be the prevalence of max players today.. my av02/03 prboom+ speedruns stirred exactly 0 controversy, even the numerous nightmare c-n beaters recorded in cz-n don't trouble anyone. but here you go with a max shredding the current c-n record to ribbons and the crowd goes wild. :)

Share this post


Link to post

...which reminds me of another fascinating topic I was too shy to bring up before. What's up with this "max players/speed players" division? It might have existed, but let's take an example of Adam Williamson. Certainly speeding/doing pacifist runs was his strongest point, but he also did record max demos. I'm pretty sure dew, Graim, xepop could do it as well. Why not?

Share this post


Link to post

90% of my demos are UV Max, all of them except for a select few recorded with the pr+ hud present. Never thought twice about it, though I have to admit those few C-N entries that I've recorded under Win98 did feel like an accomplishment, in a 'hey I can overcome the horrible mouse handling' way :P

Share this post


Link to post

I understand you didn't single me out. I'm part of the group of people who would believe comparing a port demo to a vanilla doom is unfair, and replied as such.

It's all a matter of perspective. One can see it with a glass half empty point of view and feel port demos aren't as good as vanilla, or take another look at it and believe port demos can be damn great, and then the same feat done in vanilla is even better because of the limitations. That doesn't take anything from the port demos unless the goal is to establish, i.e., a ranking, at which point equal standards (or as close as possible) are required for any kind of healthy competition to take place.

Share this post


Link to post
vdgg said:

...which reminds me of another fascinating topic I was too shy to bring up before. What's up with this "max players/speed players" division? It might have existed, but let's take an example of Adam Williamson. Certainly speeding/doing pacifist runs was his strongest point, but he also did record max demos. I'm pretty sure dew, Graim, xepop could do it as well. Why not?


I think it's because there aren't too many players like AdamW, Stx-Vile, or Xit Vono nowadays, who have recorded and are experts on essentially all categories. As to why that is, it might have to do with the wads in question as well. Most of the wads in the past 6-7 years seem to be more focused on max play than anything else, especially due to the influx of slaughter maps.

Think about it...who really cares about a speedrun through Sunder or DV II's rather lame (imo) speedrun exits when the much more exciting max runs are available? Even AV and Kama Sutra are much more Max friendly than speed/nightmare. Look at Death Destiny's or Alexander "Eternal" S's maps...all max oriented. Same with PL2 and HR2. This is especially salient with nightmare...while it is viable in some of the earlier wads, it's practically impossible in most of today's more prominent slaughter wads.

As far as recording max demos, I think Dew has said repeatedly in the past that it's a style of play that doesn't suite his style. Max requires extensive route planning unless you're just blatantly copying someone else's route. Even with copying a route, it would require some good memorization, and depending on how much of a perfectionist you are, a single mistake could cost you a run. The longer the run, the more potential mistakes, and that might not be very fun for some people.

Share this post


Link to post
Belial said:

90% of my demos are UV Max, all of them except for a select few recorded with the pr+ hud present. Never thought twice about it, though I have to admit those few C-N entries that I've recorded under Win98 did feel like an accomplishment, in a 'hey I can overcome the horrible mouse handling' way :P


I was always under the impression that you never used the hud while recording. Not that it diminishes any of your accomplishments, but it might have been nice to include in the text file. Looking at most of your max demos, it doesn't seem like the hud would have made a difference except in a few specific cases. Even then, your times in most of the demos are so far ahead of other people's that it really wouldn't have mattered anyways.

Edit: It also makes me look like an assumptive idiot when I wrote on my Youtube video of your eaxt01-655 that you didn't use the hud (when I accidentally left it in while video capturing). lol :)

Share this post


Link to post

Think about it...who really cares about a speedrun through Sunder or DV II's rather lame (imo) speedrun exits when the much more exciting max runs are available?


I do (well, about Sunder, not DV2 - the speed exits there are definitely lame). For that matter, I often enjoy 2+ minute UV speed demos on long levels more than twenty seconds blitzes with glides and AV/rocket/SR50 jumps all over the place. The latter just seems like more breaking the game than playing it, and while it's fun to watch in its own right, less "glitchy" gameplay is more entertaining to me ; heavy emphasis on quotes as it is of course arbitrary.

I'm aware I'm most likely in the minority feeling that way, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Phml said:

I'm aware I'm most likely in the minority feeling that way, though.

Agreed, I found for example xepop's latest UV Speed on HRII map 02 more interesting and entertaining than many of those sub-10s runs ( no disrespect intended ofc ). As you said, they're cool to watch, and I'm sure they need a lot of time, skill and dedication to perform, but indeed it feels too 'intentional' and glitchy.

Deus Vult II's death exits could have been more interesting had they been placed further in the levels.

There's also the variety of tricks involved. See the abundance of Arch-Vile jumps in Plutonia 2 and compare with the original Plutonia.

Share this post


Link to post

The thing that bothers me is if someone sees a demo was recorded with a port/HUD and they automatically have a negative opinion about it, solely based on the fact it was recorded with a port/HUD. Nevermind the playing in the demo. If it ain't vanilla Doom, then it's not as good.

Phml, I didn't mean you specifically, I said "if someone thinks that's unfair..."

It's hard to say if you are actually meaning someone specifically or not when that "if someone" screams for an escape route if they defend themselves. Personally I don't watch non-vanilla/random wad demos, non-vanilla compatible demos, maxes/tysons/-fast/respawn/whatever other than those that interests me. I might watch them if someone says they are good/interesting etc, but I certainly don't categorize them for goods/bads before watching and usually not even after. I don't even believe if there's someone who does so.

wrong. you're forgetting the greatest, most important advantage of ports: you can run them on today's systems without additional hurdles like dosbox. i can click a batch file on my desktop and i will immediatelly start recording a demo. this fact alone beats any vanilla discussion for me personally.

I'm the exact opposite. Playing, setting and even recording doom under dosbox is WAY easier for me.

...which reminds me of another fascinating topic I was too shy to bring up before. What's up with this "max players/speed players" division? It might have existed, but let's take an example of Adam Williamson. Certainly speeding/doing pacifist runs was his strongest point, but he also did record max demos. I'm pretty sure dew, Graim, xepop could do it as well. Why not?

For me it's philosophical/mental thing. I find recording maxes as a boring hero kills all the bad guys and saves the princess cliche. Pacifist is the most interesting, unique, amusing, etc, major category in my opinion (tyson feels a bit artifical) and speeds are then the happy medium between pacifist and maxes. It's hard to explain why I like them, but hr 12 pacifist and hr2 02 speed probably explains. (I don't record much anyway)
edit: I'd like to add that hr2 31 kind of trickery is different and the majority of my few demos are actually like those. It's more like beating the game or the mapper himself (metagaming?). Hard to explain. It's like saying to the mapper: "Screw you and your intended gameplay, I play this MY way"

Share this post


Link to post
Qaatar said:

Not that it diminishes any of your accomplishments, but it might have been nice to include in the text file.

Like I said, I never thought twice about it and I expected that for the demos where I state pr+ was used for recording anyone's first assumption would be that the extended hud was used.

It was only later that the first discussion about mentioning it in the txt file happened on the forum, and that was when I wasn't really recording much anymore.

Besides, I don't really see it as that much of an advantage. With most slaughter maps where you leave infighting monsters behind you can't really be sure where the monster count will end up unless you're standing in front of the exit. Same for secrets (32inch map05 :P). It's only really useful when you can establish certain checkpoints in your route or the map has well defined points of no return.

Share this post


Link to post
xepop said:

It's more like beating the game or the mapper himself (metagaming?). Hard to explain. It's like saying to the mapper: "Screw you and your intended gameplay, I play this MY way"

oh yeah, it's like a duel with the mapper. doom isn't very immersive and atmospheric, i see it mostly as an obstacle course. tricks are planned these days, but finding an unintended exploit that breaks the intended map flow in a brutal way is extra amusing to me. it's not winning the game, it's punching through the matrix and laughing at the 1's and 0's falling into the hole. yeah, that's how programs work.

Share this post


Link to post

TimeOfDeath said:
Timer: to use a timer in doom2.exe, listen to the music. Use parts of the song as "checkpoints" so you can tell how fast you're going. I use this method as well, even with the timer. This might be harder for non-musicians, though.

Interesting technique. I'll see if I can make use of it, notwithstanding my meager musical knowledge. Regardless, it seems only slightly more helpful than an intuitive grasp of time (often I can tell I am not beating my time by how things are going) and it's clearly not as efficient as an exacting timer.

Seriously, do people actually like finishing a map without the HUD only to find out later that you missed a monster? Why doesn't everyone use the HUD for pwads anyway?

There are different ways to enjoy things. Immediately speaking, no one likes it when a demo doesn't succeed, it's a disappointment, but people do like to succeed at something by certain established rules without needing to bend them. Sure, if you ease the rules, it's easier to succeed, but it's a game, not something our daily bread depends on. Ease versus achievement: the two types of enjoyment often contradict each other.

The non-HUD players choose to unnecessarily waste their time by not using HUD.

Following from what I noted above, why not just play TAS, where there is much less time wasting, then? The reason you are giving is the same reason some people resort to TAS recordings instead or regular runs. If you like the process of playing and play for improvement's sake, the result is not the sole focus, so you can spend some additional time to record a demo under full (or almost full) Doom specifications, be that because you missed a roaming cacodemon or because an imp blocked an important jump over a ledge.

dew said:
you're forgetting the greatest, most important advantage of ports: you can run them on today's systems without additional hurdles like dosbox. i can click a batch file on my desktop and i will immediatelly start recording a demo. this fact alone beats any vanilla discussion for me personally. the c-n guys in the old days didn't have to go through this martyrium and i'm not dedicated enough to perform obscure dosbox rituals every time i want to play to 'not have advantages', when in fact i'm inflicting a serious disadvantage on myself with that. i absolutely loathe dosbox mouse, it fucks up my settings. dosbox slows down my crap computer in horde levels. ports are a godsend and i won't participate in compet-n until it comes to terms with modern times.

I think the only real issue there is the slow-down. DOSBox definitely needs a newer system. Otherwise, you can use DOSKey functionality (to go back to a command line string) and batch files in DOSBox, either minimizing DOSBox and editing the batch through Windows, or using a short-named batch and editing it in the console (or a longer name will work, too, by scrolling back with the DOSKey function).

well.. a player circling through empty areas looking for a non-existant straggler, or camping a teleport spot for 20s even though all monsters already ported in... as much skilled the rest of the demo might look, these parts always look lame.

It looks lame particularly to someone who has no idea why that is happening or to people who watch demos with only the result in mind, who will arguably enjoy TAS more than a Compet-n demo. Otherwise, it mainly shows such a map will require keen planning on monster herding to avoid stragglers. It's true there are routes that with luck may result in a better time than surer routes, but choosing one route or another is also a game decision and a gamble when going for time improvements.

TimeOfDeath said:
The thing that bothers me is if someone sees a demo was recorded with a port/HUD and they automatically have a negative opinion about it, solely based on the fact it was recorded with a port/HUD. Nevermind the playing in the demo.

People appreciate Compet-n and its tight and more exacting rules, so they felt it was a pity your skilled recording didn't meet its specs. If someone runs quicker than the fastest runner in the Olympics but isn't participating in the Olympics, his run may be excellent, but it's not an Olympic record and not part of the Olympic games, with all that entails. A little critique about this doesn't mean people hate your demos. Let's not jump to extremes.

I recorded a demo on a port with port features. I'm not trying to directly compete with vanilla Doomers. I know there are some differences with ports/doom2.exe.

Then we all pretty much agree on the main points.

I'm not going to give someone bonus points for wasting their time in 2010 outside of Compet-N.

Does it not take more work to create a demo with the same time using 320x200 software and no HUD? There's no merit there? Remember what you said: you aren't trying to compete with vanilla Doomers, and you do know there are differences with vanilla.

The HUD is better for competitive demo recording and I urge more players to use it.

In relation to vanilla demos, the HUD is a mild TAS feature, because in the unmodified game, the HUD does not exist. Competitively speaking, if you add the HUD, a demo is less comparable to all those vanilla demos recorded with the DOS executable. I suggest using the HUD only in TAS, port demos or in huge slaughter maps (especially those that break the SEGS limit) and to note it in text files or other means, especially if used for vanilla demos. In this case, you chose to not do the first (up to you) and did inform us you used the HUD (thanks). Since we can disagree, the most important thing is to be clear about our settings and feature uses, so people can make up their own minds on what they think of any recorded demos.

Belial said:
Never thought twice about it, though I have to admit those few C-N entries that I've recorded under Win98 did feel like an accomplishment, in a 'hey I can overcome the horrible mouse handling' way :P

Was that due to mouse acceleration? By default, if you run DOOM on Windows 98 the standard mouse driver (at least for serial mice) uses acceleration. Installing another driver (I've always used a old Genius driver that's compatible with DOS, Windows 3.1 and Windows 9x) gets rid of that.

Qaatar said:
As to why that is, it might have to do with the wads in question as well. Most of the wads in the past 6-7 years seem to be more focused on max play than anything else, especially due to the influx of slaughter maps.

The older WADs were more max-specific, if you ask me. Speeding the MMs, Requiem and AV is like semi-maxing. Most newer WADs have speeding shortcuts, on the other hand. These shortcuts may have induced something of a split, though, by marking speed and max more clearly.

dew said:
oh yeah, it's like a duel with the mapper. doom isn't very immersive and atmospheric, i see it mostly as an obstacle course.

Those aren't incompatible. Especially immersive and obstacle course. I find the game's most potent immersion to be in the mechanics and competitive aspect, aside from any atmospheric contribution in the design. One is absorbed into the action, rather than something "believable". Since it's pure praxis, there's no need for it to imitate something to be immersive, it just is.

Share this post


Link to post

Heh, that was really confusing. I had somehow cut and pasted some part of the post into the whole...

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×