Text files

I'd like to know your opinion about text files which are zipped together with your demos. Do you read them? Just browse through them? Do they matter? Do you write them as soon as the demo is recorded? Is it tedious to write them?

Personally I feel unsatisfied if a (esp.good) demo has no description as if the author wanted to tell me "Pfft. No effort", or even worse, there is no text file at all (nevertheless, I see no hope I could convert those who don't write them to doing so). There is also one case of a player that leaves his txts too long and detailed for me to read them unless I am really interested in a certain map.

I thoroughly enjoy TGH's "short article" style txts, especially when he hates a map and justifies his hatred :) Kristian Ronge's enlightening style with warm words directed at... everyone, from the mapper to all the speedrunners that preceeded him; Creaphis' txts in which he usually explains all the tricks to a broad audience.

And my texts... they are usually long - if they are not, it means I don't care too much for the demo, have no great emotions related to it. I try to write my descriptions right after watching the recording, although sometimes, when I anticipate success, I have some sort of outline already prepared.

yeah, anima likes to rant. :) i read all the text files and i try to write them properly. a few lines describing the important parts or explaining some circumstances or even just tortured whines about an annoyance. no commentary somewhat feels like the person didn't care much and just spewed it from his demo assembly line.

Couldn't care less about it. I write them just so I can keep track for myself, and I read other text files when there's something specific I don't understand in the demo.

I like them. Some of them can be entertaining by themselves. I think others like them as well; it even inspired a text-file quiz a while back, which was a fun idea and also pointed out some amusing ones, like pp13 by AdamW.

I like them too, it's especially nice when the author goes into detail about the level and play experience.

I like them. I read every one. Even long ones. Sometimes the hundred plus times it takes to complete one provides excellent insight into what it really takes to play that particular map. So I am happy to have the information.

Sometimes a demo runner will notice and mention something that may not make sense to him or anyone else until a year or two later when someone figures out the "odd behavior".

A little time capsule, the way I see it.

I really like to read what runners have to say about their demos. I'm usually disappointed when new demos are released without any attached commentary, which is often done by runners that only became active after Compet-N was already past its prime. Now, this forum has become the central line of communication for many runners, and packaging the discussion about demos with the demos themselves isn't considered as important as it used to be.

I tend to get ahead of myself when it comes to writing commentary - I've usually mentally composed what I want to say about a given run before I've even recorded it. I enjoy making good runs, but, in my mind, making a good run doesn't end when the record is beaten or when the demo file is zipped and uploaded. A good run is one that interests an audience, and you can make a run more interesting by presenting it in the right way. If a given run presents certain challenges to the runner that aren't obvious to the watcher, then a run can be made more interesting with some info about these hidden goings-on - and thus, the run is made better! However, sometimes a trick is too obvious in its workings to need explanation, but its usage is still clever or innovative. Then, I think the best way to show off a trick like that is to keep it a surprise. That's what'll make the audience spit out their coffee :)

I like reading txt files too.

I used to always write txt files for my old demos, but now I rarely write txt files because it feels like a chore. It's not that I don't care about the demo or the map, or that it didn't take effort to record the demo. Actually, it's the opposite - after spending time and effort recording a demo, the last thing I want to do is write a txt file. But, now I'll start writing txt files again.

And, if I record a demo on a map, it pretty much automatically means I like the map.

I always read the txt file, and always include them with my own demos.

Mine are usually simple and short, following the Compet-N template.

The only longer ones I can remember are for the Realm Of Shades max pack, because I felt the wad was underappreciated, and for my DV2 demos, because Huy asked me to write something more interesting than a one-liner.

I enjoy reading comments/notes of people's text files as they are very informative about the demo. As for me, I'm too lazy to but much info in a text file of my demos -_-;

Its easier to write and read commentary text in the forum post in which the demo is attached, and titling the lmp file something like:
bla-cl9-uvmax-time-etc
removes the chore of having to write a txt (except for people who play doom in a more vanilla way and require 8 or less characters per file).

Anyone can rename anyone else's lmp and add/delete a text file to suit their own preferences. I like the long named lmp way for my own and other people's demos. You can know information about the demo immediately just by looking at the title/ less cryptic.

I certainly check text files, either before or after I've watched the demo or demos, and I'm thankful when runners provide one. I've sometimes breezed through some sections, in some, especially if the level or set it's for isn't something that particularly interests me, but read most of them all the way. I also prefer it when each demo has a text file, as opposed to one per pack, except for secondary fail or trivia demos that are dependent on a main demo, but one is naturally better than none.

I think it's a habit thing; if you never write them, they will surely seem like a chore. But if you get the habit, you start finding interesting things to say. And if you never read them, you'll start to feel no one will read yours, but if you enjoy doing so, you might think at least a few people may do the same. The advantage over posting the same in a forum post is, of course, that you have it there with the demo, once it's downloaded, and don't have to browse the forums to read the stuff. This is particularly relevant to me because each time I visit the forums I do a quick and general "mod" checkup to see that things are in order, and I don't want to have to do that just to see the comments for a demo.

I'm unlikely to watch a demo that has no text-file, and if it has a very bare text-file then I probably won't watch it more than once. I like to see some description of what was done - otherwise you're not clear of whether any clever ideas were used, and if you see what looks like some sloppy running or bad route planning, you can't tell if this is really so, or if there was a good reason. A good text-file means that I enjoy watching the demo much more than I would otherwise.

A text-file also enables you to know what the demo was all about when you find it on your hard-disk years later, or if you download it from a demo archive (and not from the demos forum). It gives some personality to what might otherwise be a faceless demo, and so promotes Doom speedrunners as a community.

A text-file enables the player to credit someone who previously recorded on the map or for any ideas that they used or improved upon. It is very sad when a demo with an inadequate text-file means that the chain of route credits that should accompany demo ideas is broken.

A simple text file doesn't take long to create at all. If you haven't much to say about a demo, then all you need to do is take one you made for an earlier demo, and change the wad/map/category info.

Grazza said:

I'm unlikely to watch a demo that has no text-file

I'm sorry, but lol ;)

But yeah, those are all good points for including txt files. I never meant any disrespect by not including txt files. I just don't like writing or talking (I'm a very quiet person and always hated english class). But I'll start writing txt files for all my demos that don't have one.

I also like ggg's point about having long filenames so that you can see the most relevant info immediately.

If you're going to set a speedrunning record and want to make sure no one even tries to challenge it, you may use a text file for your defense ;)

Do not touch this bloody map, its cursed

(Anders Johnsen, pl26-554): hey, it has been working for almost 12 years!

23 - Hatred. I had a premature end to one attempt where I was picking up rockets while the final boss was forming and it ended in a visplane overflow.
25 - Chaos Zone. I had another premature end to an attempt where I was going to kill a cacodemon after the last wave of enemies on the lift, but it ended in a "no more visplanes" error.

(Revved, 9226rq21): now, it's a good one. You know forgetting to kill monsters is a PITA in Max movies, but in case someone wasn't afraid of them, make them fear all the VPOs!

I like the included text files which get right down to the point about the details of the map/demo.

1. Which Doom/Hexen/Heretic/etc Episode, and mission/level (I think these can all go on one line)
2. Skill level(s) - pluralized, if there are additional difficulty settings.
3 Single player, deathmatch, co-op. Only which ones apply.

etc.. Just the important stuff. No filler or B.S. No editorials are really needed if they do not in some way relate to the WAD/demo. Whoa..that makes me think about one I wrote today. And short, plot-based stories are good too include, too, if there is a "plot" or "backdrop" to the level(s). A little bit of comedy, or dramatic background don't hurt anything to sensationalize your first impressions even prior to playing a map for the first time. I like plot-based games, but not plot-DRIVEN games. If I have to read Moby Dick before playing "Moby Dick: The Video Game", it falls short of my attention span, and I toss it, and find something else.