Favorite Source Port? (Multiple Choice Poll)

Quasar said:

I added the following lines of code to EE at lunch today:

(in RunGameTics):
  if(d_uncappedfps && count == 0)
     return true;

(in TryRunTics):
  do
  {
    ...
  } while(!(d_fastrefresh || d_uncappedfps) &&...);

I can set d_uncappedfps to true or to false, and it makes no visible or noticeable difference in the way that EE runs on my machine. I am either missing something obvious, or there is going to be more to it than this.

Isn't that more or less how it would be expected to act, until interpolation code for player movement (and whatever else you decide to interpolate) is added? As-is, it's drawing more frames but stuff is only actually changing 35 times a second.

esselfortium said:

Isn't that more or less how it would be expected to act, until interpolation code for player movement (and whatever else you decide to interpolate) is added? As-is, it's drawing more frames but stuff is only actually changing 35 times a second.

Then are you telling me EE has already had an uncapped framerate all these years? If so, what's everybody been griping about? I don't get it.

Maes said:

For some reason just mentioning "source ports" is enough to throw some DW members into an irrational rage.

Irrational rage on DW is limited to mentioning source ports? :V

To answer the OP's question, I wouldn't say there's a best one or a worst one. It really all comes down to personal taste. Me, I prefer ScoreDoom for whatever it can run. I like the scoring system and when it comes to handling the aspects of shuffle mods, the add-on pack for ScoreDoom handles it right, in my opinion.

Quasar said:

Then are you telling me EE has already had an uncapped framerate all these years? If so, what's everybody been griping about? I don't get it.

Er, what? No...

I'm saying that you can uncap the framerate but if there's no interpolation done between the 35 frames per second of the game sim, it's going to look exactly the same as it did before you uncapped it.

Nems said:

Irrational rage on DW is limited to mentioning source ports? :V

It sure sets several alarms off, as well as blowing some fuses. It can only go downhill from there.

Quasar said:

Then are you telling me EE has already had an uncapped framerate all these years? If so, what's everybody been griping about? I don't get it.

If EE can already draw >35 fps then yes, you have an uncapped framerate.

There's a difference between having power to spare to -potentially- draw more frames between gametics, and actually doing so. And doing so with motion interpolation (e.g. on player view alone, on projectyle movement, on environment animation etc.)

DaniJ said:

If EE can already draw >35 fps then yes, you have an uncapped framerate.

On a technical level that's true, but functionally there's no benefit or visible change without some sort of interpolation to make the new frames actually distinct from the 35 per second that would be getting drawn already. As of now, it'd just be drawing the exact same frame several times in succession.

Exactly. This is a case where what is being asked for, is not actually what is needed. Its a technical/practical miscommunication I think.

John Smith said:

OP asked for some information about source ports, not for all of your half brain celled opinions on why you're the smartest downs child in the tard class.

I'm not sure, since the OP asked which is the best one, with that wording I interpretted it as asking for opinions more so than facts.

esselfortium said:

but functionally there's no benefit or visible change without some sort of interpolation to make the new frames actually distinct from the 35 per second that would be getting drawn already.

Obviously. Still, even having the engine run at a higher frame rate is a good sign. The big technical parts are out of the way then. The interpolation stuff is merely adding some logic even if it's quite a bit of it.

Graf Zahl said:

Interesting isn't it?

Someone says a (even remotely) bad word about Eternity and the resident fanboys run amok.

But it seems to be largely tolerated if someone bashes ZDoom or its derivatives - one could get the feeling it's even considered good manners.

Hypocrites!

Holy fucking shit. I didn't want to get drawn into this shitfest of a thread, other than to remark upon how much of a stain on the wall of the internet it is, but this post is so stupid it makes me seriously believe that abortions might be acts of great mercy. I have created a highly informative graphic for what everyone should be picturing when they read the quoted post. It goes quite far in demonstrating just how desperately pathetic the quoted post is. This is a rough pie chart of the preferred port of the dw forum userbase:



Seriously, look at that and tell me the quoted post doesn't sound sad and desperate. Contrary to what some people who post here would like, this isn't an alternative to the ZDoom forums, nor does it even remotely share the same rules. Anybody is free to say whatever the fuck they like about whatever port they like, and anybody else is free to say why that person is wrong. Even if both of these people are drooling spastics. Thats how it works. Complaining about the system working this way, especially when the port you're white knighting is by far the most popular one, just makes you look even more like a moron than everyone else. Gold star for standing out.

I don't think it read as sad and desperate at all. I think Graf Zahl makes a good point and I really don't see why you guys had to come and shit all over the thread.

fraggle I'm sorry, and I respect you a great deal, but you seem think it's inappropriate anytime anyone says anything that could be viewed as disparaging about any port, almost to the point that it's only slightly less egregious than slander. Obviously I don't agree, and I really don't see how that's a realistic viewpoint you can hold while still actively paying attention to the doomworld forums. Everyone constantly has something to say about one port or another. Doesn't mean that every thread is being shit up. This one was, frankly, a trainwreck waiting to happen, and if the fact that it's gone that way surprises you in the least then I wish I could share your unabashed optimism. Besides, regardless of the forum, white knighting a group that fiercely defends one opinion because there's another group that also fiercely defends their opinion is pretty poor regardless. A classic non-doom related example is the "both sides are bad, so vote republican" sort of comment, and the sort of thing applies pretty well in this situation too.

The more I use vanilla/Doom2+ with DosBox the less I care about ports.

At this point I only use Pr+ to watch the odd demo or two.

Seems to work OK :)

Yaaay Quasar :D

To the original poster:

The best thing to do is download a bunch of sourceports and experiment with them to determine which one or more best suits your own needs.

Quasar said:
Seems to work OK :)

Except there's a red cross in the middle of the screen and not on the medikits :-)

We have a 16-year old guy who started playing around 2000 asking what port is "the best", "best" meaning in this case "better graphics than in the original". (For the purpose of this thread I'm going to turn a blind eye on this blatant blasphemy and presume it's honest ignorance and not trolling. ;) And he gave a link to a YouTube JDoom video to clarify what he was looking for. So going by the information he provided, it's not hard to deduce that he is looking for a port with a hardware-accelerated renderer.

Does it make sense to recommend Chocolate DOOM or Eternity then?

entryway's post was the third reply in the thread and the first that was right on the money. I don't think he has a reason to hate Eternity, he just pointed out the reasons he thought it was wrong to recommend Eternity to someone looking primarily for eye candy.

If you have to communicate in a language you only have limited knowledge of, the natural tendency (or, perhaps more accurately, a lazy person's tendency ;) is to manage with as few words as possible. That may have the unfortunate side effect of coming off as brusque or even arrogant. I don't think that impression was intended here, although I don't rule out the possibility that the annoyance at how far off the mark the Eternity recommendation was may have influenced the wording. :)

At any rate, limited English or not, entryway seems to be one of the few posters who understood what the OP wanted (presuming the OP is not a troll). A special mention goes out to Glass Rook's first post - informative, concise and relevant.

And it seems like Eternity may soon have uncapped framerate thanks to this thread, so there may be something useful, not mere entertainment, coming out of it in the end. That is, if you happen to like uncapped framerate, but that's a subject for another thread. :D

Whether you like "uncapped framerate" or not doesn't really matter in all practicality because most ports implement an optional "framerate clamp" should you want to play without it (effectively disabling all fractional-tic interpolation).

In addition, some ports also allow more fine-grained control over how the fractional-tic interpolation is done and to what.

@Never_Again:
The OP didn't post the video of what he was specifically looking for until after the thread had already devolved into developer shit-flinging. "Better graphics" is vague and subjective; some of us consider software-rendered ports like ZDoom or Eternity to look better than the resource-replaced GL that he was looking for. I recommended Eternity because it retains the look and feel of the original game while having "better graphics" (in this case being a high-precision renderer, smoother colormaps than vanilla for lighting, and high resolution support) and some other nice features. Plus, Entryway's list wasn't debunking claims of eye candy, it was listing supposedly crippling flaws that made the port useless. (I have no idea why I or anyone else would be using it if it were even half as broken as Entryway claimed.) Until the OP posted the video, very nearly any modern port in existence would have potentially fit the bill. :)

DaniJ said:

Personally I consider this question to be akin to asking: Which is better - bus or train?

With no passenger train services down here it would appear to be a clear-cut choice, though with the local bus service having been downgraded to little more than a shopping centre shuttle the choice is more likely to be - taxi or walk? </rant></off-topic>

Quasar said:

Seems to work OK :)

Sheeet yeah!

Most modern ports already go to considerable lengths to enhance quality without requiring any additional user-supplied/authored data. Ports utilizing GL-rendering are no different in this respect (difference being - what, why and how).

Many Doomsday users (and presumably others) don't use any additional resources at all, preferring to play with just the automatic enhancements (myself for one*).

* Yeah, even though I maintained and contributed to the jDRP - doesn't mean I prefer it.

DaniJ said:

Most modern ports already go to considerable lengths to enhance quality without requiring any additional user-supplied/authored data. Ports utilizing GL-rendering are no different in this respect (difference being - what, why and how).

Many Doomsday users (and presumably others) don't use any additional resources at all, preferring to play with just the automatic enhancements (myself for one*).

* Yeah, even though I maintained and contributed to the jDRP - doesn't mean I prefer it.

I'd agree with that. While I admit it's not my port of choice for modding, I'd stand by my opinion that Doomsday's got the best-looking GL Doom renderer around, by a long shot. Fake-radiosity and similar effects make a huge difference to reduce the flatness that often results from rendering Doom's sector lighting in GL, and makes the settings feel much livelier with the subtle shadowing effects. Unfortunately it's sometimes difficult to discuss this without folks thinking that I'm just talking about the hi-res textures and models, which I don't use :P

I use Skulltag for everything, simply because it looks nice and I already have it set up the way I like it. It's basically gzDoom with a multiplayer bonus. Also it supports mouselook, which is a gaming feature that I love in the year 2010.

Now, if you want the "oldschool" look, go for chocolate doom. As a latecomer to the Doom scene myself, I don't much care for it. It's an impressive piece of work from a technical perspective, but I seriously hate the limitations of Vanilla doom.

A nice blend of this is prBoom(with assorted plus signs). It supports mouse movement, but you can't look up and down.

Also, a pro tip: if this thread has not scared you off already, DO NOT bring up zDoom. Just don't. Its advanced features seriously piss some people off.

Abyssalstudios1 said:

Its advanced features seriously piss some people off.

Use of the term "advanced" for any port could also be debated. There is no set criteria for what is considered "advanced".

Vermil said:
Use of the term "advanced" for any port could also be debated. There is no set criteria for what is considered "advanced".

The line is blurry, although in terms of level editing support, it's a good label to use in comparison with engines that port "dead" or "established" functionality, like Chocolate Doom and PrBoom. Even then, Prboom+'s extra TAS and demo features are very advanced, for example. That said, Abyssalstudios1 just played the Dubya card; "any attack against us is due to envy".

Abyssalstudios1 said:

Also, a pro tip: if this thread has not scared you off already, DO NOT bring up zDoom. Just don't. Its advanced features seriously piss some people off.

Here's a strong assertion:

ZDoom is Really Doom the Way It Was Meant To Be.

Now chew on that.