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

Favorite Source Port? (Multiple Choice Poll)

Favorite Source Port? (Multiple Choice)  

136 members have voted

  1. 1. Favorite source port?



Recommended Posts

Gez said:

I'd advise GZDoom as probably the best source port for single player mods because it's compatible with vanilla mods of course, with ZDoom mods as well of course too, but also with Legacy mods. Also, it supports Doom correctly.

That is not true.
GZDoomxx is not compatible with (G)ZDoomxx
And it does not support Doom correctly.
Didn't know it's compatible with legacy.
Don't know how big the issue is with (g)zdoom not being compatible with gzdoom but it might be a good idea to mention the version of (G)ZDoom you used for your map, me thinks.
Instead of the use the latest version, I see quite often in text files.
Is there a zdoom version which features are always supported in later incarnations of zdoom?

Share this post


Link to post
Coldfusio said:

Did you dislike it because of the implementation (the archvile having too much space?
(background info here.)
or don't you like ghosts in doom maps?

Ghosts are fine with me, as long as their movements are controllable to some extent and their spawning is predictable, which was not the case in seej where the archvile has to hit that sweetspot to start resurrecting them and the main area is completely open for them to move around in.

Share this post


Link to post
Belial said:

Ghosts are fine with me, as long as their movements are controllable to some extent and their spawning is predictable, which was not the case in seej where the archvile has to hit that sweetspot to start resurrecting them and the main area is completely open for them to move around in.

Belial, can you finish doom2 on nightmare? How about nightmare with 100% of secrets? You are my favorite of the latest years and I should know. Do you have a potential to beat the latest Ryback's demo? In any case I want to see your tries.

Share this post


Link to post

I've never tried Doom2 on NM. The only NM movies I've recorded are some runs of the first 3 episodes of UDoom I did for fun.

Share this post


Link to post

Public it if you can. Please. Your run of Eleven and casaly's seej make me hope. I miss about full movies of doom2. Vile and Xit do not want to record some max or tyson for me :( Ryback's run is exception *for years* :(

Share this post


Link to post

entryway said:
The only award for newbie, except for satisfaction of the ambitions, it is how other people will love his work. There are more people, there is more love. It's simple. Isn't it?

That's the best way for people make crap wads. To make them to try to impress others. If that is their priority, they should better spend their time doing something else. Less time wasted for them, less time wasted for others wading through the rubbish to find good wads.

Coldfusio said:
Yes but not all of them use their rights
Entryway did take into account the position of the beginning mapper.

Actually, PrBoom, which is a worse case than Eternity or EDGE in this case, had been suggested, and he went on to trash these others. As for how he considered new users; badly, adding nothing I myself hadn't said, skewing the idea in the process.

Share this post


Link to post

http://belial.startan3.com/demos/udoomnm.zip

I hardly have time for Doom now, so new demos and movies in particular are not likely to happen anytime soon.

heh yeah you can, at least doom1 (saw only episode1 for now)

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

That's the best way for people make crap wads.

I disagree because of
1) how many wads you did?
2) how many wads you did for zdoom?
3) how many wads you did for edge or something?
if nothing, why you judge?

Share this post


Link to post

entryway said:
if nothing, why you judge?

Because I've played many thousands of wads. I'm also working on a wad and have learned to ditch such motivations.

Apart from that, this idea hardly applies only to wads. Any creative process needs an attachment due to aesthetic or design concerns primarily, to be any good, far over any social concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

Because I've played many thousands of wads. I'm also working on a wad and have learned to ditch such motivations.

It is the problem for you and me. We judge the wads which are in the other style. We judge they, because they are not in our style. Our words: that wads are not a doom; that wads are stupid because they have a text story and the stories are not compatible with doom, etc. What can you say me about Super Sonic? Is it an another zdoomish crap? Do you like it? Do you played it? God...that's an off topic of course

Share this post


Link to post

entryway said:
We judge the wads which are in the other style. We judge they, because they are not in our style.

I hardly discredit the creative merit of wads that I don't like to play for whatever reason (such as not being very "classic") but make ingenious use of the engine and resources, but can easily see weaknesses in wads that resort to imitation or having lame designs because their authors were more concerned over what others would think of their wads than over being enthused by the work itself as a creative experience.

Share this post


Link to post

In a smokin' birch bark canoe.

Clarification much?

By vanilla I guess I mean "Minimal 3D, pretty much regular Doom graphics wise." The only 3D I want to deal with would be maps (not even feelin' vertical aiming). Higher res texture support would be a bonus.

I'm not even sure a Doom port would really fit my bill. I'm a n00b to Doom SP's (and game dev in general. I'm a network admin :))

Scripting. Yeah sorry not sure wtf I meant there. I guess the ability to script events so scenarios are easier to build.

wakka wakka!

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps the lack of a clear answer stems from asking for a "best" choice, which spurs a slew of subjective replies or related reactions.

Note that any engine uses the normal graphics, at least unless a "hi res" package is added in addition. The ones that allow true 3D, as opposed to the standard game's 2.5D (things can't walk on each other and you can't normally have bridges), use GL acceleration to do it, generally modifying the way the graphics and lighting are displayed by smoothing and dynamic effects. Some hacks and tricks (either editing tricks used in a level, or coded features in the engine that exploit them) do allow you to fool 2.5 engines, granting the equivalent of 3D, but those may have some limitations.

3D engines: Doomsday, EDGE, GZDoom, Vavoom
2.5D engines: Eternity, ZDoom

Share this post


Link to post
Coldfusio said:

The first problem is caused by sloppy DECORATE code in the mod. Author forgot to put some strings between quotes, and the DECORATE parser is now stricter about this kind of errors (to prevent later problems with the DoomScript interpreter that is being worked on at last).

It's fixable in SlumpEd in 30 seconds.

Your second problem seems to be about playing or recording demos for compet-N and that kind of things. Well, duh. That's the exclusive realm of vanilla/chocolate/PrBoom anyway. For simply playing through mods, this isn't a problem.

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't played every source mod yet, but I prefer ZDoom because it lets me choose which iwad I want to play on startup. That's important if you have all the classic Doom iwads.

EDIT: Okay, so does PrBoom+, and it's looking good. I'm more used to ZDoom, though.

Share this post


Link to post

Hm. I use lots of them.

GZDoom, ZDoom, PrBoom/PrBoom+, and chocolate-doom if I'm feeling all old-schooly. I don't play online much anymore... Though odamex's progress may change my mind.

Most of the time, I'll actually use PrBoom whenever dealing with a 100% boom compatible wad of sorts.

ZDoom spoils me. It's mouse feel is so easy to adjust to, but PrBoom preserves some of the old school doom behavior. (Shooting through decorations, the real length at which the doom marine can punch, etc)

So I guess ZDoom/GZdoom is for coop and any wad that requires it.
Though I will use GZDoom when I want things to look nice.
Some awesome GZDoom-only wads are popping up, kudos to graf for that engine.

Share this post


Link to post

If Zdoom wasn't such a universal source port that ran almost everything I wouldn't use it.

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, it never fails that if someone recommends one port over another, it stirs the ire of lot of people. And it also never fails, that some people try to push their preferred port onto others without giving reasons why their port is "best". If it is simply a matter of one's personal preference, that is simply not enough and makes the poster appear .... well stupid. Suggest several ports and then let them draw their own conclusions.

myk said:

3D engines: Doomsday, EDGE, GZDoom, Vavoom
2.5D engines: Eternity, ZDoom

Yeah, exactly like that. Good man, myk.

I must admit, that I have not tried every port out there, but if a good map comes along, which can be played only with a particular port, I will use it quite willingly.

Coldfusio said:

...Don't know how big the issue is with (g)zdoom not being compatible with gzdoom but it might be a good idea to mention the version of (G)ZDoom you used for your map, me thinks...


Isn't that the same with any port? Since ports are a work in progress, that is only to be expected.

Share this post


Link to post

Kappes Buur said:
Isn't that the same with any port? Since ports are a work in progress, that is only to be expected.

The only true exception would be PrBoom and PrBoom+, with the -complevel parameter, behaving like any engine in the Doom and Boom/MBF tree, from Doom v1.666 to the latest PrBoom. Entryway recently also added an -emulate parameter that accounts for minor differences or bugs in previous versions of the engine itself.

PrBoom-plus -complevel 9 -emulate 2.2.4

The above, for example, behaves like Boom (v2.02), but according to v2.2.4 of PrBoom, that had some bugs in its Boom emulation. Such a high level of backward compatibility was added mainly for demo viewing.

Share this post


Link to post

Chocolate Doom should never break compatibility; it should be fully compatible with vanilla, both playing and recording, and an optional longtics mode (Doom 1.91 patch). The only time files from Chocolate should not be compatible in vanilla, is if you've disabled the savegame and demo limits...

Share this post


Link to post

MikeRS said:
The only time files from Chocolate should not be compatible in vanilla, is if you've disabled the savegame and demo limits...

Sort of, as with maxdemo you can handle practically any demo anyone could really want to record (hours of playing), and applying the savedemo hack from Doom+ will allow Doom to make huge saves as well. In any case, Doom can load the large save games from Chocolate Doom or from a hacked version, even when it can't create them. I could be wrong, but I imagine it could also read a gargantuan demo beyond what maxdemo can produce.

If there's any way Chocolate isn't compatible with Doom that's in not supporting the recent Doom+ extensions (higher VPO limits and whatnot).

Share this post


Link to post

I'll just put my two cents in and recommend ZDoom. GZDoom if you want OpenGL rendering.

If you ever get into demo recording, use PrBoom for the love of god.

Share this post


Link to post

First post. Long time doom lover (i have an original ultimate collection). Here is the count, if i did right, of votes (should have been a poll).

ZDoom 51
GZDoom 30
PrBoom 23
Chocolate 22
Skulltag 19
Zdaemon 16
Eternity 13
Odamex 8
Prboom+ 8
Doomsday 6
JDoom 4
Legacy 4
Risen3D 4
Doom2+ 3
EDGE 3
Boom 2
Doom+ 2
GLDoom 2
MBF 2
Black 1
Doom3 1
Nashgore 1
Rordoom 1
uHexen 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm a pretty big purist, so I almost exclusively use Chocolate Doom, except for WADs requiring limit-removal in which case I use PrBoom. I'll also use ZDoom on WADs that require it or are designed for it, but I still try to keep the settings close to vanilla and I avoid things like vertical aiming and jumping. Playing the same game for 14 years in the same way can get boring, so I see nothing wrong with using more modernized ports and features, but I personally like the look and feel of the original, if only for its simplicity and nostalgia.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×