SIGIL v1.21 - New Romero megawad [released!]

[Capellan]

1 hour ago, Hellbent said:

EDIT: I guess I do feel like it's cheating somewhat to have it off for playing the original game, but it seems to me new doom levels should be designed to be played with the setting off, since it's a major limitation to the game (and an illogical one at that).

 

I play Doom to play Doom, and Doom has infinitely tall things.  I'm not interested in turning it off, and I design with the expectation it is on..

 

[Kira]

1 hour ago, Hellbent said:

why?

 

EDIT: I guess I do feel like it's cheating somewhat to have it off for playing the original game, but it seems to me new doom levels should be designed to be played with the setting off, since it's a major limitation to the game (and an illogical one at that).

I always play with the intended complevel since this is what the gameplay was fine-tuned for, which means infinite height 100% of the time using PrBoom+. So unless I play ZDoom wads then.

 

I'll be honest, infinite height is the one thing I'm not too fond of regarding vanilla/Boom wads. But the gameplay there is most of the time built around that and you would break many a caco swarm and make them boring. It's not always working against you so I can't really say removing it is cheating either. I'm particularly prone to use splash damage to clean off enemies I don't want to deal with for instance.

 

On the subject of Romero, I can imagine him not minding that limitation due to playtesting with something like GZDoom primarily. Hopefully it won't impact the gameplay too much.

[Revenant100]

21 minutes ago, Gez said:

GZDoom is how Doom is meant to be played; you have it straight from Romero's mouth. 

Ah, but GZDoom is not the only usurper of Romero's fallible memories! This situation is remarkably reminiscent of that time he lauded the accuracy of the engine's line precision while strafing over a light border in E1M2 in the Doomsday Engine, except that the actual original engine's noted (by Carmack himself) lack of line precision is precisely (no pun intended) what led to a common and obvious visual error that all advanced modern source ports eventually had to fix. This bug is even visible in E1M2 in the very same spot Romero was walking over in that video, but of course, the reason he wasn't seeing the error then is because he was playing in Doomsday's hardware-accelerated renderer which intentionally diverges from Doom's behavior quite heavily.

 

'Tis a sad revelation to realize, as it begs the question, how much can we really rely on Romero's word in these contemporaneous times? Is he truly a bastion of all knowledge that is Doom, or has he been forever and irrevocably warped by the ravages that is the modern source port?

[Jimmy]

I think it may just be that it's been 25 freaking years and his memory on the whole thing is a little wonky.

 

(That said, Carmack's probably wouldn't be.)

[Loud Silence]

https://www.sigilgame.com/

[Sparktimus]

2 hours ago, Gez said:

It's not distortion, it's revelation. GZDoom is how Doom is meant to be played; you have it straight from Romero's mouth.

Romero also played Doom on the Doomsday Engine with texture filtering and that awful built-in dynamic lighting system and thought that was perfectly acceptable, so I'm not going to hold his word in high regard personally :v

 

Being completely serious though, 25 years or not, Romero should know better than to think that decorations block projectiles by default considering he's spent almost as much time around the engine as Carmack.

Edited March 3, 2019 by Sparktimus

[geo]

On 12/13/2018 at 11:59 AM, leodoom85 said:

Still in this thing?

Linguica made the whole point very clear. There's no need to discuss more...

And, being discussed about compatibility to specific sourceports doesn't matter to me. I just want to play and enjoy it...it's not hard really...

The sausage has spoken!

[Gez]

44 minutes ago, Sparktimus said:

Romero also played Doom on the Doomsday Engine with texture filtering and that awful built-in dynamic lighting system and thought that was perfectly acceptable, so I'm not going to hold his word in high regard personally :v

 

Being completely serious though, 25 years or not, Romero should know better than to think that decorations block projectiles by default considering he's spent almost as much time around the engine as Carmack.

Honestly, I think that someone who knows first-hand how much of Doom's code has been changed around, sometimes at the last minute, how many features were desired but never implemented, and so on, cares a lot less about the exact minutia of tiny gameplay details than most of the people around here. It's very possible that memories of development are kinda blurring the distinction between port features and original features.

 

Didn't we see him taking shelter behind torches in videos of Tech Gone Bad, too?

[Dark Pulse]

I'm still sad he turned down my request to do God Mode noises on the stream. :(

[Lila Feuer]

Doesn't surprise me he would think the torches blocking projectiles is intended behavior, that's how static objects work in Doomsday, which he's played in!

Also, unless it's GZDoom or Doomsday, I prefer infinite height to be on, and if I want more accurate Doom engine behavior, I use other source ports (Crispy and Eternity).

[OleBumma]

maybe he's wanted others to pay attention at what GZDoom did there with their custom setting.

ofc he wasn't gonna stress and change the setting in the middle of the action, or complain/bash about the port's behavior while he was on live stream...

[Nevander]

I can't believe you people. Who cares what Romero thinks or believes is intended old school behavior, just play the maps however you please when they release. If they don't play well with infinite height on, well then that's just too bad. You'll just have to deal with it. Turn it off and just play the game.

 

Old school rules don't apply anymore, at least not when we are talking about PWADs. You can't expect a modern PWAD to always adhere to vanilla design etiquette. I don't care who the author is.

[Capellan]

Just now, Nevander said:

You can't expect a modern PWAD to always adhere to vanilla design etiquette.

 

Sure you can ... if the author says it is Vanilla :)

 

But I don't believe that's been said in this case (especially since it seems to be mapped in E5), and certainly at the end of the day everyone should play Doom in the way that is most fun for them, whatever that actually happens to be.

[Nine Inch Heels]

23 minutes ago, Capellan said:

 

Sure you can ... if the author says it is Vanilla :)

 

But I don't believe that's been said in this case (especially since it seems to be mapped in E5), and certainly at the end of the day everyone should play Doom in the way that is most fun for them, whatever that actually happens to be.

All signs indicate that it's limit removing vanilla format. Further, there has already been some iteration wrt whether or not the maps will actually be slotted into E5 or if they're gonna be replacements in the end. But if that happened, or what happened exactly, I dunno, all I know is that if it's indeed an E5, then RIP speedruns for these maps.

[ReaperAA]

1 hour ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

all I know is that if it's indeed an E5, then RIP speedruns for these maps.

 

Shouldn't it be possible to create a patch (or a alternate version of the wad) that can change the map slots from E5 to other episode slots (like for e.g E4). Apology in advance if I sound like a noob incase if its not possible.

[Doom64hunter]

This actor height debate is probably some of the most petty shit I've seen come out of this community and that's saying something.

[Lila Feuer]

@Doom64hunter You missed out, it's been pettier. Try correct aspect ratios on PSX Doom emulation. Should I see the thin black line at the bottom of the screen or not?

[Beginner]

5 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

Further, there has already been some iteration wrt whether or not the maps will actually be slotted into E5 or if they're gonna be replacements in the end. But if that happened, or what happened exactly, I dunno, all I know is that if it's indeed an E5, then RIP speedruns for these maps.

Just load some placeholder graphics.

Spoiler

At least it (sorta) worked for: Chocolate Doom*, Crispy Doom*, Eternity Engine***, PrBoom-Plus*, (G)ZDoom**, Zandronum**, Risen3D.

 

* crashes as soon as it's time to write end of episode text (?)

** exiting map boots player to Doom 2's end-game screen

*** exiting map warps player to the next map slot but in E4

 

 

[Revenant100]

1 hour ago, Doom64hunter said:

This actor height debate is probably some of the most petty shit I've seen come out of this community and that's saying something.

Actor height and the nature of how the engine handles this element is one of the core mechanics of how Doom's gameplay functions. Discrepancies in how a source port handles actor height can render a map completely broken. Consider the Gridlock community project's MAP32 which pits the player in corridors built of tall green torches. The level's gameplay is built entirely around the fact that monsters can fire projectiles (there are no hitscanners in the map) through decorations. Otherwise, they're literally harmless. Even more than that, the infinite actor height also plays a key role in controlling the spread of the Cacodemons, Pain Elementals, and Lost Souls to certain sections of the level.

 

Everything I've just mentioned is thoroughly non-functional in the map in GZDoom's default settings. In fact, it's even a fair bit worse due to an unrelated GZDoom-ism that severely impacts flying monster behavior, something that lacks a compatibility option at the moment (but it's known and being discussed, as you can see).

 

On 3/3/2019 at 4:07 AM, Jimmy said:

I think it may just be that it's been 25 freaking years and his memory on the whole thing is a little wonky.

 

(That said, Carmack's probably wouldn't be.) 

As a contrast to Romero's recollections, Carmack has personally called out source port authors on their introduction of bugs. Romero might have made us his collective bitch, but Carmack will ruthlessly correct your code without a moment's mercy! (Also, it's highly amusing that Bethesda has unlisted this video featuring Carmack.)

[Hellbent]

Not to derail the thread, but it was fun listening to Carmack while he was bumbling around in Wolf3D. I like this part where he talks about what the quintessential moments in Wolf3D and Doom are for him and then goes on to talk about the good ol' days of rapid game development: "there's so much waste that is endemic in development".

 

[Daemon Doomer]

N/A

Edited March 17, 2023 by Daemon Doomer

[Sparktimus]

19 hours ago, Nevander said:

I can't believe you people. Who cares what Romero thinks or believes is intended old school behavior, just play the maps however you please when they release. If they don't play well with infinite height on, well then that's just too bad. You'll just have to deal with it. Turn it off and just play the game.

 

Old school rules don't apply anymore, at least not when we are talking about PWADs. You can't expect a modern PWAD to always adhere to vanilla design etiquette. I don't care who the author is.

 

Tell that to people who don't primarily play GZDoom. So many things are changed in that engine that the minor intricacies that make up Doom's meta no longer apply. That's fine if you are building something for UDMF or some such, but in any other format, stuff like that absolutely does matter. Try tysoning a map in GZDoom and then try doing it in Chocolate. You will begin to notice some big differences that most people probably don't even think about. Hitboxes are much more forgiving and it's way easier to just dominate a map if you have the 'zerk. That's just scratching the surface, too.

As far as infinite height, that too does matter. A lot of the stock maps and some maps that are even made today are built with those principles firmly in mind. Simply turning it off could break a lot of areas and cause some unintentional behavior within the map. May even allow you to sequence break in some cases and get to places you shouldn't be able to. Maybe it doesn't matter to Romero, but it does matter to a lot of other people, so I wouldn't call any of this "petty".

Edited March 5, 2019 by Sparktimus

[Linguica]

I have no doubt that Sigil will play perfectly fine using normal vanilla gameplay / demo recording ports.

[Nevander]

3 hours ago, Sparktimus said:

Tell that to people who don't primarily play GZDoom.

That's when they need to drop the "vanilla/boom is superior" attitude and just use GZDoom. Or keep complaining if that makes them feel better.

 

It's a simple fact that when you have ports that change behavior, people will use them and make maps for it that break the vanilla rules, even if they know what the original behavior is. That's when it's time to just use that port to play it and move on with your life.

[Sparktimus]

14 minutes ago, Nevander said:

That's when they need to drop the "vanilla/boom is superior" attitude and just use GZDoom. Or keep complaining if that makes them feel better.

 

It's a simple fact that when you have ports that change behavior, people will use them and make maps for it that break the vanilla rules, even if they know what the original behavior is. That's when it's time to just use that port to play it and move on with your life.

 

I should be more clear. I'm not saying that people should turn their nose up at anything that requires GZDoom. Personally think port warfare is entirely unhelpful to the community. I'm just pointing out that there ARE thing to consider when going from port to port, such as infinite height and all that stuff. I'm sure the average joe who plays Doom doesn't really care about that, but there are people who do and have valid concerns about it.

[Bauul]

Let's not turn this into yet another GZDoom vs. PRBoom+ debate, please? No-one is going to say anything that someone else hasn't already said a dozen times over.

 

On the Sigil topic, I do find it interesting how we can't help but hang onto every word Romero says, although I suspect he doesn't really realize how specifically people interpret him. Like when he said he's making an unofficial fifth episode, many people took that to mean he's literally creating a fifth episode slot, when in reality he could just be replacing Episode 1 like any other PWAD would do.

[XLightningStormL]

At the end of the day, I don't think really any of this port warfare matters, we should all have our cake and eat it, we don't need to start pointless arguments about "x is better because original vision" or "y is better because better features"

You want a classic Doom experience? Play Chocolate Doom
Want an expanded Doom experience, but with better compatibility, and the ability to play modern wads? Go Crispy
Want to play it with gameplay mods, with extended features, jumping, and crouching? Go GZDoom
Etcetera...

If you want a certain experience, look for whichever port best fits your taste. I prefer GZDoom, but I'm not gonna convert you to it, because "muh opinion is better! REEEEE!"
Taste and ports, are both subjective.

Now please have something on topic to SIGIL instead of random ree-ing that should go in another thread.

[Budoka]

Better features ? Well no, just more features. They aren't necessarily better, which is the whole source of the contention. For those who don't know what I'm talking about, Extra Credit's video "Depth VS Complexity" covers this little fallacy quite well. @Linguica : what is this confidence of yours based on exactly ? As far as I'm aware, Zdoom-exlusive WADs don't do too well as far as establishing workable demo standards goes.

[chowbar]

1 hour ago, Budoka said:

As far as I'm aware, Zdoom-exlusive WADs don't do too well as far as establishing workable demo standards goes.

 

If I recall from his SIGIL streams, Romero said that it would be limit removing only. I’m pretty sure it’s not ZDoom exclusive. 

[Kira]

4 hours ago, Nevander said:

That's when they need to drop the "vanilla/boom is superior" attitude and just use GZDoom. Or keep complaining if that makes them feel better.

 

It's a simple fact that when you have ports that change behavior, people will use them and make maps for it that break the vanilla rules, even if they know what the original behavior is. That's when it's time to just use that port to play it and move on with your life.

The problem is that someone who didn't follow this thread closely would assume "limit removing" would work fine on a vanilla close sourceport and then get to clunky situations that weren't tested properly. Hence why it's at the very least good that an author mentions what they tested their wad with in the txt. Unless I'm mistaken Romero is aware of idgames etiquette, said he was going to test with other sourceports, and he should have some extra time now. So I'm not that worried about the matter though.

 

On 3/4/2019 at 8:10 AM, ReaperAA said:

 

Shouldn't it be possible to create a patch (or a alternate version of the wad) that can change the map slots from E5 to other episode slots (like for e.g E4). Apology in advance if I sound like a noob incase if its not possible.

Assuming PrBoom+ and co don't get a parameter to handle this properly (like NRFL with -nerve), that's a good solution to allow demo recording. If it's authorized by Romero, someone could make a "fork" with the maps placed elsewhere (and hopefully the secret exit compatible with one of the 4 existing episodes).