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

What engine should I target?

Recommended Posts

What does the community appreciate more?

 

Vanilla, limit removing, or zdoom compatible?

 

Personally I do like the appeal of aiming for something vanilla or maybe limit removing compatible.

 

However, there is a certain appeal to using an engine where you can rotate or translate flats.

 

Is a certain engine target more popular or more appreciated?

Share this post


Link to post

If you personal goal is to target the largest playerbase, build for Boom or MBF (using the PrBoom+ engine on either complevel 9 for boom or 11 for MBF).

 

Most successful megawads in the last 2 decades target these ports.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I personally would like to see more Eternity Engine maps, because it's damn underrated port and format. You can't go wrong with limit removing or boom format maps, if you care about demos and huge compatibility with various ports. Zdoom family ports are also good, but they will have a bit less attention(Gzdoom for example will only play demos on that specific version, only last version of zdoom is good for demos), but it's being worked on with projects like Elementalism or Refracted Reality. 

Share this post


Link to post

k8vavoom, of course. this is simply the best sourceport out there, and its author is one of the best persons i ever talked with. he looks great in a mirror.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd say go for what you would play it on, I prefer to use GZDoom so I typically map in UDMF format for all the goodies like dynamic lighting and whatnot.
So if you've got a preference for vanilla, map for vanilla.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, wolfmcbeard said:

I'd say go for what you would play it on

 

I was gonna say the same, but I do want to add that making the occasional map for some other port - one you're not as familiar with - is a good idea too. It's certainly a learning process if nothing else. As someone who's been mapping almost exclusively for ZDoom-based ports since 2011, I decided to challenge myself by trying to make a Boom map at one point. Sadly, that map was scrapped in favor of a GZDoom map.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, ketmar said:

k8vavoom, of course. this is simply the best sourceport out there, and its author is one of the best persons i ever talked with. he looks great in a mirror.

Nice job in doing shameless self-promotion of your port and yourself, narcissistic asshole! Go back to JUST working on your own port before you talk more dumb shit. This community doesn't need more of it. If your port is good (not judging how good it is as I have not personally tried it), it will get it's following, and you won't need to defend it either, same with your internet persona here. Step it up homeboy.

 

Anyway to answer OP's question, you can either go Boom or UDMF, I recommend UDMF because it's not that hard to use and it allows for a lot of creative things that Boom/Vanilla would'nt allow. Unless you like the basics, then I recommend sticking with Boom, vanilla mapping even with chocorenderlimits can drive people insane lol *points at TNT2/BTSX*

Share this post


Link to post

Thinks about what kind of map appeals to you to create. Do you want to make something close to the feel of the original game? Go vanilla or limit removing. Feel more like having multi action switches, more complex architecture and a variety of custom assets? Boom would fit the bill. 3D structures, dynamic lighting, scripting limited only by your imagination (and coding knowledge), no palette limitations and the QOL that flat/texture rotation/panning/offsetting brings? UDMF is for you.

TBH it's not a bad idea to have a play in each format. They all have a relatively steep learning curve and each have quirks and foibles (I recently made my first vanilla map in 15 years). All are fun to use

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Alter said:

Nice job

thank you! i am always doing a great job, that is the nature of mine. damn, i'm so good!

 

2op: anyway, vanilla is usually too restricting. i'd say that boom-compatible is a de-facto standard, and something that is supported by most sourceports.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I'd say limit removing. Strict vanilla can be a pain if you're starting because of the limits. With limit removing you can be free and keep it simple at the same time.

 

Edit: For some reason I thought you were starting with mapping and wanted advice for your first map. Nevermind.

Share this post


Link to post

Does k8vavoom have good documentation. Does it have any already available doombuilder configurations? I'd probably try to make a map for if it isn't difficult, just for the awareness.
Also, no mentions of eternity, sad. You should probably aim for Boom for the most compatibility.

Share this post


Link to post

@Kore eh, i was joking, you don't need to do anything special to map for vavoom. the only thing you'd better be aware is that dynamic lighting is doing proper shadows, so your lighting may not look like in other sourceports. otherwise it is more-or-less zdoom compatible (and i am constantly working on improving compatibility).

Share this post


Link to post

If you're a newish mapper, limit-removing. Boom can be a little overwhelming when you're starting out (or it was for me at least), but limit-removing teaches you the basics without all the weird quirks of vanilla.

 

If you're more experienced, Boom/MBF. Almost every port can play Boom maps, so you aren't really losing any potential players by going for Boom.

 

I wouldn't target more specialized stuff like Eternity and ZDoom unless they've got specific features you want to take advantage of.

Share this post


Link to post

Do you want to make a super huge and detailed map, with fine control over every aspect? Then you'll stick with UDMF, which limits you to a handful of engines.

 

Do you want scripting? That will probably stick you in a ZDoom family port.

 

Maximum compatability with most engines? Keep it Boom-compatible and everything short of Chocolate and/or Crispy should play it.

 

Plays on everything? Pure vanilla/Chocolate Doom limits, but of course, then you're quite restricted. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 4/22/2019 at 4:05 PM, Alter said:

Nice job in doing shameless self-promotion...

Pretty harsh for a joke...

 

@foul_owl In most cases, you can see the set of source ports as a hierarchy, whereas the more complex source ports offer a superset of features of other ports. For example, most every port will play a vanilla map. The next step up might be Boom maps, which are supported by many ports. At the other end of the spectrum, some map features only work in the most complex ports. Because of this, I recommend using the most-vanilla-like port that supports all of the features you want in your map, which might broaden the number of ports your map will work on.

 

But, in my opinion, design is first. Make your map using the features that you want. If you can get everything you want in a vanilla map, so be it. But, if not, that's ok too. Nowadays, you can build just about anything you want. And, while it's important to know the various limitations, you should be the one in charge of how your map plays, not the map format, and not the port. Build the map how you envision it, using the most conservative format that will get the job done.

 

There are some good responses in this thread that explain some of those limitations. Please check the Doom Wiki to help understand the limits and capabilities of each format. One idea is that you could release a "compatible" version and an "extended" version of your map, if you wanted to broaden play-ability, though this is, of course, more work.

 

Some people claim that using a restrictive format helps creativity, by placing bounds around the number of possibilities. Other mappers enjoy working with a wide-open palette of choices.

 

A final tip: Upgrading to a more-capable format is much easier than downgrading to a more restrictive format, because there can be data loss when downgrading. So, starting out vanilla, and upgrading as needed gives you a chance at wider support, and can avoid some ugly cleanup procedures you might face while downgrading.

Edited by kb1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Try targeting ZDoom-in-Hexen so you get quite a lot of power while still keeping compatibility with a bunch of engines (GZDoom, ZDoom, Zandronum, ZDaemon, Odamex, k8Vavoom and even Skulltag if you REALLY want)

 

UDMF can have even more crazy stuff (Want to have fun with portals and 3D floors? Go ahead!) althrough it does remove ZDaemon and Odamex as available ports, but IMO it's worth the tradeoff if you want more verticality.

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, foul_owl said:

What does the community appreciate more?

 

Vanilla, limit removing, or zdoom compatible?

 

Personally I do like the appeal of aiming for something vanilla or maybe limit removing compatible.

 

However, there is a certain appeal to using an engine where you can rotate or translate flats.

 

Is a certain engine target more popular or more appreciated?

 

I think you kind of answered your own question there. Just map for whatever you enjoy, it'll produce the most inspired results. Out of the two you have expressed interest in, limit removing is certainly far, far more forgiving and easy to work with as you don't have to be as careful with the scope of the spaces you are creating. The power to rotate flats and stuff is nice i guess, but certainly easy enough to work around without overly compromising visuals and so on.

 

A lot of the biggest community megawad releases in recent years are in boom format, incidentally. Think the likes of Sunlust, Ancient Aliens, Eviternity. I personally think this is because boom format allows you a myriad of options and trickery while still retaining a lot of base feeling that resonates with the original vanilla style Doom gameplay. That said, mapping format does not determine quality, and people will always appreciate quality regardless of map format.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, -TDRR- said:

but IMO it's worth the tradeoff if you want more verticality

actually, 3d floors and slopes are possible in zdoom-in-hexen. slopes are done by placing special things inside sectors, and 3d floors are done by sector tags and line specials. yet UDMF is required to use zdoom-specific things -- like DooM64-style lighting, custom glowing flats, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Scotty said:

A lot of the biggest community megawad releases in recent years are in boom format, incidentally. Think the likes of Sunlust, Ancient Aliens, Eviternity.

@Scotty Just a little detail, Eviternity is in MBF format.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Ryath said:

If you're a newish mapper, limit-removing. Boom can be a little overwhelming when you're starting out (or it was for me at least), but limit-removing teaches you the basics without all the weird quirks of vanilla.

 

 

That really doesn't make sense and sounds like the implicit assumption that if you use an advanced engine it is a requirement to use all of its features.

Boom is not merely about conveyor belt scripting and deep water but also features a lot of convenience features like being able to use all 6 keys separately or just offering a lot more map actions, like doors and lifts with longer delays.

 

My general advice would be to use what you are comfortable with as a mapper.

For someone comfortable with close-to-vanilla mapping the advanced features of modern ports can indeed be overwhelming but on the other hand, for someone familiar with advanced stuff it can be a painful and frustrating experience to work in a more restrictive environment.

 

And both of these extremes will inevitably lead to an inferior end product if a mapper has to step out of their comfort zone.

In the end, if a mod is good it will be played and if a mod is bad, the players will make it very clear, regardless of target engine.

 

For a mapping beginner, I think Boom may be the best compromise. It has none of the annoying limitations of vanilla and since it doesn't offer too much in terms of advanced mapping it also inhibits the temptation to go overboard. Just steer clear of voodoo doll conveyor scripting unless you really know how this stuff works!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, -TDRR- said:

Try targeting ZDoom-in-Hexen so you get quite a lot of power while still keeping compatibility with a bunch of engines (GZDoom, ZDoom, Zandronum, ZDaemon, Odamex, k8Vavoom and even Skulltag if you REALLY want)

 

UDMF can have even more crazy stuff (Want to have fun with portals and 3D floors? Go ahead!) althrough it does remove ZDaemon and Odamex as available ports, but IMO it's worth the tradeoff if you want more verticality.

 

Actually, it's not quite that simple. ZDaemon or Odamex are both only compatible with ZDoom v1.23 (I'm assuming by this they mean v1.23 Beta 33), which predates the final version of ZDoom by some 14 years, and UDMF itself by 7 years. Naturally, quite a few additional features were added to the ZDiH format during this period.

 

Case in point, portals and 3D floors are quite possible in ZDiH (Knee Deep in ZDoom features plenty of the former), but were added after v1.23. Other ZDiH-compatible features not supported by these two ports include linked sectors, texture/flat interchangeability, enhanced polyobjects, and numerous additional and enhanced ACS functions.

 

Of course, you also have to consider all the non-map data lumps such as DECORATE, MAPINFO, TEXTURES, etc which a map author might want to make use of and that have been added/changed/enhanced since v1.23.

 

The last release of Skulltag is based on ZDoom v2.3.1 which predates the final ZDoom version by 7 years, so again there are quite a few missing additions & changes you'll need to consider.

 

Zandronum does actually support UDMF, however regardless of whether you go with this or ZDiH the current release is still about two years (AFAIK anyway) behind the final version of ZDoom so even then you'll need to be careful what features you make use of.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

That really doesn't make sense and sounds like the implicit assumption that if you use an advanced engine it is a requirement to use all of its features. Boom is not merely about conveyor belt scripting and deep water but also features a lot of convenience features like being able to use all 6 keys separately or just offering a lot more map actions, like doors and lifts with longer delays.

It wasn't any kind of assumption. Just an acknowledgement that advanced features can be, as you say, overwhelming.

 

Lifts are actually a perfect example of this. In Doom format there are 8 possible actions for a lift (all the combinations of switch/walkover, repeatable/non-repeatable, and fast/normal), and those extremely limited options can really quickly give a new mapper a feel for the core concepts they need for mapping. Boom throws 20- or 30-something at you right from the start, and that's before you start clicking around and find the generalized actions. As experienced mappers, we can look at these additional options, understand their usefulness, and zero in on exactly what we need immediately. For someone new to mapping, though, it can be a lot of noise that obscures the simpler lesson of how a linedef action functions.

 

Obviously it depends on the person, and probably in large part how that person learns. But I think people should know what their options are and that, for some, starting with Boom can be too much.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Andromeda said:

@Scotty Just a little detail, Eviternity is in MBF format.

 

There is no actual MBF mapping format as far as i am aware - i think Eviternity used MBF/cl11 for extra Dehacked options but all the maps are Boom format.

Share this post


Link to post

how about skulltag http://www.skulltag.com/ 

 

it works with most of the wads but not newer ones though but there is invasion wads those are the best wads out there

 

i would suggest getting skulltag 98c an i would suggest getting hi res items i think skulltag is the best sourceport to my option  

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, haruko haruhara said:

how about skulltag http://www.skulltag.com/ 

 

it works with most of the wads but not newer ones though but there is invasion wads those are the best wads out there

 

i would suggest getting skulltag 98c an i would suggest getting hi res items i think skulltag is the best sourceport to my option  

God, you love Skulltag, don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Skulltag is deprecated. How do these new guys find out about such an old port?Insert other media

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Kore said:

Skulltag is deprecated. How do these new guys find out about such an old port?Insert other media

Hey listen, I talk with Haruko on Discord a lot. I only use Skulltag incase a wad I want to play needs it. He loves Skulltag, almost as much as Zandronum for him. He rarely uses GZDoom, though.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, crazyflyingdonut said:

God, you love Skulltag, don't you?

yes i do thats when wads were good like invasion but sadly invasion is not a popular game mode an no one talks about it or make them ether 

Share this post


Link to post

I don't remember if the new things were hardcoded, but what's stopping you from using the old resources with zandronum? I don't think anyone's really gonna bother with making a map for a dead port.

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
×