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

difference between zdoom and gzdoom?

Recommended Posts

What is the difference between zdoom and gzdoom? i never really understood...

is it because gzdoom is open gl? and zdoom is software? or is zdoom opengl as well?

i dont even know lol im thinking thats the case cause of the ''g''

Share this post


Link to post
  • ZDoom was originally by Randy Heit till 2016, when Graf took over, making GZ the defacto successor.
  • GZ adds a OpenGL renderer and several visual improvements.

DoomWiki:

There you go @DoomerNL.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Redneckerz said:
  • ZDoom was originally by Randy Heit till 2016, when Graf took over, making GZ the defacto successor.
  • GZ adds a OpenGL renderer and several visual improvements.

DoomWiki:

There you go @DoomerNL.

thanks i guess i could of just googled or went to wiki lol but yeah thx makes sense a buddy of mine likes zdoom over gzdoom not sure why since zdoom is software only then prboom is too and people love it hmm

Share this post


Link to post

The main fact is that GZDoom is still regularly updated but ZDoom has been dead for about 4 years.

 

If your friend likes ZDoom over GZDoom, maybe show him GZDoom but with texture filtering turned off?

 

ZDoom is a relic at this point, unless someoe wants to play "sort of new" wads on an old rig, there's no point. Even then, there are old-hardware-compatible builds of GZDoom from only about 6 months ago, so they're still far more up to date than the final build of ZDoom.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DoomerNL said:

thanks i guess i could of just googled or went to wiki lol

Seems you decided otherwise.

1 hour ago, DoomerNL said:

but yeah thx makes sense a buddy of mine likes zdoom over gzdoom not sure why since zdoom is software only then prboom is too and people love it hmm

  • ZDoom is discontinued, the last version being 2.8.1 from 2016. LZDoom currently keeps the codebase up to date without providing all the visual fluff of GZ.
  • PrBoom+ is indeed software, but targets a different audience altogether, being noted for its qualities as a testing port and its the main port used in the demorunning sub-community. Several utilties from said community use the engine as a basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Doomkid said:

ZDoom is a relic at this point, unless someoe wants to play "sort of new" wads on an old rig, there's no point. Even then, there are old-hardware-compatible builds of GZDoom from only about 6 months ago, so they're still far more up to date than the final build of ZDoom.

 

Zdoom 2.8.1 has also become the only version or port in the zdoom family of ports that is at all sane to speedrun or make demos with due to its demo support finally being stable from being discontinued, so maybe there are some reasons to still use zdoom over gzdoom ;p

Share this post


Link to post

ZDoom 2.8.1 is dead? Damn, and here's me still playing and making maps for it.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Doomkid said:

The main fact is that GZDoom is still regularly updated but ZDoom has been dead for about 4 years.

 

If your friend likes ZDoom over GZDoom, maybe show him GZDoom but with texture filtering turned off?

 

ZDoom is a relic at this point, unless someoe wants to play "sort of new" wads on an old rig, there's no point. Even then, there are old-hardware-compatible builds of GZDoom from only about 6 months ago, so they're still far more up to date than the final build of ZDoom.

ZDoom is dead? I use it all the time to make WADS in Doom Builder 2! Since when was it dead? :c

Share this post


Link to post

ZDoom is only "dead" in the sense it isn't being updated any more.  Doesn't mean you shouldn't map for it - as others have pointed out it's finally a version of ZDoom you can be confident you can record demos for.

 

One of the appeals of the ZDoom family of ports is continuous introduction of new and exciting features, which is why some people feel ZDoom has been "left behind" GZDoom at this point.  But personally I think it solves a new niche now: there aren't really any other advanced, fixed source ports that support demos and run on basic hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, DoomerNL said:

thanks i guess i could of just googled or went to wiki lol but yeah thx makes sense a buddy of mine likes zdoom over gzdoom not sure why since zdoom is software only then prboom is too and people love it hmm

 

If it's software rendering you want, you're not *just* limited to ZDoom (unless the mod demands it).

 

There are literally dozens of different ways to play Doom nowadays, but I would keep in mind that since ZDoom is not being updated anymore, most of its modders and creators have switched to GZDoom.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Fonze said:

 

Zdoom 2.8.1 has also become the only version or port in the zdoom family of ports that is at all sane to speedrun or make demos with due to its demo support finally being stable from being discontinued, so maybe there are some reasons to still use zdoom over gzdoom ;p

That's an interesting highlight, and what @Bauul says - ZDoom 2.8.1 could be an ideal starting point for demo coders and runners. ZDoom has been used in that community for some time already as you know.

Reason being that its now a fixed platform of some sorts.

This could mean something significant for the more obvious Doom cases but also others:

  • Users that now rely on PrBoom+ or use a custom made variant of it should now have an additional tool to study upon. Perhaps a merger of the best bits of PrBoom and ZDoom 2.8.1 could be considered - PrZDoom, anyone? ;)
  • Another user case might be the Heretic running community, by @kraflab, @PVS and so on. Because ZDoom 2.8.1 has Heretic support, it could be used in this manner.

Surprisingly the idea of seeing ZDoom in this capacity is an exciting thing. Finding another use for the discontinued port is promising prospect, and i am eager to see if people will take up on it. Perhaps they are not yet aware of ZDoom's full feature set that way, or even the sheer fact its discontinued and the last version is slowly becoming a standard?

Who knows, but i can't wait to see what people do with this. Custom demo-focused ports of ZDoom 2.8.1 when? ;)

Share this post


Link to post

I would use the term "final" rather than dead! 😄

 

For speedruns on wads requiring zdoom+ we recommend indeed to use this final zdoom version instead of gzdoom / etc (when possible). For heretic, crispy heretic is quite good, but heretic wads often require or are intended for the zdoom environment, so it gets use there as well. I've thought about forking zdoom and adding speedrun features but the audience for that is extremely limited hehe.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

Another user case might be the Heretic running community, by @kraflab, @PVS and so on. Because ZDoom 2.8.1 has Heretic support, it could be used in this manner.

 

This is a nice thought, but I honestly dont see zdoom becoming a standard for *general* heretic runs until it can 1: at least maintain demo compatibility with other ports and 2: present a level playing field for runners among other ports. A large part of me hates to say that because port choices for heretic speedruns/demos (and even map formats) are abysmal and it would be so convenient to be able to use like a zdoom for it, but it would take so many code rollbacks that one would prolly be better off forking one of the existing demo compatible ports and adding new age stuff to it. It will, however, see a lot of use for demo stuffs with new sets that want something more than vanilla for heretic (of which the port options are scarce) like The Wayfarer, which cannot run in ports that dont support zdoom, but again that basically is only talking about vanilla, choco, and crispy :/

 

*edit*

Kraf brings up a good point I forgot to mention in that zdoom lacks speedrunning features, and more importantly to at least my use, demo playback features, which makes watching a zdoom demo (especially a long one) frustrating and time-consuming. 

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, kraflab said:

I would use the term "final" rather than dead! 😄

 

For speedruns on wads requiring zdoom+ we recommend indeed to use this final zdoom version instead of gzdoom / etc (when possible). For heretic, crispy heretic is quite good, but heretic wads often require or are intended for the zdoom environment, so it gets use there as well. I've thought about forking zdoom and adding speedrun features but the audience for that is extremely limited hehe.

Build it, and they will come? Since ZDoom provides a lot of support for other titles beyond Doom and Heretic, it could be that players will start running for lesser known IWADS (Harmony, for instance, or Action Doom 2.)

These standalones were made with older versions of ZDoom (And originally had their own ZDoom based executable, which was just a stock ZDoom build with a custom icon, mind you) so 2.8.1 should provide perfect support for these in the first place.

Other motivations to do so are given by yourself: Certain new-gen Heretic wads that rely on ZDoom features (Such as Fonze's aforementioned Wayfarer) would cover the grunt aswell. Crispy ZDoom could be a thing, i feel ;)

14 hours ago, Fonze said:

 

This is a nice thought, but I honestly dont see zdoom becoming a standard for *general* heretic runs until it can 1: at least maintain demo compatibility with other ports and 2: present a level playing field for runners among other ports. A large part of me hates to say that because port choices for heretic speedruns/demos (and even map formats) are abysmal and it would be so convenient to be able to use like a zdoom for it, but it would take so many code rollbacks that one would prolly be better off forking one of the existing demo compatible ports and adding new age stuff to it.

Is this so? Because there are quite a few options, i feel:

  • Crispy Heretic
  • CHeretic
  • SHeretic (Smart Heretic)
  • jHeretic 0.93.4 SE
  • Heretic 1.1a
  • wHeretic (Well, very limited, really. Its just that it is used.)

Its actually quite a lot, if ask me. Atleast 3 of these are built with a focus on demo recording.

 

14 hours ago, Fonze said:

*edit*

Kraf brings up a good point I forgot to mention in that zdoom lacks speedrunning features, and more importantly to at least my use, demo playback features, which makes watching a zdoom demo (especially a long one) frustrating and time-consuming. 

And how about leveling only the demo specific features from PrBoom+ over? I am sure i am thinking about this in an overly simplistic manner, what with PrBoom+'s complevels and all, but i do reckon that there are things that can be levelled over or adapted.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

Is this so? Because there are quite a few options, i feel:

  • Crispy Heretic
  • CHeretic
  • SHeretic (Smart Heretic)
  • jHeretic 0.93.4 SE
  • Heretic 1.1a
  • wHeretic (Well, very limited, really. Its just that it is used.)

 

That list is disingenuous; a good portion of those are dos ports and pvs's version of jheretic only runs up to windows xp. What among this list runs on windows 10 without using an emulator like dosbox besides crispy?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Fonze said:

 

That list is disingenuous;

That's quite a loaded term i feel is errornously used here: Being disingenuous would imply that i deliberately wanted to set you or anyone else on the wrong footing.

You did reference that current port choices are abysmal, i didn't agree with that, so i listed a few.

But i do agree with you that the majority of the mention ports are decidely conservative in OS support.

1 hour ago, Fonze said:

What among this list runs on windows 10 without using an emulator like dosbox besides crispy?

None, besides Crispy.

Conversely, its also a good reason why you would want a demo-focused ZDoom 2.8.1 build as that does run on Windows 10 :P

Share this post


Link to post

For me the difference is that you can actually play a mod on zDoom, and on GZdoom you try it with 5 GZdoom versions, nothing works, and you give up :)

Share this post


Link to post

I always wondered if GZDoom stands for Graf Zahl Doom, or if the G has something to do with hardware rendering (OpenGL).

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, maxmanium said:

I always wondered if GZDoom stands for Graf Zahl Doom, or if the G has something to do with hardware rendering (OpenGL).

Neither:

  • "Graf Zahl" is the German name of the Count von Count character from Sesame Street.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, D00mJedi said:

For me the difference is that you can actually play a mod on zDoom, and on GZdoom you try it with 5 GZdoom versions, nothing works, and you give up :)

 

I don't know. GZdoom works fine for most mods. In fact I am right now playing a 9-year old mod on GZdoom and it works fine for me.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

Neither:

  • "Graf Zahl" is the German name of the Count von Count character from Sesame Street.

 

That's not really relevant to what I said. I'm implying that it would be called Graf Zahl Doom because he's the lead dev of it.

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, maxmanium said:

 

That's not really relevant to what I said. I'm implying that it would be called Graf Zahl Doom because he's the lead dev of it.

Except it is relevant, due to your own phrasing:

 

3 hours ago, maxmanium said:

I always wondered if GZDoom stands for Graf Zahl Doom, or if the G has something to do with hardware rendering (OpenGL).

You are wondering what it stands for and list two options. I respond with what GZ actively stands for, primarily  because more users have wondered the same thing as you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

That's quite a loaded term i feel is errornously used here: Being disingenuous would imply that i deliberately wanted to set you or anyone else on the wrong footing.

You did reference that current port choices are abysmal, i didn't agree with that, so i listed a few.

 

But i do agree with you that the majority of the mention ports are decidely conservative in OS support.

 

Perhaps that's merely me giving you too much credit for knowledge but otherwise I feel it was the correct word for your reply as you chose to insert your theoretical opinion like it was factual and accurate in a real setting. I stated that port choices for demo stuff are abysmal and you listed off theoretical ports as if they were viable options. One of the ports you listed as a viable option for speedruns/demo stuff (and map formats) has a reported fps of 20, runs only in dos, and you listed it as something to record serious runs on; let that sink in. Part of me wants to ask if you are trolling but I was trying to be more civil.

 

Of course, I'm not serious into the speedrunning scene; I'll try to practice a run here and there but I've yet to make any notable runs happen, so I could be totally incorrect about any number of things and thus am always trying to pay attention and learn stuff, but to list those ports as viable options only shows me that you either are being disingenuous or that you just don't know what you're talking about and chose to chime in on something regardless to push your want to see zdoom used for this. And dont get me wrong, I would love to see a speedrun/demo-oriented zdoom come out and get some use too, but it's important to be realistic about the current situation in order to discuss what a demo-oriented zdoom would even bring to the table. Not that it matters in reality because it's likely something we'll never see, but even for the sake of discussion at least we can try to be accurate.

 

Quote

None, besides Crispy.

 

Which is what I was getting at: for modern OS, windows users there are choco, crispy, and emulation through dosbox, whether through some dos port or the vanilla executable. That's abysmal.

 

Russian Heretic may be something interesting to look into in the future though, especially if it can produce vanilla-compatible demos.

 

Quote

Conversely, its also a good reason why you would want a demo-focused ZDoom 2.8.1 build as that does run on Windows 10 :P

 

Yes, if it presents a level playing field with other ports, is compatible with their demos, and can produce demos which play back in them. Ironically, none of these things have ever been part of zdoom's MO, but if it ever were to come to pass I would love it.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Perhaps that's merely me giving you too much credit for knowledge but otherwise I feel it was the correct word for your reply as you chose to insert your theoretical opinion like it was factual and accurate in a real setting.

I mean the ports listed are used in demorunning, so that's factual.

 

I guess i got hung up on the word abysmal which to in my ears can have more meanings than "being unfit", but also "lacking options".

 

I never said the listed options were viable, just that they are options. :) Options that have been used.

4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

One of the ports you listed as a viable option for speedruns/demo stuff (and map formats) has a reported fps of 20, runs only in dos, and you listed it as something to record serious runs on; let that sink in.

JHeretic SE is used by its author to play in 1280x720 on a Pentium 3 if i recall, achieving similar performance. Not sure if demoruns are also recorded with that framerate but i am just saying.

 

4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Part of me wants to ask if you are trolling but I was trying to be more civil.

Trolling would not look so clumsy and innocent don't you think. :P

4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Of course, I'm not serious into the speedrunning scene; I'll try to practice a run here and there but I've yet to make any notable runs happen, so I could be totally incorrect about any number of things and thus am always trying to pay attention and learn stuff, but to list those ports as viable options only shows me that you either are being disingenuous or that you just don't know what you're talking about

Neither. Please do not assume bad faith is in play here. You have to wonder what i would gain from doing so.

 

As for ZDoom: im not making a wishlist, just stating logicsl pluses and minuses.

 

4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Not that it matters in reality because it's likely something we'll never see, but even for the sake of discussion at least we can try to be accurate.

Agreed. Sorry for attempting to encourage Kraflab with this. Obviously this is not appreciated.

4 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Ironically, none of these things have ever been part of zdoom's MO, but if it ever were to come to pass I would love it.

Well, that's what the encouragement was for. :/

 

Thanks for your response.

Share this post


Link to post

 

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

I mean the ports listed are used in demorunning, so that's factual.

 

I guess i got hung up on the word abysmal which to in my ears can have more meanings than "being unfit", but also "lacking options".

 

"Factual" from a very relativistic point of view which has not been *accurate* for many years now. Those ports (other than crispy) have a player-base of just the person who made each of them, and I bet a non-zero number of those ports' creators don't even play heretic anymore. One of those ports (SHeretic) was just a test and isnt available for download anywhere according to the info presented by your inquiries to pvs and kraf in that thread. Disingenuous and not realistically factual information; why would you even list it. I hate to mention it as an example to this, but that is also akin to listing kbdoom as one of these, even though it's not available publicly anywhere or finished/shareable to the author's expectations.

 

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

I never said the listed options were viable, just that they are options. :) Options that have been used.

 

... But that's purposefully and knowingly presenting the reality to be different than what it is and logically it makes no sense. How can something be an option if it isn't viable? That's like saying it's an option to buy an old PC or OS just for heretic speedrunning in a native dos environment. It's almost as nonsensical as saying that it's an option to just not pay taxes, like sure you'll go to jail but "radical freedom" and all that I guess...? Like you could float across the pacific ocean on a raft to get to your hawaiian vacation spot; it's not viable but it's an option! You could not give your kids vaccines just in case they cause autism; it's not viable or relevant but it's an option! Do you see the ridiculousness of this logic?

 

If your attempt was to merely state that historically there have been other ports then I mean yeah that's cool and all but your phrasing suggested otherwise:

 

16 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

Is this so? Because there are quite a few options, i feel:

  • Crispy Heretic
  • CHeretic
  • SHeretic (Smart Heretic)
  • jHeretic 0.93.4 SE
  • Heretic 1.1a
  • wHeretic (Well, very limited, really. Its just that it is used.)

Its actually quite a lot, if ask me. Atleast 3 of these are built with a focus on demo recording.

 

This is nice to know from a historical perspective but due to the phrasing comes across as being directly contrarian and in all reality you're effectively lying, even if that isn't your intent, because most of these are not available to the vast majority of users. And that's not "quite a lot" if you ask me, especially when you consider their lack of popularity, notability, use, presence, and access to obtain.

 

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

Trolling would not look so clumsy and innocent don't you think. :P

 

Not necessarily; it could just mean that you're not well practiced at trolling or are attempting clumsily at sealioning ;p

 

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

Neither. Please do not assume bad faith is in play here. You have to wonder what i would gain from doing so.

 

Then why are you attempting to be contrarian towards my point with an unrealistic answer?

 

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

Agreed. Sorry for attempting to encourage Kraflab with this. Obviously this is not appreciated.

 

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

Well, that's what the encouragement was for. :/

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Awesome. Wow. *slow clap* Thanks for clarifying that you're trolling. Why would I not appreciate that? Are you serious? How many blunts do I need to hit to forget the forest for the trees and see where you're coming from? I would thank you for your response, but I've been around long enough to know basic social skills and can see that you are not genuine in that, same as your behavior to another member in another very recent thread, so I'm not gonna waste my time playing that game with you. You can't feign kindness on the back of such low quality bait. I'm disappointed in you. I do appreciate your informative and relevant posts elsewhere but this is not at all helpful to the overall picture of getting new people in and making it an attractive option.

 

I feel bad typing all this but at the same time saying stuff like: "sorry for attempting to encourage Kraflab with this. Obviously this is not appreciated," is some bullshit of the highest caliber. Kraf is more than familiar with the demo/speedrunning scene and active members (which means not me) to know if he wants to do it beyond the encouragement of somebody who won't use it and will instead merely look at it as a nice museum piece amongst that... list you posted. From my limited knowledge seeing a friend toil over his own port and having been in the community to see a couple new ports be released, making a demo compatible port and trying to make it at all relevant sucks and is a massive undertaking; the work to make it reliable and even trusted among community members is a daunting task that will eat up many hours of one's life for a hobby who's resulting product's use by others is realistically a risk at best. A decent example of this can be mocha doom: running in java is cool and useful; you'd think it would have become something more than the museum piece it is now.

 

I'm all for encouraging new source port dev and I'm not at all trying to discourage it here, (I would love to be able to use such a port and would probably design maps for it, in addition to using it to play and record demos) but again discussion should at least try to be realistic. My point by that segment you quoted was to say that 1: with it being such a massive undertaking and for heretic instead of doom, I dont have faith that it's something somebody will pour their time into, which is sad, but likely the case, and 2: neither of us are doing anything to help or create a new port so it's not like our opinions do much more than take up space and distract from meaningful discussion from people who may be more relevant to the topic at hand. Also we're way off-topic at this point. So not trying to be rude with all this but yeah that kinda had to be said.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Fonze said:

One of those ports (SHeretic) was just a test and isnt available for download anywhere according to the info presented by your inquiries to pvs and kraf in that thread.

It was attached by the author, a few posts below your linked post.

Ill address you further in private.

In general, sorry for bringing it up in the first place. I just wanted to be helpful.

Share this post


Link to post

@Fonze @Redneckerz

Wow, I can't believe you two derailed this thread to this personal food fight of yours, but thanks to you I now know what "sealioning" is and I started reading that very entertaining "Wondermark" comic, so thanks!

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
×