What are the differences between id tech 1 and the build engine?

[Hisymak]

One more thing to mention - I always felt that Doom has much more consistent and reliable splash damage spread calculation, than Duke.

In Duke Nukem, I sometimes throw a pipe bomb and launch it, it explodes just a centimeter next to a monster, but that monster gets barely damaged. I feel like it has to do with explosion damage spread between sectors, which cannot be just coordinate and sight calculation-based like in Doom, but needs to take into account the overlapping sectors and that transitions between two sectors are portals.

[Graf Zahl]

Duke's radius damage function is very, very broken. This is not a Build problem, though. Just a piece of bad code from a sub-par programmer. If it really was needed it could be rewritten to be just as good as Doom's.

 

I think many of the Build games' problems came from getting poor advice from Ken Silverman who often used ill-fitting shortcuts to save processing time - even in places where the side effects were far worse than acceptable.

 

[Gibbon]

And let's not forget a fundamental thing.  Apart from Ken giving sometimes, not very good advice, the programmers had zero access to the BUILD source code.  All they had was the header file and object files to link against.  Most of their advice came from the exstensive notes in the header about how to use it.

 

This is very different to how DOOM was done, and likely, since it was just gameplay programming that their programmers were not exactly the best of the best.  Looking at Duke's original code release, there are so many hacks and disgusting workarounds that I am amazed it even worked at all!

[ChopBlock223]

On 4/28/2022 at 1:18 PM, Gibbon said:

Well a few things:

 

1. Slopes

2. Destructible environments (well scripted level explosions to deform walls etc..)

3. Interactive objects

4. Breakable things (windows, objects, grates)

There's no reason you can't do these. 3 and 4 was done by Strife and Hexen. I think also Mars 3D did 1.

 

Quote

In general, it was just a superior engine

There's a lot of subjectivity to that, swinging doors in Build obliterating players is common. Carmack is more programmer than gamer so he didn't see why Duke Nukem 3D was so fabulous, but he was also totally right that it was held together by chewed bubble gum.

 

Quote

that allowed a hell of a lot more creativity and design to happen. 

In some ways, sure, and people made some truly fantastic games with it, but it's not like you couldn't devise a lot of these things by just adding them onto iDTech.

Build added a lot of features, but it wasn't exactly easy to work with, and Ken Silverman wasn't very good tech support when Build was troublesome, as can be attested by that old leaked e-mail from Blood's development.

 

Quote

Though it isn't as easily modded and the tools used are pretty ancient today.  Nothing like Ultimate Doom Builder, Slade and Deutex for BUILD.

True, the tools are to a large degree antiquated pieces of shit. There's the first person 3D mode in that Mapster program, and Doom didn't have that with any editor until Doom Builder, but it seems the tools haven't developed much to speak of in all this time.

Edited April 29, 2022 by ChopBlock223

[Ludi]

22 hours ago, Redneckerz said:

In terms of Philosophy:

• Doom Engine is Plato
• Build Engine is Friedrich Nietzsche or Voltaire
• Quake Engine is Bertrand Russell

Still uses Doom rendering so yes.

All of JVal's DelphiDoom based ports of games (GLSpeed, RAD-X) are still IDTech1 by heart aswell.

 

@Dubium please vibe check this

[Dubium]

1 hour ago, Sr_Ludicolo said:

 

@Dubium please vibe check this

Eh? I don't know almost anything about the engines lmao. But I assume what Redneckerz meant is-- Doom Engine is more ancient like Plato (whose philosophy was still basic), while Build Engine is more sophisticated like Nietzsche/Voltaire, while Quake Engine is even more sophisticated like Russell.