Rant: Vanilla is too limited

[out_of_service]

5 minutes ago, Egg Boy said:

my brother in christ you choose the format

We always have a choice. ALWAYS.

[TheMagicMushroomMan]

2 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

So my point is = vanilla can't do almost anything, Zdoom or UDMF can do almost everything, but maybe it's too much as you might not even need like 90 % of features and people will expect certain today's standards from it.

I've yet to encounter one person that said "well, your map was pretty good, but it doesn't live up to ZDoom standards".

 

Besides that, this place isn't some hardcore vanilla-purist sanctuary. Far from it, as most people have no problem with GZ unless they have an old rig. I don't get why some people seem to think that Doomworld doesn't like ZDoom maps. Now, if you have some feature-heavy gameplay mod, I'll admit that you're better off posting on the ZDoom forums. But that's more due to the fact that most people are mainly here for the maps as opposed to gameplay mods. Many people perfer vanilla-style gameplay, but I think you are overestimating how many people care about source port compatibility. As long as you aren't posting Skulltag maps in 2022 (sorry Haruko) or making maps for new and experimental source ports, I think you'll find that the vast majority of people will have no problem playing your map in whatever port you develop for.

[Paf]

2 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

So you can use a modern Zdoom map format or maybe even UDMF, but it feels like an overkill to use these just because you want one or two simple functions.

 

Using Zdoom also means you will loose many players

 

Also also when you use Zdoom, you're like "why not to use other Zdoom features?"

uh.... UMAPINFO for PrBoom-plus UM or DSDA-Doom. There's a lot of ports that support this.

 

Also, if it's too limited for you then you can choose a different format then. 

[Lippeth]

3 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

And if you download a Zdoom map, play it and realize its content is mostly vanilla-like and Zdoom is used only for one small thing, you are like "Isn't the a little bit unnecessary? The author could just avoid this little thing and make it vanilla, or at least Boom, so it will work for far more ports, right?"

This was the most common criticism of my UDMF maps, even though they totally used 3D floors, zscript/decorate effects, a titlemap and ACS, but the style was a super throwback so a few people wondered why not make it Boom or vanilla compatible. But the main reason I stuck with UDMF for ZDoom was for more freedom with texture placement.

[Noiser]

You can do a lot of things on vanilla, but you have to think outside the box. If you want to make a Cyberdemon open the door, all you need to do is putting a Keendie action on him and tagging the door as 666.

Not everyone like to deal with limits though and that's fine. You should map on whatever format you feel more confortable. 
 

4 hours ago, IcarusOfDaggers said:

I'm just surprised people even want to stay in the past with an engine that is so well customizable, simple to learn, yet hard to master.

We are all here around a game made in 1993, but for some reason it's unnacceptable to mod on vanilla because we are staying in the past. Oh dear.

[magicsofa]

4 hours ago, TimeOfDeath666 said:

The fun part of vanilla mapping is figuring out ways to get your ideas to work in the limited format. For your example, one way would be to add the KeenDie action to the cyberdemon's death with dehacked and a door with tag 666 will open after all cybers have died.

That's one way to do it... but I think it would be even better to focus on making the cyberdemon effective without the need for a hard-locked door. Such as, instead of waiting until the very end to drop in the cybie, release him into an area where there's still lots to do and thus you will be crossing paths a lot, and fighting other monsters along the way. You don't have to be locked in a cage together... allow the player to escape into side rooms temporarily, so that they can listen to the footsteps patrolling behind the wall. Make it possible to run past but very risky. To me this is much more fun and suspenseful, opening up different strategy options for the player, and more immersive since you're not just railroaded into an arena battle.

Another tactic could be to literally use his massive girth to block the way. Make a long and twisting, but linear, path to the exit... when you get close to the end, cybie starts rolling down on you like a boulder, forcing the player to fight while retreating.

 

5 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

Using Zdoom also means you will loose many players, because the doom community seems to prefer vanilla megawads (you know, the vanilla purists) or at least they can forgive you the Boom format. Also also when you use Zdoom, you're like "why not to use other Zdoom features?" so you can add 3D floors and slopes and scripts and cutscenes with dialogues and NPCs and such... Of course, this is a little hyperbole from me, but yeah, when you say your megawad is Zdoom or UDMF format, community will have certain expectations from it and they might be surprised (maybe even disappointed) that your megawad is basically just vanilla and Zdoom is used only for certain small things here and there.

 

I disagree, I think there's actually a slight bias toward playing in modern ports because of convenience more than anything else. Many people just run GZ because it can handle the widest range of mod formats, and because we're all creatures of habit so if we get comfortable with a port, we'll tend to keep using it when possible.

There is the phenomenon of newbie mappers creating .wads that only work in GZDoom (or something else) but are using very few or none of its advanced features. In that case, from a critical standpoint, people are usually encouraged to switch to a simpler format in order to make the learning process easier and to broaden the compatibility of their maps.

[LadyMistDragon]

I agree 100 percent with the clickbait.

 

No, but I mostly agree with this. There are plenty of people who'd say the opposite. However, the limits are really the hardest and most annoying aspect to deal with. That's why Boom/Woof and Eternity are good middle grounds, the latter especially because of portals. I definitely think that if you want to make a city map that Doom's default resources just aren't adequate, not that it's impossible but when the only tree is dead, you might want to think of more options.

[Ludi]

I hate to be one of the "oh em gee why does this thread exist!?? >:(((((" people, but this thread is pointless. This is pure cringe

[Murdoch]

9 minutes ago, Sr_Ludicolo said:

I hate to be one of the "oh em gee why does this thread exist!?? >:(((((" people, but this thread is pointless. This is pure cringe

 

I disagree completely. I mean, how dare a group of maverick programmers not anticipate every single thing that people making maps for their game nearly 30 years later would want to do?! I mean seriously, did they not plan ahead at all? Total amateurs!

 

This post proudly bought to you by sarcasm.

[Shibainumaster]

/calladmin. Waiting for mods (and probably @Nine Inch Heels) to come and block the thread and tell the guy he's wrong because they're right.

[Ozcar]

"Vanilla is too limited". Water is water.

[CBM]

10 hours ago, magicsofa said:

There is the phenomenon of newbie mappers creating .wads that only work in GZDoom (or something else) but are using very few or none of its advanced features. In that case, from a critical standpoint, people are usually encouraged to switch to a simpler format in order to make the learning process easier and to broaden the compatibility of their maps.

In my opinion, I think that UDMF maps are fine as long as they use atleast one UDMF feature.

 

5 hours ago, LadyMistDragon said:

I agree 100 percent with the clickbait.

 

No, but I mostly agree with this. There are plenty of people who'd say the opposite. However, the limits are really the hardest and most annoying aspect to deal with. That's why Boom/Woof and Eternity are good middle grounds, the latter especially because of portals. I definitely think that if you want to make a city map that Doom's default resources just aren't adequate, not that it's impossible but when the only tree is dead, you might want to think of more options.

I think it is possible to make a city map using default resources that can play in the original dos doom2.exe that looks way better than the original doom city levels.

 

However... Adding custom resources like trees and/or custom textures to even dos doom would make the task easier... same with modern map formats.

 

But I'd also say making a city map is more fun in UDMF than in the original doom map format due to the added functionality.

Edited July 28, 2022 by CBM

[jazzmaster9]

There is a reason why i switched from Vanilla to Limit Removing for Rapidfire 3.

There came a point where every room i made resulted in either a visplane and seg overflow and i end up either dejectedly chopping up or simplifying rooms so that chocolate Doom wont shit itself.

Also the reason why I mostly just make GZDoom stuff now 

[Sneezy McGlassFace]

Constraints breed creativity. Have a limited pallet of possibilities, come up with clever solutions. Everything in game design is a compromise. 

You can say that compared to what your can do in unreal 5, doom is limited. Yes it is but that's not a bad thing. You can say that ROTT is limited, and it is. Your can still make some fun levels in it if you want to try. 

And moreover, if you can find a way to make something cool in very limited environment, you'll do a lot better with the limits removed. 

[Wavy]

You're right. In fact, it's why people have been making new source ports for the past 2-and-a-half decades. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Majin]

i've been using this format for a while now to limit myself & it's not too bad. many features in other formats can easily be replicated with work arounds or compromises. if i wanted to make the player kill an enemy to progress, i can simply place the enemy in a position where they must be killed to access a switch to progress or as another example,  z-level bridges can be made with floors/ lifts that lower & raise depending if the player is below or above. i can't deny that it's a huge inconvenience & not as flashy compared to modern formats, but i find it to be a great learning experience to work with the limitations.

 

in many ways modern engines are a crutch: it's cool & easy to attach a door trigger to a boss to make mandatory--but the true underlying lesson is that having this feature doesn't make your a better mapper, in fact i'd go as far to say that without it, you're forced to make the boss mandatory by constructing an environment to facilitate it--thus making you a better mapper in the long term. 

17 hours ago, 7Mahonin said:

If one won’t play something because of the port(s) it does or does not support that’s just a loss on them, nobody else really. 

wise words, arrogance is in & of itself, a punishment.

[Obsidian]

6 hours ago, Shibainumaster said:

/calladmin. Waiting for mods (and probably @Nine Inch Heels) to come and block the thread and tell the guy he's wrong because they're right.

 

*Pulls up a chair, sits down and stares at you*

[Shibainumaster]

20 minutes ago, Obsidian said:

 

*Pulls up a chair, sits down and stares at you*

Exactly, some people will start arguing and shit will go down. I just wanna spectate.

[Stupid Bunny]

I like working within the limits of vanilla's linedef actions, including the hardcoded ones--yeah, it would be nice from time to time to say "let's make the door open when I kill these imps here", but that also risks becoming a crutch for lazy level/combat design if you never make yourself learn anything else.  It's not to say it will, of course, or that nobody can dive right in with UDMF to start and create something awesome, but I can say for myself that I at least feel that the limitations benefit the design and creativity of the levels I build. 

 

Although the visplane and other technical limitations are not so much fun and I don't personally like working within those (I like the option to add oodles of fun details if I want), but a lot of time "vanilla" and "limit-removing" get conflated.

 

I think, objectively, Boom is probably the best compromise format for you, especially by generalizing all the linedef actions and adding simple things like pushing floors that can enable lots of cool sector magic without having to learn scripting or deviate too far from the crispy crunchy Doom center we mostly all love.  +1 probably for Eternity too, I'm much too unfamiliar with the format but it clearly can do remarkable stuff just a bit beyond what Boom can.

[wallabra]

21 hours ago, SMG_Man said:

my guy, have you not heard of the UMAPINFO standard?

 

Does that still count as vanilla then? Like for DSDA stuff?

[NiGHTMARE]

19 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

For example I am working on a city map and I was like "that would be great if you could add a trashcan as a decoration to create better feeling of a city." and I was suprised how rare are city decoration things (considering the Doom II lore is being hell on Earth, you know Downtown and such). And I realized that I am force to use hellish decorations like Evil Eye and such.

 

Decorations can be replaced even in vanilla. If you give the sprite a unique name e.g. TRASA0 and change the reference in DeHackEd, vanilla players won't even need to mess around with importing all the iwad sprites.

 

If you want to add decorations rather than replace them, then what you're after is DEHEXTRA: https://doomwiki.org/wiki/DEHEXTRA

 

As noted on the wiki page, DEHEXTRA is supported by Doom retro, Crispy Doom, DelphiDoom, DSDA-Doom, Eternity, GZDoom, Odamex, PrBoom+ and several others so players will still have a wide range of port choice.

[Mr. Alexander]

22 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

Using Zdoom also means you will loose many players, because the doom community seems to prefer vanilla megawads (you know, the vanilla purists) or at least they can forgive you the Boom format.

I'm not sure vanilla/Boom purism actually constitutes the majority opinion within the community as a whole, even if purism is a reasonably well held position on Doomworld in particular thanks to the historical prestige and popularity of Back to Saturn X, the TWiD wads and their associated projects, and the forum's general focus on maps rather than mods.

 

I understood, maybe incorrectly, that GZDoom and its older relatives were the most popular source ports in the community at large, thanks to their ability to play pretty much anything, and the popularity and press coverage of Brutal Doom and other gun/gore/enemy mods. So I don't think mapping for the ZDoom family of ports really restricts your map's reach to the degree you fear.

 

Maybe I never understood this correctly, though, and maybe more conservative source ports have overtaken the ZDoom family in recent years. I don't know how you would measure this beyond "vibes" on the various Doom forums/chatrooms/YouTube channels/etc.

Quote

I simply wish there was some sort of Vanilla+ format that was almost like vanilla, loved by all vanilla purists, worked in almost every single port and contained only few new small basic fetarues yet the powerful ones that gives you more freedom.
 

What do you think? Am I insane to think this way?:D

I don't think that's an insane way to think at all, and it's been well supported over the years with more advanced source ports and more expansive compatibility standards like MBF 21. I totally understand frustration with the bare limitations of the original DOS file and Chocolate Doom.

[OpenRift]

Dude just make limit-removing stuff lol

[Ludi]

I'll cook the popcorn...

[HorrorMovieRei]

23 hours ago, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

when you say your megawad is Zdoom or UDMF format, community will have certain expectations from it and they might be surprised (maybe even disappointed) that your megawad is basically just vanilla and Zdoom is used only for certain small things here and there.

 

I see modding (and indie, not AAA gamedev in general) as art. I think the healthiest mindset you can have when taking these creative art endeavors is to make something for yourself first, and for the community second. Of course, feedback is important, but don't get too hung up on community expectations or else the process becomes cynical and not fun. If you wanna make an UDMF megawad that's very pulled back and light on features, go ahead and don't let anybody stop you, you might even be surprised by the reception. Remember that there's a niche for everything 

[IcarusOfDaggers]

18 hours ago, Noiser said:

We are all here around a game made in 1993, but for some reason it's unnacceptable to mod on vanilla because we are staying in the past. Oh dear.

 

not sure what you meant here

11 hours ago, Murdoch said:

 

I disagree completely. I mean, how dare a group of maverick programmers not anticipate every single thing that people making maps for their game nearly 30 years later would want to do?! I mean seriously, did they not plan ahead at all? Total amateurs!

 

This post proudly bought to you by sarcasm.

gonna save this lmao. i'm pretty sure the discussion is about community opinions and behaviour, not about original executables and ports. 

 

4 hours ago, Majin said:

in many ways modern engines are a crutch: it's cool & easy to attach a door trigger to a boss to make mandatory--but the true underlying lesson is that having this feature doesn't make your a better mapper, in fact i'd go as far to say that without it, you're forced to make the boss mandatory by constructing an environment to facilitate it--thus making you a better mapper in the long term. 

 

thing about cruxes is, you can use them to your advantage. start off with cool and easy, and then learn how to do it the hard way. Easier mapping does allow easier learning of basics, but I must agree with previous ones, that it also allows to get lost in abundance of features.

 

1 minute ago, HorrorMovieRei said:

 

I see modding (and indie, not AAA gamedev in general) as art. I think the healthiest mindset you can have when taking these creative art endeavors is to make something for yourself first, and for the community second. Of course, feedback is important, but don't get too hung up on community expectations or else the process becomes cynical and not fun. If you wanna make an UDMF megawad that's very pulled back and light on features, go ahead and don't let anybody stop you, you might even be surprised by the reception. Remember that there's a niche for everything 

 

I know you quoted OP, but thanks. It is rare to hear this kind of opinion these days.

[pcorf]

Vanilla is great. Nice and sweet.

 

Last year I even made Zone 400, a Vanilla megawad. The challenges of the limits are there, trying to avoid VPO's and tutti frutti effects. Keeping the music size down below 64kb.

[Rifleman]

I'd say go for UDMF - you can still make maps with vanilla rules, if you want(in which case I wonder why would you complain about it). From various polls I've seen around the forums, most people use GZDoom anyway.

 

Some users said earlier you have to be more creative with vanilla, but I see it as something stifling creativity - if you are truly creative(and I think you are from your work), then more options can only benefit you. And it's not like there aren't limits...

Plus, if you like it, there is room to grow and learn new stuff like custom actors, scripts and many more things used for better atmosphere, gameplay and stories.

[Sokoro]

Original doom developers did not care about modding much, they just hardcoded the features and actions they used in their maps and deleted the rest.

They did not restrict themselves beyond what was not possible back then. I am sure if Romero wanted to have door open after player kills zombieman, then Carmack would code it for him.

It is you vanilla purists who are stuck with a code sets that were not fully meant to be used by modding community.

[Kinsie]

On 7/28/2022 at 2:05 AM, Matthias (LiquidDoom) said:

I wonder if someone feels this way as well, but classic vanilla Doom map format feels too limited sometimes. Maybe it's a weird complain, like "what do you expect from a computer game that was made back in 1993, huh?" but, yeah...
 

Imagine you want to make a map and add certain features. For example you want boss fight where you kill the cyberdemon and killing him opens a door to the exit. Simple thing, but of course you can't because it's a vanilla format.

"Doctor, it hurts when I do this."