Do you think GZDoom should have texture filtering on by default?

[RataUnderground]

8 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

I'm sorry, I can't agree this has anthing to do with lilith. That entire mod was based around the premise that certain rendering bugs should work, because otherwise the entire mod breaks. That is not the case with linear filtering. Where do you put the line then? Max resolution at 320x200? Some artist might believe that's the only way to experience their work. This is just silly.

In some wads, some time ago, I experimented putting in broken zscript lumps that would crash the game if you tried to play the map in GzDoom, to avoid distortions like texture filtering, wacky lighting, high resolutions, jumping/squatting or freelook. Since other sourceports ignore that lump, you could play on them without problems.
 Although it served the purpose well, I decided not to publish any map with this "trick" because in the end the audience for a Doom map is limited and I didn't want to reach less people either. But I was tempted.

[roadworx]

3 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

No, I didn't know he made that mod. But that doesn't really change anything about what I said. I'd say the only kind of mod where I would find it acceptable with that kind of warning is something abusing mods. That kind of mod however also restricts itself to a specific version of the engine anyway as tomorrow's version can have one of the bugs used fixed. In short: you HAVE to read the readme file closely and truly dedicate yourself to trying out that kind of mod. I don't see what those have to do with the subject of this thread.

this thread is filling with dumbfucks at an alarming rate.

right in the readme of defy the omphalos, it says "Advanced engine needed: GZDoom 4.8.1+", so it's not really restricting itself to a specific version (other than the newer versions i guess), and thus a warning like that is kinda necessary.

 

either way, if a modder's artwork is ruined or something because of shitty settings, then it makes sense that'd they'd want it to be changed and there's nothing wrong with that. @Scuba Steve already mentioned earlier how filtering pretty much ruins all of his spritework

[Cacodemon345]

I'm just going to say this as a counter-example to "general public" argument of Graf:
 

Almost every time I have seen a big software use telemetry to determine where development should go, it usually ends up sending development down the wrong direction. Two most prominent examples:

Firefox: Started changing UI like underpants, also started implementing very-undesirable features like JavaScript execution in PDF files and still didn't stop copying features from Google Chrome.

Microsoft Windows: Features in Pro editions started getting stripped since Windows 10 when telemetry got introduced, including ability to turn off ads in Start Menu. And in Windows 11, taskbar toolbars, window arranging options and ability to reposition taskbar got nuked.

GNOME (to an extent, not sure it's a correct example): Also started stripping many useful features like launching executables from Nautilus.

 

In short, the so called "general public" shouldn't be listened to blindly, ever, and ever; they will care about nothing beyond default settings, and that will lead to inevitable incorrect interpretations. And no, I am not saying to go all the way into UNIX elitist territory of making your software only usable by nerds; I am saying that you need to balance feedback between your community and the silent majority outside them.

 

About the Presets proposal: I strongly suggest to consider which will be the default one, and it better not come with texture filtering enabled, because we will be back to square one at the end.

[dpJudas]

Just now, RataUnderground said:

Although it served the purpose well, I decided not to publish any map with this "trick" because in the end the audience for a Doom map is limited and I didn't want to reach less people either. But I was tempted.

In a similar manner I could be tempted to use checksums to block author mods that I don't like.

 

Lucky we all mature enough not to use such tactics, right? :)

[roadworx]

5 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

In a similar manner I could be tempted to use checksums to block author mods that I don't like.

 

Lucky we all mature enough not to use such tactics, right? :)

you're not mature enough to not shit on anotak when they were just trying to help (and you did it for the dumbest fucking reason too, like wtf), so idk, you'd probably go ahead and do something like that judging on how you're acting in here

[RataUnderground]

9 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

In a similar manner I could be tempted to use checksums to block author mods that I don't like.

 

Lucky we all mature enough not to use such tactics, right? :)

Although I don't give it as much importance now (perhaps because some time has passed and I've moderated, or perhaps because I've seen that deep down Doom players appreciate mapper recommendations when they specify them), I thought of it in the first place as a relief to save myself from frustrations like the ones Scuba mentions. 
"What if my carefully planned combat scene goes down the drain because a player can go under cacodemons, jump imps, or shoot monsters he shouldn't thanks to freelook? Then I'll make my map not playable in GzDoom, simple as that."
I guess that's why compatibility levels were invented too. To not broke maps.

[Kinsie]

My mods are only allowed to be played on a 1080p LG IPS LED monitor in a 1280x720 window in a well-lit room at 4am, and if you change even one of those ingredients I will call the police on you.

[DRON12261]

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

sounds like the lilith.pk3 scenario, albeit a descendant of it.

Huh) Not necessarily that much of course, but it can show up in certain little things that can affect the perception of the map in a negative way. For example, the map was designed with dynamic lighting turned on, but the player has it turned off. Or vice versa, the map was designed to play without dynamic lighting, but it is turned on, and for example, some lost-souls or lanterns behind the wall start to shine where they should not be. Or incorrectly configured sector lighting, where for example there is a dark area where the player must get through at the expense of the usual vanilla halo, illuminating a small radius around the player, but the player suddenly had Doom mode enabled, which completely removes it and leaves the player in complete darkness. Or when your wad focuses on some kind of playing with lighting and the usual fixed colour palette, but the player has True Color. In general, such situations can be a huge mass and they occur regularly. And the more complex and elaborate the project, the more such points may be involved.

That's why I really insist on the possibility of detailed render settings for a certain wad, which will be automatically applied when you run that wad temporarily on a game session with that very wad. But, unfortunately, this only works if you know about GZDoom, know about its peculiarities. But there is a huge number of wads released before GZDoom and after (which are created for Doom, not GZDoom), where such pre-made settings simply can not be in principle, but because of incorrectly selected default settings, such maps have a high risk of "breaking". That's why I say that source-port should look like its source, it's not an independent project, it's based on a specific project. And you could turn a blind eye to this if GZDoom wasn't the most famous port and the first one that people who almost saw Doom itself for the first time come out to. But GZDoom has been that for a long time now, and a certain small burden of responsibility for that still rests on it, but it does, regardless of whether it's a commercial project or not. It directly affects other projects by other authors, which can't go unnoticed with such popularity. 

I have raised this problem and tried to suggest at least an approximate direction for its solution, but I'm afraid it will remain ignored.
https://www.doomworld.com/forum/post/2668691
 

1 hour ago, dpJudas said:

Except that the game didn't break by the user seeing it with linear filtering on. In fact, in my example he wants to have it enabled.

I should also add that I'm not just talking about texture filtering, but all render settings in general.
 

1 hour ago, dpJudas said:

I was reminded earlier in this thread that the user of a source port has the right to use and criticize my work as they see fit. If that's the case, surely that also applies to artists?

That's not quite correct. The port is an intermediate step in consumption. It is the wads that are the final step. That's what people come for and generally why they run the ports themselves. Ports have a certain kind of "responsibility" for how these wads will be displayed to the player, they directly influence it. Wads themselves are final projects, which for the most part are not meant to deform anyone else's work.

Edited July 13, 2023 by DRON12261

[dpJudas]

10 minutes ago, RataUnderground said:

"What if my carefully planned combat scene goes down the drain because a player can go under cacodemons, jump imps, or shoot monsters he shouldn't thanks to freelook? Then I'll make my map not playable in GzDoom, simple as that."
I guess that's why compatibility levels were invented too. To not broke maps.

While I understand your frustration, keep in mind that most players using freelook know that this makes the game easier and wasn't in the original. They have chosen to experience your mod this way, whether you like it or not.

 

In same manner as anotak has the right to abuse every bug in the engine, he should also respect the player to use his creation any way they want to. My language was maybe a bit harsh in the first post, but I don't think my point of view is wrong. By spamming the player on every launch, his mod does not respect the player the way I see it. If he's allowed to dictate how they should use his creation, then I too by logical extension have the right to block use of my creation (parts of GZDoom) in any way I don't like.

[RataUnderground]

7 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

While I understand your frustration, keep in mind that most players using freelook know that this makes the game easier and wasn't in the original. They have chosen to experience your mod this way, whether you like it or not.

 

In same manner as anotak has the right to abuse every bug in the engine, he should also respect the player to use his creation any way they want to. My language was maybe a bit harsh in the first post, but I don't think my point of view is wrong. By spamming the player on every launch, his mod does not respect the player the way I see it. If he's allowed to dictate how they should use his creation, then I too by logical extension have the right to use my creation (parts of GZDoom) in any way I don't like.

Nah, not to worry. I agree that there is no need to force or bother the player. In the case of Defi the Omphalos, I think a simple innocuous warning at the beginning should suffice, and let the player do what he wants.

[banjiepixel]

7 minutes ago, RataUnderground said:

Nah, not to worry. I agree that there is no need to force or bother the player. In the case of Defi the Omphalos, I think a simple innocuous warning at the beginning should suffice, and let the player do what he wants.

 

I mean the player can still do what they want and remove those things that make the mod unplayable with wrong settings. There are just some extra steps now.

[LexiMax]

1 hour ago, dpJudas said:

It also reveals the one that created the mod is rather silly. If you actually do like to play with those settings on the moronic mod will now pester the player every stinking time they launch the mod. I'm sorry, but that's just stupid behavior.

 

They can just use a mod to disable the notice. 😀

[dpJudas]

1 minute ago, LexiMax said:

 

They can just use a mod to disable the notice. 😀

We could even bundle that mod with the engine and automatically apply it when the checksum matches. :D

 

On a more serious note, most users faced with the problem would probably just do like Kinsie said and decide this mod wasn't for them.

[Lucius Wooding]

We can simply make a few preordained lists of render settings for mappers to force onto people. To avoid confusion, we'll number them and call them "copelevels".

[banjiepixel]

3 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

On a more serious note, most users faced with the problem would probably just do like Kinsie said and decide this mod wasn't for them.

 

Imagine that, creator making a bad design decision has consequences and people stop using the thing.

[LexiMax]

13 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

We could even bundle that mod with the engine and automatically apply it when the checksum matches. :D

 

Okay, then let's start with KDIKDIZD.

 

[dpJudas]

Haha, I didn't know KDIKDIZD did that. I tried that mod in Eternity actually. :)

[LexiMax]

6 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

Haha, I didn't know KDIKDIZD did that. I tried that mod in Eternity actually. :)

 

I'm not sure if the newer release still has this warning, but release I have has a SHA-256 of 8b4bf60495a8130b6f0b2dd80cb13a0a9b3d6a1339c8cc0a94958ce727c7aa53 for the first wad and 0ab3ab1f111ab3744cb728421008292d82492ae5d0186ebd475ee19d33d0033a for the second.  The texture you'll want to remove is ZWARNING.

[ETPC]

i may be biased as my name is on DEFY THE OMPHALOS as a tester, but I genuinely don't see an issue with works asking players to please respect a creator's intentions with their work and to alter the game accordingly. that seems incredibly fair and like a good workaround. and like Lexi said, you could just alter the map or code if you really want to play with trilinear filtering, hq4x upsizing, brutal doom gameplay, 3d model pack-ass doom. 

[dpJudas]

2 minutes ago, LexiMax said:

 

I'm not sure if the newer release still has this warning, but release I have has a SHA-256 of 8b4bf60495a8130b6f0b2dd80cb13a0a9b3d6a1339c8cc0a94958ce727c7aa53 for the first wad and 0ab3ab1f111ab3744cb728421008292d82492ae5d0186ebd475ee19d33d0033a for the second.  The texture you want to remove is ZWARNING.

You do know I was joking, right? I have a feeling you're pulling my leg now. :p

[LexiMax]

3 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

You do know I was joking, right? I have a feeling you're pulling my leg now. :p

 

The last time the subject was broached - recommending specific settings through scripting - Graf appeared in the thread and threatened to do exactly what you're describing.

 

Someone else can dig up the post, but I don't think he was joking.

[dpJudas]

I'm not Graf. That's all I have to say to that. :)

[Redneckerz]

14 minutes ago, LexiMax said:

 

The last time the subject was broached - recommending specific settings through scripting - Graf appeared in the thread and threatened to do exactly what you're describing.

 

Someone else can dig up the post, but I don't think he was joking.

You know i would but yes - This did happen.

I understand you making an example for Judas to denote how serious this used to be in the past and i hope by foregone it won't again. Disclaimers to run a wad as intended should always be allowed and can even be used as a defacto easteregg.

 

12 minutes ago, dpJudas said:

I'm not Graf. That's all I have to say to that. :)

Lets humor me then, even though i know the answer because i am not from yesterday: Is there any valid reason as to why Graf has only posted once in this thread and not for the topic at hand?

 

Again, i know the answer, but from a newbie perspective, might be good to have this aforementioned.

 

This isn't a suggestion for Graf to not show up either way, just saying.

[dpJudas]

16 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

Lets humor me then, even though i know the answer because i am not from yesterday: Is there any valid reason as to why Graf has only posted once in this thread and not for the topic at hand?

I'm not Graf, so this is just a guess. I think it boils down to him not wanting to change the default. He likes the filtered look. This isn't the first time it was brought up and it probably won't be last either.

 

The way I look at it is that the source port author ultimately have the final call on what he wants into his port. Same as a mod author. As an extension of that, the port author also controls what the defaults are and what the source port is about. The only thing contributors can do about it is to threaten to fork - that's how open source works. That's also why I only joke about checksums - I can think a mod does something stupid, but I'm not going to try control what they did. As the author they ultimately had to right to do what they did (as long as it doesn't break any laws).

 

If you're going to ask me next why I haven't forked GZDoom over the filtering, then that's because there's pros and cons with doing a fork. The filtering default on its own isn't enough for me to be willing to do all the extra work involved in running a source port. Keep in mind if I did a hostile fork like that then that would also mean Graf would stop contributing to my hobby. Open source development has always been a compromise unless you work alone.

[Bauul]

48 minutes ago, LexiMax said:

 

Okay, then let's start with KDIKDIZD.

 

 

I did something similar with Elementalism: there's a warning message on the title screen if the player isn't using Dynamic Lights correctly (as some levels are almost unplayable without them).

 

Although I guess Texture Filtering is kind of a different kettle of fish because (aside from really specific theoretical uses) it's never going to render a wad/mod unplayable, just simply less artistically pleasing.

[Blzut3]

When it comes to setting detection and nagging, the main problem with it (any any form of user agent detection instead of feature detection like KDIKDIZD) is that it's built to assume the status quo won't change.  For example remember when everyone assumed the software renderer would absolutely never ever in a million years get 3D floors and were coming up with ways to force the user to switch to OpenGL?  Now those mods are compatible with the software renderer but they'll still nag even though the reason is invalid.  Plus the burden of making sure that cvar values remain compatible, which in some cases can spill over to non-Z descendant ports that want to implement compatible scripting.

 

I get that ultimately it's a no win situation since people do anything they can to not read and better tools to provide hints haven't been given, so mod authors are going to do it anyway.  There are many reasons port author loathe it though.

[Shepardus]

I've seen people insist that insist that being able to see pixels is a backwards mentality and swear by those upscale filters that make everything look like cartoons drawn by a large-tip Sharpie. If they want to play the game like that, that's their choice.

 

I don't think it'd be out of the question for a mod to show a setup prompt the first time you launch it (maybe even with presets you choose from!), and also provide a menu with easy access to the settings the author thinks are most important. I've seen both done in some form.

[LexiMax]

4 hours ago, Shepardus said:

If they want to play the game like that, that's their choice. 

 

I think we can agree that the problem comes at the intersection of:

• People who aren't too fussed about the default settings, whatever they happen to be, and don't change them.
• Mod makers who make mods who actually care about the look of their art and would prefer that screenshots, videos and streams of their mod aren't washed-out by default.

If someone doesn't care about texture filtering, but the modmaker does, I think a perfectly reasonable response from a mod-maker's perspective is to say "Okay, if you the player actually don't care, then let's insist on a different default."

 

I agree that people should be able to override that preference and play with unintended settings if they want, but mod authors should be able to opt-in to alternative defaults, and this is the GZDoom's problem to solve.  Not just accuse modmakers of whining about something that shouldn't matter, hand-wringing about how it's an intractable problem, or even vitriol at the thought that a modmaker found their own solution with the tools GZDoom exposes to them.

 

Then again, if the developers want to put a lid on the problem for good, there's another possibility that doesn't involve blocking hashes - blocking visibility of video mode cvars from zscript.  I suppose at that point we'll know that this "preference" is really just outright spite.

Edited July 14, 2023 by LexiMax

[RataUnderground]

Finally he answered! 

 

[Nash]

I just had another idea, on top of the presets menu (or simply just a texture filtering tickbox at the IWAD selector):

 

MAPINFO-defined texture filtering settings, just like with lightmode, no jump, no crouch and the like. User will be able to override it to ignore the MAPINFO setting.

I can make PRs for these but there's zero guarantees any of this will get in.