What is the best port for ediding?

[hardcore_gamer]

What is the best port to make a map? is there a port that alows me to make one room above another room?

[Steeveeo]

I'd say GZDoom, its openGL, so it supports true 3D floors (thru the use of dummy sectors and linetype 160)

Its also compatible with ACS (actionscript). This gives you the ability to add a ton more flare and functionality to your maps if used wisely!

[Glassyman]

I'd say ZDoom because it's quite simple to use and it's compatible with ACS.

[leileilol]

Id' say Vavoom because it supports OpenGL, Direct3D, and Software and has 3d floors and ACS and a very powerful VavoomC interpreter that lets you do whatever DECORATE can't do (you could even code real bots in vc!)

[hardcore_gamer]

what ports can play the same wads as Doomsday? I want to know couse i can do alot more when makeng levels with doom builder than if i were only mapping with a normal Doom2 wad.

[Glassyman]

hardcore_gamer said:

what ports can play the same wads as Doomsday?

Risen 3D, I think.

[Lobo]

The whole "Best port to make a map" part of your question is something that I feel cannot be answered without prejudice by anyone, but another port which does Room-over-room (3D floors) is EDGE of course.

[Searcher]

I have to agree with Lobo, and another is Legacy.

[Hobbs]

Eternity when linked portals are finished.

[Scuba Steve]

RORDoom!

[printz]

I like Eternity because it tries to have as many editing features as possible, without sacrificing its Doom engine the same way JDoom and ZDoom do. Eternity can be used both for complex maps and doom.exe demos. But if you want 3d floors, try the ports mentioned by others.

[DaniJ]

without sacrificing its Doom engine the same way JDoom and ZDoom do

If by "sacrificing its Doom engine" you mean that jDoom has replaced the software renderer and the cruddy net code then you are correct.

jDoom behaves pretty much identically to the original DOOM, where it counts; gameplay.

[printz]

DaniJ said:

If by "sacrificing its Doom engine" you mean that jDoom has replaced the software renderer and the cruddy net code then you are correct.

Incompatibility with older demos, obstacles which also block projectiles (in Doom), z-clipping (in Doom) and some slight physics modifications are some.

jDoom behaves pretty much identically to the original DOOM, where it counts; gameplay.

I remember JDoom having missile-blocking obstacles and z-clipping also in Doom, not just in Heretic. That changes the gameplay a lot, I could say, especially with the obstacles (except in case they've released a new JDoom in the meantime which fixes these whatarethem; I don't have it now on my computer).

[Hobbs]

In terms of sacrificing the Doom engine, what (G)ZDoom has done and what jDoom has done don't even compare. jDoom does a decent job of keeping gameplay related things the same, its not 100% like vanilla, or maybe even 99%, but its lightyears ahead of (G)ZDoom.

Also, demo incompatibility isn't a gameplay thing, its a demo thing. I don't like Doom demos in general being broken in a source port, usually because the excuse for breaking them is pretty sorry indeed, but it certainly doesn't affect general gameplay.

[Quasar]

I wouldn't call the excuse for getting rid of demo comp sorry, actually. It really, REALLY dirties up the code. Branches and extra predicates all over the place. Code explosion every time you need to rewrite something to work the way it should. The near impossibility of making sure some minor change doesn't somehow break that one obscure demo that people *will* find and call you on. And this is not to mention the things that become virtually impossible to do within a demo-compatible framework.

Example: Eternity really needs to treat "buttons," which do the texture changes for switches, as thinkers. But it can't because any change to the thinker list during a demo could potentially cause a demo desync due to certain AI routines relying on the ordering of the list (although this may only apply to MBF demos, I haven't verified this).

I put up with it all because I love demos and I love compatibility options. I can easily understand why most coders do not, however. At one time I was even considering forking Eternity into two branches; one with demo comp and one without. That idea died pretty quickly though; it would just be twice the work :P

[Hobbs]

Actually Quas that's the best reason I've ever got.

[Csonicgo]

Oh boy, a "best port" thread!

GZdoom was tolerable when it was separate from Zdoom but now that GZDoom is creeping into the Main Zdoom program I think I will have to be switching to Eternity for my little map I was working on. That and I want to play around with the Eternity Scripting and Portals! :D

[DaniJ]

Incompatibility with older demos, obstacles which also block projectiles (in Doom), z-clipping (in Doom) and some slight physics modifications are some.

Demo compatibility with DOOM.exe - forget it, never gonna happen in jDoom.
z-clipping - is already optional.
slight physics modifications - please report these via our bug tracker and I assure you they will be looked in to.