The /newstuff Chronicles #316

[Grimm]

Why, GreyGhost, what an excellent review. We should probably do this sort of thing more often.

Hahaha

[leileilol]

Nuxius said:

I don't think we need to go quite that far.

Although I personally think either 640*480 or 800*600 is fine, for consistencies sake, I'll go with 800*600. We can suggest using software mode (unless the map requires a hardware accelerated port), however, I wouldn't force it.

pft, i'd go for 640x400. If you still think that's small then why don't you just install the image resize extension then rightclickhold+leftclick on omgtiny image!

[myk]

leileilol said:
pft, i'd go for 640x400.

No, that resolution does not work properly outside of the game (unless it's a properly adjusted 16:10 mode instead of the usual 4:3). I think 800x600 is good, considering the desktop resolution most people use (1024x768 or more). 640x480 seems acceptable but a bit small (and no, using an image resize feature is not a good idea, as it adds a step to view the shot as desired, I doubt every browser can have it, and you can't have a leileilol explaining it to everybody reading the Chronicles), and 1024x768 is also relatively reasonable to me, though I think some browse at that resolution. Bigger (or smaller) is annoying to many.

People using very high or very low resolutions who don't want to change the resolution before play (I sure wouldn't want to) can take shots normally and then resize them with something like Paint Shop or The GIMP. I do it myself, in fact, as I play at 320x200.

[GreyGhost]

myk said:

GreyGhost's inclusion a shot of the place the "Enter if you dare" (concar) level was based on was a nice touch.

I spent more time researching the real-world location than I did playtesting the map. :-)

Creaphis said:

No, that's a screenshot. Not bad for '96.

I wish it was. ZDoom wouldn't let me fly outside the map boundaries. :-(

Creaphis also said:

Universal screenshot proposal:

Most of it I could go along with - however - with the number of screenshots I'd let Bloodshedder decide when he's sick of adding URL's.

Grimm said:

Why, GreyGhost, what an excellent review. We should probably do this sort of thing more often.

Hahaha

Well I'll be damned - someone's actually read one of my reviews - and didn't complain. :-)

[Grimm]

Wow, seriously, good call on that picture! I actually feel like I've BEEN to that place after playing that map. I didn't realize what a good job that guy did. Probably would have given it a 4/5 if I had realized.

There really is nothing like a good city map. I should start a page of all the good ones at some point. Of course, at this point I'd have like, two, heh

[david_a]

Personally I think every WAD should have a screenshot (obviously excluding sound/music only WADs). Even if it's absolute junk, having a screenshot to confirm this would stop you from having to download it to find out yourself if it really does suck or if the reviewer just hated it.

[40oz]

Just reaffirming what david_a said, Yeah I suggest a minimum of 1 (for maps) and a maximum of 6. And I suggest 640x480. For those who have big monitors and crappy internet, like me for example.

[myk]

Creaphis said:
There are enough other places to get secondary opinions if you need more than one review.

Yeah, including the database, which is linked from here, and occasionally has good mini-reviews.

Traysandor said:
Obviously, there's some WADs that will undoubetdly be reviewed where screenshots and/or second reviews are not necessary, like in the case of old '94-esque wads, or a poorly made/poorly detailed mapset, not of the jokewad variety. On the picture front, If I find anything interesting, I'll give it a screenshot.

Honestly, that doesn't make sense. I suggest leaving to others any wads you can't dedicate proper attention to. They will be more interested (whether or not they judge them positively) and will produce juicier reviews. Shots should characterize the wads, rather than merely showing their pretty or unusual elements. There are people that like '94-esque wads, and the poorness of designs is a rather subjective matter.

The only files that don't need shots are the ones without visual elements. Even the review of a program such as a launcher can benefit from a screen grab.

[david_a]

Can we automatically insert the /newstuff review into the database? It would help to condense all the reviews in one place. If the screenshots were somehow linked it would also take care of people's desire to see screenshots of levels in idgames (at least moving forward).

[Arch-Valentine]

The only part I found impossible, in DV II, was when all the Lost Souls teleported on the hellish Organ type thing in the chapel lvl near the end. MY fps dropped to 1-2 in GZdoom with 2 8800GTX's. Anyone else get that problem? I loved the wad, but that kinda ruined it as I had to play that lvl all over in another engine.

[Carnevil]

Arch-Valentine said:

The only part I found impossible, in DV II, was when all the Lost Souls teleported on the hellish Organ type thing in the chapel lvl near the end. MY fps dropped to 1-2 in GZdoom with 2 8800GTX's. Anyone else get that problem? I loved the wad, but that kinda ruined it as I had to play that lvl all over in another engine.

Yep, happened to me too :( What did you play it in where it ran faster?

[The Ultimate DooMer]

The gameplay: Hard. Very hard. I died many, many, times. Difficulty is actually pretty moderate in the beginning, where you mostly face large groups of weaker enemies, with generous amounts of barrels occasionally placed about, but as you get further and further, the odds against you start increasing greatly. You have to be a real hardcore player by the time you reach the hellish maps.

Sounds just right for me, can't wait to fire up -fast and charge in :D

[40oz]

Arch-Valentine said:

The only part I found impossible, in DV II, was when all the Lost Souls teleported on the hellish Organ type thing in the chapel lvl near the end. MY fps dropped to 1-2 in GZdoom with 2 8800GTX's. Anyone else get that problem? I loved the wad, but that kinda ruined it as I had to play that lvl all over in another engine.

I had a hard time playing in Map03, far too many sprites drawn on screen to get an fps above 2. It was frustrating, because looking away from the monsters sped the game up about 20+ fps, but turning around to fight them dropped it down quite a bit.

I'd also like to make a note that I REALLY enjoy how well this newstuff review thing is going, There only 4 or 5 wads left in that giant list that haven't been reviewed yet. Well done everyone!

[Doom Marine]

Carnevil said:

Yep, happened to me too :( What did you play it in where it ran faster?

Belial UV-Maxed Map21 in PrBoom+ on his shitty Athlon XP 2000+, and ZDoom works too, one untested method for running it at tolerable fps in GZDoom is to turn off dynamic lighting...

[Arch-Valentine]

Carnevil said:

Yep, happened to me too :( What did you play it in where it ran faster?

Zdoom 2.2.0 or Skulltag 97D

[Kira]

The latest Skulltag support Voodoo dolls ? (I mean, DVII use a lot of dolls...)

[Creaphis]

K!r4 said:

The latest Skulltag support Voodoo dolls ? (I mean, DVII use a lot of dolls...)

Definitely. They wouldn't break that. I'm not too sure why Legacy needed to.

As for the remaining wads needing review, it looks like some marathon deathmatch sessions will be necessary.

[esselfortium]

Skulltag supports voodoo dolls, but not in multiplayer. As such, it can't play DVII online (and a good number of other notable Boom wads).

[Graf Zahl]

Creaphis said:

Definitely. They wouldn't break that. I'm not too sure why Legacy needed to.

Such things happen if secondary issues take priority while developing. Another change of the same kind, albeit not as critical is the way damaging floors have been altered in Legacy, making them significantly more dangerous (apparently to counter cheating by jumping across them.)

Doom Marine said:

Belial UV-Maxed Map21 in PrBoom+ on his shitty Athlon XP 2000+, and ZDoom works too, one untested method for running it at tolerable fps in GZDoom is to turn off dynamic lighting...

Guess why GZDoom doesn't load lights.pk3 by default? ;) Of couse Skulltag had to change that, taking away the option of not having the default lights while still allowing custom light definitions.

That said, large numbers of Lost Souls with lights on will inevitably cause massive performance issues. The sudden appearance of hundreds of light source will be a major performance hit.

[kristus]

Graf Zahl said:

Such things happen if secondary issues take priority while developing. Another change of the same kind, albeit not as critical is the way damaging floors have been altered in Legacy, making them significantly more dangerous (apparently to counter cheating by jumping across them.)

They claimed it had a serious bug involved with it. When I talked to hurdler about changing it back, he didn't really know how to do it since he hadn't been involved when it were removed in the first place. (Hurdler also didn't know anything about doom's map construction, which made a few things hard to explain for him)

About that floor. Yeah, I actually remember when that were. At the time I were actually constructing maps with this in mind. Safe to say I had some rather "hardcore" philosophies about game play back then. Anyway, at the time it was possible to completely avoid getting hurt by jumping. Didn't know that it made the floors deadlier though.

/me goes into nostalgia mode.

[Enjay]

kristus said:

Didn't know that it made the floors deadlier though.

It's been a while, but isn't it something like painful floors only hurt you after you have been standing on them for a few tics, therefore jumping allowed you to never be on them long enough to trigger damage? IIRC, the legacy solution was to make you take damage as soon as you touched the floor.

[Graf Zahl]

The damage event depends on the game clock. By damaging immediately you can't run across small patches of nukage without getting hurt. There's lots of WADs that are quite unforgiving towards such a radical change.

(Ah, well, is there still anyone here who regularly uses Legacy...? ;) )

[Creaphis]

Graf Zahl said:

(Ah, well, is there still anyone here who regularly uses Legacy...? ;) )

Good point. High Tech Hell: Alien Tech is probably the only thing I've ever played on it.

[GreyGhost]

Graf Zahl said:

(Ah, well, is there still anyone here who regularly uses Legacy...? ;) )

Semi-regularly - for KingKill33's untitled map, checking wad behavior under different ports and sometimes just for the hell if it.

[Graf Zahl]

Creaphis said:

Good point. High Tech Hell: Alien Tech is probably the only thing I've ever played on it.

It works just as well with GZDoom. ;) Great WAD, btw.

[Creaphis]

Graf Zahl said:

It works just as well with GZDoom. ;) Great WAD, btw.

Ah, neat. I didn't know those ports used the same 3D-floor construction method among other things. I guess I could have guessed so.

[kristus]

I think EDGE Legacy and GZdoom all does them the same. (seem to remember something about EDGE setting it to accommodate Legacy's line specials as well) Only Vavoom is really different, as it inverts the floor and ceiling. (So "ceiling" is the bottom ceiling of the brush, and "floor" is the top floor.)

[Grimm]

In a strange turn of events, I totally agree with Graf. Changing the floors like that would absolutely render many older WADs (and probably some newer ones, too) totally unplayable. IF their rational was, "People will cheat", they better have taken out the cheat codes too. And made no cheats available via the console.

Which I'm sure they didn't.
Dumb.