Compatibility issues between Doom2 format and Zdoom(Doom in Doom) format in DB

[Kyka]

Ok. So the way I am editing at the moment. I build most of the map in standard Doom2 format, then later in the level, when I want to add certain things/switches/linedefs etc, I switch to ZDoom(Doom in Doom) format. I find this way faster. As far as I know, Zdoom(Doom in Doom) format keeps all existing vanilla linedef triggers the same and simply adds a pile of new ones.

I can't see any incompatibility issues or any reason why this wouldn't work, but that doesn't mean that there isn't something I have just missed/not thought of/haven't forseen/don't know about.

So I thought I would just ask. If anyone can see any reason why this is a bad idea or knows of any incompatibilities between these two formats, could they let me know.

Thanks.

[edit] oh yeah... this is a Zdoom only mapset, so Boom compatibility doesn't need to be an issue.

[Graf Zahl]

No, there aren't any issues. After all it's just the descriptions of linedef actions and things that are decided by the config.

Still, your working style makes no sense. Why don't you start editing with the target format you are aiming at? Since you already decided to go the ZDoom route you are only limiting your options in the beginning stage (e.g. non-availability of extended Boom features.) ZDoom (Doom in Doom) is a true superset of Doom2. It offers anything the base config also has to offer.

[esselfortium]

This makes no sense. Are you seriously intending to make your sourceport map using vanilla features only and then awkwardly tack on ZDoom stuff after you're done with everything else? o_O

[Kyka]

Thanks for your thoughts guys. I can see how this way of working sounds very odd, but there are a couple of reasons why I work like this.

-I spent a long time making vanilla maps, and can map reasonably quickly in standard Doom2 mode, far faster than I can navigate my way around all the newer ZDoom-only functions.

-The mapset that I am working on, I want it to still feel reasonably vanilla in terms of the way it plays. All the new features, I want to use them subtly, to really enhance the Doom experience, rather than overtake it, so mostly I think I will be able to get away with adding them in later...

So, as weird as this way of working is, it allows me to keep mapping at a reasonable pace, while I keep learning the newer functions.
I am sure that once I am familiar with all the extended functions/actions etc, I will start directly in ZDoom (Doom in Doom) Format. Or better yet, start learning Doom in Hexen format. Playing Maps like Thunderpeak, Darkness and KDiZD were real eye openers for me.

[Lich]

The sooner you start working in your target source port, the more fluent you'll become. It's always an awkward switch to have to make a sudden change, but you'll get the hang of it faster. Plus you won't have to deal with the problems a format change will inevitably bring.

[Graf Zahl]

Sorry, Kyka, but with that attitude you are fooling yourself. If you finish 90% of your map before considering any additions for the intended engine you got a limit removing map. And no matter what you do afterward, it will always keep that impression. In that case you might as well skip port specific features altogether because no matter how you do it, they will feel tacked on. If you don't want to come across as a lazy ass that had to add ZDoom features to a mostly vanilla map just because - you will most likely get a cold reception.

Besides, with ZDoom (Doom in Doom) you can barely scratch the surface of what ZDoom can do. Hexen map format is indeed a bit more complex and thus harder to learn but in the end the benefits far outweigh the invested work.

[Creaphis]

As someone who has seen the levels in question, I should note something. Kyka's levels are very large and visually complex, and he's aiming to give them a dark, oppressive atmosphere. I suggested to him that heavy usage of ambient sounds would enhance the effect he's going for, and would help keep the ears from getting impatient. The result will essentially be limit-removing with a tacked on ZDoom feature, but that alone is not grounds to condemn it, when it's the only way to achieve a certain combination of aesthetic elements. Wait for a release, and I promise that when you hate his wad it will be for different reasons.

[Graf Zahl]

That may all be but still, he should at least use Boom as config. Who knows, maybe the added Boom line and sector types come in handy during editing.

[Creaphis]

Yeah, I'll concede that.

[CodeImp]

While switching between Doom 2 format to ZDoom (Doom in Doom format) does not give any problems, please note that switching between any Doom format and a Hexen format DOES give you problems with your tags, actions and flags. If you ever want to make a map in Hexen format, then start your map in that format.

[Kyka]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I will take the advice of people here and get to work mapping in the intended format.

For this project, I will probably have to stick to ZDoom (Doom in Doom) format rather than move to ZDoom (Doom in Hexen) format because of the size and complexity of the levels that have already been completed.