hardcore_gamer Posted June 29, 2009 dutch devil said:Dude Doomworld has always been the place for harsh reviews, its common tradition around here. Craigs review says more than enough for me, there wasn't much to say about it in the first place. I can understand that point of view, and i have seen many harsh reviews on Doomworld before. But i still think he crossed the line with his "hands should be cut off" comment. I actually felt disgusted reading it because it gave me the impression that the reviewer does not care for the mappers and takes new Doom WADS for him too play for granted instead of looking at them like a luxury, similar too how a spoiled brat thinks getting 4 new games a month is something too take for granted and that there is no real reason too appreciate that fact that he get's new games because he is so use too getting them. I know there may not be a very good reason too "appreciate" shitty WADS dumped into the Idgames by people who make no effort whatsoever too make there are WADS good but i hope you understand where i am going with this. People make new maps and WADS for other people too enjoy, and as long as the people making these new maps and WADS are actually trying really hard too make them good (even if they may fail at making anything good) then the people downloading these new maps should appreciate the fact that people are making new maps for them too play. Like i said above, there are some people who just really don't care about the quality of there maps and make no effort too improve and those people probably deserve the shit they get from others most of the time but it always makes me sad when some dedicated mapper who may not be very good yet spends allot of time and effort too create something only too hear things like "this map is vomit, you should stop mapping you talentless prick" or something like "thanks for wasting my time by making me download this crap" and things of that sort. It simply destroys allot of the mappers motivation too make maps because he is left with the impression that the people who are downloading his work don't care about any of the effort he puts into them and only view him as a free source for new maps and have no real reason whatsoever too show any respect too that mapper because there are always more mappers out there who make sure that the flow of free maps will continue in case that said mapper decides too leave the mapping community. Don't get me wrong, i think there are plenty of good people who do appreciate the effort people are putting into making new maps (good or bad) for them, but i still think people should spend a little more time into remembering the fact that the reason for why they have free maps and WADS in the first place is because there are people willing too make them for them for free simply because they like creating fun stuff for people too play. Ok, i know i have gotten somewhat off topic here and i am sorry about that but i just really felt like saying all of that for some reason. Have a good day and enjoy your Dooming! -Hardcore_gamer 0 Share this post Link to post
pavera Posted June 29, 2009 Yeah man, but this is the internet. It's pretty cold out there. Besides doesn't Terry make bad maps on purpose? 0 Share this post Link to post
hardcore_gamer Posted June 29, 2009 Krispavera said:Yeah man, but this is the internet. It's pretty cold out there. Besides doesn't Terry make bad maps on purpose? I would not know since i don't know much about Terry's maps, but even if he does what i said above still stands. Also, about the whole "but the internet is crap" logic: It is true that the internet is full of crap, but that is not too say you have too be a part of that crap. 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted June 29, 2009 Given that indeed Terry is someone that uploads stuff that is junk on purpose, the only problem I see with Craig's review is that it might actually encourage people like Terry to upload shit, instead of discouraging it. A more "mature" approach might actually put WAD trolls off. 0 Share this post Link to post
scwiba Posted June 30, 2009 Styx is quite a lot of fun. I hope to see more maps from this Bishop fellow in the future. AgentSpork said:Beautiful Doom actually makes the game look worse! Oh, the beautiful irony of it all. I'll never understand these WADs that are supposed to add effects or modernize the look of the game. It's clear a lot of good work was put into it, but it just feels like a pointless gimmick. In the end it was fun to load it up with Scythe and run through a few levels, but I don't think I'll ever have the urge to play with it again. 0 Share this post Link to post
hardcore_gamer Posted June 30, 2009 Ryathaen said:Styx is quite a lot of fun. I hope to see more maps from this Bishop fellow in the future. I'll never understand these WADs that are supposed to add effects or modernize the look of the game. It's clear a lot of good work was put into it, but it just feels like a pointless gimmick. In the end it was fun to load it up with Scythe and run through a few levels, but I don't think I'll ever have the urge to play with it again. I more or less agree, unless it is actually being used with some other MOD that is designed too look modern in the first place. But i still think the MOD is very cool. 0 Share this post Link to post
Hitherto Posted June 30, 2009 Snarboo said:Styx is pretty great so far. If it's reporting unknown textures in vanilla or a port, that can easily be fixed with Doombuilder's find and replace feature. it may quite easy fixed even without wad recompilation (adding BRICK8 texture into wad or replacing texture name in SIDEDEFS directly), butVermil said:I didn't encounter any other ZDoom-isms playing therough the entire wad. a bunch of other bugs needs to be fixed even for prboom doom2.exe compatibiltyaleksej said:Labs Of Deimos Revisited and Agony of Eighth - both wads really doesn't work in vanilla doom/doom2 even with limit removing hacks applied. Actually Labs Of Deimos works well with limit removing but crashes anyway right after teleporting in exit area. Heh. If "Tested Whit: Zdoom 2.1.7, Gzdoom 1.0.9, Doomsday, Prboom 2.0.2" then "Advanced engine needed : none (doom.exe)" = FALSE in 99% 0 Share this post Link to post
esselfortium Posted June 30, 2009 myk said:The only problem I see is reviewers having to bother changing resolution while reviewing or to resize the shots they take (I do that, but upwards from 320x200 ;p). One solution is to use a temp lower resolution in the command line. I have to admit I really prefer you wouldn't do this with your reviews. I can understand it for vanilla wads, but honestly, authors of limit-removing maps almost certainly don't plan on them being displayed in 320x200. I mean, it's up to you, but ehh.. 0 Share this post Link to post
GreyGhost Posted June 30, 2009 TheeXile said:Any good image hosting services with auto-resize options? None that I know of - my preference is to resize before uploading 0 Share this post Link to post
Wills Posted June 30, 2009 Imageshack has an auto-resizer. As for people complaining about the reviews: Welcome to the world of /newstuff! 0 Share this post Link to post
esselfortium Posted June 30, 2009 Wills said:As for people complaining about the reviews: Welcome to the world of /newstuff! And as for people complaining about the complaints about the reviews: Welcome to the world of /newstuff discussion threads! Those people will unfortunately never go away, but they sure do help to keep things interesting I guess! 0 Share this post Link to post
DuckReconMajor Posted June 30, 2009 esselfortium said:And as for people complaining about the complaints about the reviews: Welcome to the world of /newstuff discussion threads! Those people will unfortunately never go away, but they sure do help to keep things interesting I guess! And as for the people complaining about the complaints about the complaints about the reviews: Welcome to the world of discussion of the world of /newstuff discussion threads! These people aren't very many, since most won't bother to get this recursive, but they sure do help to keep things interesting I guess! 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted June 30, 2009 arrrgh said: Maps From Memory was an idea that appeared on the forums which went like this: Recreate E1M1 from memory as closely as you could. The zip contains two WADS, one for Doom with the bulk of the maps, and one for Doom II which only contained two. Some of the maps were worryingly good while others felt completely different. Most of the errors are in the texturing, though. Quite an interesting experience. Excellent work by Enjay and Nuxius, who really came close to the original. The Green Herring tailed them, although his initial room having only two columns stood out. The timing difference between the lift secrets was a curious touch. In some renditions, it became shorter, in Creaphis' the secret actually became hard to get to. It's also neat how different authors were good at some things (like Creaphis, who could get the layout but couldn't remember the textures well). It seemed to me that the initial room was the most accurately represented area (this seems to make sense because we've all seen it the most), followed by the "computer room". The area before the exit and the secret to the megaarmor displayed more variance, and the central slime area was somewhere in between. The proportions between the areas also varied, interestingly. For example, SirTimberWolf's had good layout and texturing, but seemed cramped, except that the final barrel room was long, and Enjay's looked all around very accurate but ended with a short final barrel room. ArmouredBlood's was amusing because of how much it differed from the original. esselfortium said: I have to admit I really prefer you wouldn't do this with your reviews. I can understand it for vanilla wads, but honestly, authors of limit-removing maps almost certainly don't plan on them being displayed in 320x200. I mean, it's up to you, but ehh.. That's not very different from Doom or Boom WADs being displayed in high resolution, OpenGL, with dynamic lighting, crosshairs, additive translucency on fireballs, projectile and hitscan decals, stretched skies, HUD stat modes or widescreen mode. One of my comments above was about not expecting reviewers to use anything other than what they normally use to play because, if not, reviewing becomes more complicated and less fun (needing special case settings and perhaps settings the reviewer doesn't even like). Additionally, my whole review is based on playing the WAD in 320x200, so it should only be more natural and transparent for me to display shots that show what I saw while playing the levels. As for the authors' intentions on how their WADs should be shown, you could say the same about the review texts themselves: who's to say that the way the reviewer describes and judges a WAD is anything near what the author had in mind for his work? 0 Share this post Link to post
Super Jamie Posted June 30, 2009 dethtoll said:Nothing interesting, though I laughed out loud at "thanks for the tip." :Deveryone said:Terry Terry should be on idgames autodelete, and that's all there is to it. Starting meaningless arguments over "troll" reviews of his troll maps is probably exactly what he wants. Don't feed the troll(s). 0 Share this post Link to post
TheeXile Posted June 30, 2009 It must take a kind of dark talent to achieve his sort of notoriety. 0 Share this post Link to post
esselfortium Posted June 30, 2009 myk said:That's not very different from Doom or Boom WADs being displayed in high resolution, OpenGL, with dynamic lighting, crosshairs, additive translucency on fireballs, projectile and hitscan decals, stretched skies, HUD stat modes or widescreen mode. One of my comments above was about not expecting reviewers to use anything other than what they normally use to play because, if not, reviewing becomes more complicated and less fun (needing special case settings and perhaps settings the reviewer doesn't even like). The only one of those things that I'd consider a problem at all is the dynamic lighting, and in some cases the stretched skies, assuming the map isn't somehow broken by GL renderers at least. No idea what being high resolution that's in widescreen has to do with anything. In any case, though, the higher resolution means I can see the map better, which is my point here :P 0 Share this post Link to post
printz Posted June 30, 2009 Good that most notable maps are for ports, but if such a wad happens to be for vDoom, like that Styx episode, then I prefer it to get reviewed with vDoom or choco-Doom, so as to spot any tutti-frutti bugs. Way too many vanilla wads have got away with tutti-frutti everywhere because no one in charge tried them with bare Doom. 0 Share this post Link to post
NoWits Posted June 30, 2009 dethtoll said:Nothing interesting, though I laughed out loud at "thanks for the tip." >:( You were lucky I didn't go with my original line "It's my first map, and it's REALLY over the top!" 0 Share this post Link to post
caco_killer Posted July 1, 2009 Doomdream was a pretty decent map. I got lost briefly in the city part, but I managed to finish the map in about 35 minutes. 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted July 1, 2009 esselfortium said: The only one of those things that I'd consider a problem at all is the dynamic lighting, and in some cases the stretched skies, assuming the map isn't somehow broken by GL renderers at least. I think they get in the way of judging the raw visuals of a map. We all have our opinions on how a map is seen adequately. I regularly see levels in 320x200 without any of those effects (regardless of what engine I'm using), and compare different levels sets from there. Why would low resolution be a problem in WADs that aren't strictly for vanilla? If you are implying that in vanilla WADs it's not an issue because they are less detailed, that's not always the case. Many vanilla WADs are more detailed than port WADs with simple architecture, and low resolution will always impact the appearance of stuff at a medium to long distance. I mean, I get the impression you say this because you might personally play the vanilla WADs in low res but the limit removing ones in high res, and you'd like to see screen shots that show roughly what you'll see ingame if you download them. Well, I'm not going to ask you to use low res for limit removing WADs just because I do :p printz said: Way too many vanilla wads have got away with tutti-frutti everywhere because no one in charge tried them with bare Doom. Yeah, or worse; some tag 0 line breaks the map, some switch doesn't work, or there's a DB cam in there. 0 Share this post Link to post
Julian Posted July 1, 2009 myk said:SUPERCHARGE Damnit, myk, I got used to seek for your previous avatar when I was in need of good trolling ! Damn you for making my life miserable ! :P 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted July 1, 2009 Ah, damn it, not even changing my avatar will get me some privacy... Celebrity kills! 0 Share this post Link to post
hardcore_gamer Posted July 1, 2009 myk said:Ah, damn it, not even changing my avatar will get me some privacy... Celebrity kills! Why change your avatar? Your avatar makes you who you are, that's why i always use the same avatar on almost every site and never change it. 0 Share this post Link to post
sector666 Posted July 1, 2009 EarthQuake said:Is it really necessary to have screenshots that are 1680 x 1050? udderdude said: Get a bigger monitor. I don't care about the scrolling myself. But it's also not very friendly for dial up (which I have no choice but to be on). When it takes a minute and a half to view a screenshot, that takes away a large part of the point of having screenshots in the first place, at least as far as I'm concerned. I could understand it for newer games somewhat, but for Doom where the wad sizes are most often tiny, meaning very dial up friendly unlike most games, having the screenshots so large is not very time saving (which is basically the point of reviews in the first place, isn't it?) 0 Share this post Link to post
Dutch Doomer Posted July 1, 2009 myk said:Ah, damn it, not even changing my avatar will get me some privacy... Celebrity kills! Aw no more Dawn of the Dead :( 0 Share this post Link to post
Agent_Ash Posted July 1, 2009 Ryathaen said:Styx is quite a lot of fun. I hope to see more maps from this Bishop fellow in the future. I'll never understand these WADs that are supposed to add effects or modernize the look of the game. It's clear a lot of good work was put into it, but it just feels like a pointless gimmick. In the end it was fun to load it up with Scythe and run through a few levels, but I don't think I'll ever have the urge to play with it again. It all is absolutely individual. Plenty of people feel the game differently, when it looks differently. The Japanese like to put in their games various stuff like additional costumes, etc., and this is considered cool by some and pointless by others. But whatever, what I made looks awesome, some will like it too. That's pretty enough. Although they moved the comments to older version to the new one. How lame. 0 Share this post Link to post
Shanoa Posted July 2, 2009 Wish this newstuff had more darkdave stuff and rage. ;-; 0 Share this post Link to post
Super Jamie Posted July 2, 2009 Archvile78 said:Wish this newstuff had more darkdave stuff and rage. ;-; Never wish for more darkdave. 0 Share this post Link to post
Shanoa Posted July 2, 2009 i only wish for more of is childish reaction really. 0 Share this post Link to post