Engine preference

[LightningBolt101]

What's your preference for engines?

Vanilla? Boom? ZDoom? Skulltag? Legacy? You get the point.


Personally, I prefer Skulltag when it comes to new age gameplay, but love PR-Boom when it comes to getting that classic feel whilst still being able to play properly on Windows 7.

[45th Parrallel]

Vanilla or (G)ZDoom

[Dragonsbrethren]

Moving back towards vanilla right now - been playing through Plutonia, and DTWID before that.

[Darkman 4]

Used to be a pretty big fan of ZDoom, but I switched to prBoom after a several year hiatus from Doom and I don't regret it one bit.

[printz]

Eternity or, if wad allows, vanilla (or hacked vanilla) Doom under DOSBox.

[chungy]

Used to play Chocolate Doom exclusively for a while, but I became a graphics snob so I use prboom-plus so I can play at 1920x1200, but with vanilla -complevel always set for me.

[gemini09]

Only GZDoom.

I haven't played vanilla in aaaaaaaaaaaaages. Although, I should grab one of those Dos-boxes and revisit the past... but I'm afraid it will be a pleasant surprise, with regards to how the controls feel, and take away some of GZDoom's attraction... Maybe it's best to turn a blind eye, for now :)

[Kira]

Gl/Prboom-plus

[kristus]

I usually end up using Zdoom simply out of sheer convenience.

[ReFracture]

Oh hey it's one of these threads... again.

GL/PRBoom-plus for the most part.

[Xaser]

It's been a long while since I've had the chance to post "All of them."

Having said that, All of them.

[HavoX]

I went through a variety of ports throughout the years of playing Doom, including Legacy, Doomsday, Boom (I think I tried it, my memory is a bit shaddy.), EDGE (mostly because of Immoral Conduct and Don's Challenge), Vavoom (I tried Vavoom a very long time ago, but didn't like it because it ran so slow on my system. I don't know if it's because of the way it was coded... Graf? Gez?), ZDoom, Skulltag, and of course, GZDoom.

I'd list more ports, but it's been so long and I don't feel like listing them all. :P

[Gez]

Terminal Doom. With luck, Doom 4 will allow us to go deeper in the Doomception. :p

[purist]

PRBoom+ is the preference now but I occasionally also use Chocolate, Legacy, ZDoom or GZDoom.

Actually, this is as good a time to ask as any. Does anyone else get garbled graphics with PRBoom+? On my PC (XP) I've mainly noticed it on the CWILV text graphics but I think it sometimes happens to the top of the titlescreen and MDOOM graphics...

[GreyGhost]

Rolls-Royce Merlin

[Archy]

Archy said:
I use Doom v1.9 (Ultimate), Doom2 V1.9, and Doom2 V1.9f, for everything including multiplayer, but when I absolutely have to, I use Doom V1.92.2 or Doom2 v1.92.6.

It's Prboom-Plus-2.5.1.3 though when it comes to watching demos.

In other words, Vanilla Doom.

[Kira]

HavoX said:

(I tried Vavoom a very long time ago, but didn't like it because it ran so slow on my system. I don't know if it's because of the way it was coded... Graf? Gez?)

I think it has something to do with dynamic lights.

[DoomUK]

Is there a reason why Doomsday isn't as popular as it's competitors?

Personally it's my favourite source port and undoubtedly the prettiest. Don't use the 3D models though.

[Gez]

Doomworld regulars are only a small part of the Doom player population. The result of informal polls here like this one are not representative. Doomsday is one of the most popular Doom ports because it is the prettiest; but the Doomworld crowd is made of die-hard purists, competitive demo-recorders, port programmers and modders eager to use new fancy features; so people just looking for a modern engine with eye-candy are under-represented, and instead Choco/Eternity/PrBoom+/[G]ZDoom get the bulk of the votes.

[45th Parrallel]

DoomUK said:

Is there a reason why Doomsday isn't as popular as it's competitors?

Personally it's my favourite source port and undoubtedly the prettiest. Don't use the 3D models though.

I don't know but Doomsday was one of the first source ports I ever used

[Graf Zahl]

DoomUK said:

and undoubtedly the prettiest.

Possibly because many players that visit Doomworld don't care about Doomsday's interpretation of 'pretty'. Personally I think that it doesn't work for levels not specifically made for it. So the features get switched off and what remains? A rather basic GL renderer, not particularly fast, that doesn't handle vanilla rendering tricks that well. PrBoom+ would be a better option for that. It's a lot faster and handles tricks better.

And I'm sorry to say, right now the 'prettiness' is all Doomsday has to show, with almost no mods using specially made for it.

Doomsday's userbase lies elsewhere, i.e. in attracting modern players to an old game. But once they dig deeper and start to appreciate the game for what it is I guess those with a genuine interest will switch to other ports later.

[printz]

Graf Zahl said:

Doomsday's userbase lies elsewhere, i.e. in attracting modern players to an old game.

Heh, that's exactly jhow I discovered Heretic, with high-res textures and 3d models to boot. I liked it, those effects boosted that 1994 game to 2000.

[Graf Zahl]

The hires textures for Heretic, unlike those for Doom, actually look good and consistent. I still prefer not using them though.

[DoomUK]

Graf Zahl said:

Doomsday's userbase lies elsewhere, i.e. in attracting modern players to an old game. But once they dig deeper and start to appreciate the game for what it is I guess those with a genuine interest will switch to other ports later.

Ahem. I've been playing Doom since 1993. It's still my favourite port. The 3D models look pretty horrible so I don't use them, but I still love the other visual niceties that Doomsday has to offer. What's left is a slicker-looking version of the game I played as a child, not mutilated by unnecessary features and additions but easier on the eye.

I mean, I'm sure there's some truth to what you say but there's also more than one kind of person who prefers Doomsday. I switch to another port on those occasions where I'm playing someone's map or mod which doesn't work well with it (couldn't even get RTC-3057 to work with Doomsday, but that's another tale for another time), but for the IWADs there's one choice as far as I'm concerned.

To each their own, of course.

[Gez]

DoomUK said:

(couldn't even get RTC-3057 to work with Doomsday, but that's another tale for another time)

Ahah, of course you couldn't! :)

[printz]

What are Doomsday's current and in-dev modding capabilities? Does it have DED files for info table editing and extending, similar to Eternity's EDF?

Does Doomsday support ROR (room over room)?

[Gez]

Yes and no, AFAIK. You can certainly create new things and new states.

That said, Risen3D does support ROR since it has a 3D floor feature.

[DaniJ]

A large segment of Doomsday's user community have zero interest in DOOM mods. All they want to do is to relive their childhood playing the IWADS with a more up to date audio visual experience.

Considering that enhancing the graphics has traditionally been Doomsday's primary motivation then it stands to reason that if you discount that there will be little else to talk about.

However, Doomsday does in fact have a great many features. The majority of which are unfortunately completely overlooked by the modding community. Half the reason for this is, I think, is because they approach Doomsday with a traditional DOOM modding mindset and naturally start asking questions about whether we support BOOM feature X or ZDoom feature Y and are put off when they hear a "no we don't support that".

As for Doomsday's renderer being "basic" I have to laugh a little, sorry. In what way is this basic? It may not be using the latest up to date features (as it was written over decade ago) but considering that, the render quality is still far higher than any other GL port I've seen.

[Vermil]

To put an example; traditionally, Doom, HeXen and Boom feature a series of hardcoded line and sector types with augments.

Doomsday then came along with XG; a system that allows one to create their own line and sector types in notepad.

For instance, here is a simple, probably slightly crude (I'm not that good with XG myself), Doomsday XG def.

It is a single use XG linetype that the player can activate by using, when they have at least 1 armour, but below 150 armour. It will activate on any skill level and game mode.

Once it activates, it plays a sound in the line tagged sector(s) (set in a map editor, in this case), changes the mid texture on the line tagged line(s) twice (again set in a map editor, in this case, with a small delay between each change, to imitate an animation) and gives the activator 50, 75 or 100 armour based on skill level, up to a max of 150 armour.

To place the below XG def on a map, you simply open your map editor and stick linetype 5320 on a linedef, like you would any Doom, HeXen or Boom linetype.

Then you simply launch Dday with both the map and the ded file that contains your XG def.

Line Type {
ID= 5320;
Comment= "Armour Charger";
Class = chain_sequence
Count = 1;
Type = timed_off
Flags = player_use_a
Flags2 = when_act | any | power_above | power_below | multiple
Time = 10;
Ip0 = done_d
Ip1 = 5321
Ip2 = 5324
Ip3 = 5325
Ip4 = 5326
Ip5 = 5322
Ip6 = 5323
Fp5 = 0.1
Fp6 = 0.1
Power Above = 0
Power Below = 150
Act Message = "Armour Repaired";
}

Line Type {
ID= 5321;
Comment = "Play a sound";
Count= -1;
Class = sound
Flags2 = when_act | any
Time= 1;
Ip0 = "lsref_line_tagged";
Ip2 = "vortexop";
}

Line Type {
ID = 5322;
Flags2 = when_act | any
Class = wall_material
Count = -1;
Time = 1;
Ip0 = "lref_line_tagged";
Ip4 = "1CIRWLA";
}

Line Type {
ID = 5323;
Flags2 = when_act | any
Class = wall_material
Count = -1;
Time = 1;
Ip0 = "lref_line_tagged";
Ip4 = "1CIRWL2";
}

Line Type {
ID = 5324;
Flags2 = when_act | any_mode | hard
Class = power
Count = -1;
Ip0 = 50;
Ip1 = 50;
Ip3 = 150;
}

Line Type {
ID = 5325;
Flags2 = when_act | any_mode | med
Class = power
Count = -1;
Ip0 = 75;
Ip1 = 75;
Ip3 = 150;
}

Line Type {
ID = 5326;
Flags2 = when_act | any_mode | easy
Class = power
Count = -1;
Ip0 = 100;
Ip1 = 100;
Ip3 = 150;
}

I suppose something similar to XG would be the trigger editor in Blizzards Starcraft 1: with Starcraft's trigger editor, you have a simple GUI, through which you select a bunch of requirements from a list, all explained in nice simple English; i.e X Carriers are in X part of the map and X time hasn't elapsed.

Then you select a bunch of outcomes from a second list.

The trigger editor then makes the script behind the scenes for you. You never see the actual script; you create and edit them with the trigger editor GUI.

Nobody ever created a similar GUI program for writting XG, even though it perhaps would have been ideal for it. Which can make it difficult for the typical user to understand.

[Dragonsbrethren]

Gez said:

Doomworld regulars are only a small part of the Doom player population. The result of informal polls here like this one are not representative. Doomsday is one of the most popular Doom ports because it is the prettiest; but the Doomworld crowd is made of die-hard purists, competitive demo-recorders, port programmers and modders eager to use new fancy features; so people just looking for a modern engine with eye-candy are under-represented, and instead Choco/Eternity/PrBoom+/[G]ZDoom get the bulk of the votes.

Every non-Doomworld place I visit with Doom discussion seems to be about GZDoom now. A few years back Doomsday seemed to be the most popular port at those places, but that's definitely changed now.