Making a map What format is better ? UDMF vs HEXEN vs VANILLA vs PRBOOM vs HERETIC

[riki2321]

If you were gonna make a good wad, Which format would you use? I'd use UDMF, since it's the easiest one for me.

Put your opinions too. which one is recommended for shit?

[scifista42]

I've stated my opinion, and even tried to describe objective pros/cons of different mapping formats, in this post: https://www.doomworld.com/vb/post/1413967

[riki2321]

scifista42 said:

I've stated my opinion, and even tried to describe objective pros/cons of different mapping formats, in this post: https://www.doomworld.com/vb/post/1413967

PrBoom sounds good.. Anyways, does it handle mp3 files or anything? If it does then i'd choose that, if it's only midi. i will try and see :)

[scifista42]

Not all Boom-compatible ports support MP3's, but PrBoom-plus does, as well as ZDoom-based ports (which also support Boom, of course).

[riki2321]

scifista42 said:

Not all Boom-compatible ports support MP3's, but PrBoom-plus does, as well as ZDoom-based ports (which also support Boom, of course).

Eh, PrBoom-plus is my choice.

[scifista42]

OK for you. I just wanted to point out that PrBoom-plus is just one of many source ports that people might be using to play so-called "Boom compatible" maps (because "Boom format" is not strictly a "PrBoom-plus-only format"), so that if you add MP3 to your Boom-compatible wad, you will need to clarify that people should play the map in a port that supports MP3 music.

[riki2321]

scifista42 said:

OK for you. I just wanted to point out that PrBoom-plus is just one of many source ports that people might be using to play so-called "Boom compatible" maps (because "Boom format" is not strictly a "PrBoom-plus-only format"), so that if you add MP3 to your Boom-compatible wad, you will need to clarify that people should play the map in a port that supports MP3 music.

Okay then.

[Zulk RS]

My personal favorite is actually skulltag. But since that port is dead, it's not a good idea to use that format.
I like UDMF. It appears to have the most feature but it is a little tricky for me.

[baja blast rd.]

riki2321 said:

Eh, PrBoom-plus is my choice.

riki2321 said:

Okay then.

Interesting attitude.

[riki2321]

rdwpa said:

Interesting attitude.

What? I acted like that since i was 10, i'm 13 right now :)

[Tango]

Zulk-RS said:

My personal favorite is actually skulltag. But since that port is dead, it's not a good idea to use that format.
I like UDMF. It appears to have the most feature but it is a little tricky for me.

skulltag is itself not a mapping format; most skulltag maps used hexen format (eg "Doom in Hexen format"). skulltag's extras are available to be used in any zdoom-based port that supports them by loading the skulltag resources .pk3 file as an additional resource. it does not have anything to do with the mapping format, though, so you could use skulltag's weapons/monsters in a hexen format map, a udmf format map, a doom format map, etc. hope that makes sense D:

[jazzmaster9]

For first timer's : Boom or Limit Removing.
For people who have mapping experience: UDMF.

I mostly map with UDMF and Hexen Format nowadays, unless I submit a Vanilla map to community projects.

[riki2321]

jazzmaster9 said:

For first timer's : Boom or Limit Removing.
For people who have mapping experience: UDMF.

I mostly map with UDMF and Hexen Format nowadays, unless I submit a Vanilla map to community projects.

Why bump a 1week old topic?
anyways, yes, udmf is very powerful, but hexen is better.

[scifista42]

riki2321 said:

Why bump a 1week old topic?

If he has something relevant to say, why not?

Also, UDMF is more powerful than Hexen format. UDMF has been specifically designed to be maximum flexible.

[boris]

riki2321 said:

anyways, yes, udmf is very powerful, but hexen is better.

How is Hexen format better than UDMF? UDMF can do everything Hexen format can, plus more. If you're mapping for (G)ZDoom there's just no reason to not use UDMF.

[Mechazawa]

Why would anyone at any time ever NOT use UDMF? Other than if you are trying to get people to speed run your map, I don't see the point. Even if you have never mapped before, why start out on an inferior, less useful format that you are going to have to ignore everything you learned anyways when you change map formats?

[RestlessRodent]

Mechazawa said:

Why would anyone at any time ever NOT use UDMF? Other than if you are trying to get people to speed run your map, I don't see the point. Even if you have never mapped before, why start out on an inferior, less useful format that you are going to have to ignore everything you learned anyways when you change map formats?

DOOM2.EXE? The fact that every source port supports that inferior less useful format?

[scifista42]

Mechazawa said:

Why would anyone at any time ever NOT use UDMF?

Well, my first post in this thread links to my another post where I explain why I prefer limit-removing, Boom and vanilla compatibility over UDMF, and try to compare their advantages and disadvantages, all of which I consider relevant when choosing a map format to map in. And I didn't even mention the fact that majority of this community's established good mappers make most of their works in Doom format (between vanilla and Boom/MBF compatibility), not UDMF.

[antares031]

To me, limit removing will be always my favorite compatibility for Classic Doom. If I want to make maps with complex 3D environment, I rather use Hammer Editor or UDK.

[jazzmaster9]

scifista42 said:

And I didn't even mention the fact that majority of this community's established good mappers make most of their works in Doom format (between vanilla and Boom/MBF compatibility), not UDMF.

Well that's not really the format's fault.

[Dave The Daring]

antares031 said:

To me, limit removing will be always my favorite compatibility for Classic Doom. If I want to make maps with complex 3D environment, I rather use Hammer Editor or UDK.

But if you want to make Doom maps with complex 3D environments, then those editors are completely useless.

[Edward850]

Dave The Daring said:

Doom maps

Dave The Daring said:

complex 3D environments

One of these words is not like the other...

[Dave The Daring]

Edward850 said:

One of these words is not like the other...

Please don't give me your Sesame Street metaphors. Just say what you mean. I get the gist of your post, but it could really do with some additional explanation.

[jazzmaster9]

Edward850 said:

One of these words is not like the other...

if the mapper is skilled enough It can be one and the same.

[antares031]

Dave The Daring said:

But if you want to make Doom maps with complex 3D environments, then those editors are completely useless.

In my honest opinion, 3D environment is not an essential to make Doom levels. Doom is completely fine with 2.5D for me.

[Jaxxoon R]

Edward850 said:

One of these words is not like the other...

Until 3DGE receives Quake 3 map format support.

[Dave The Daring]

antares031 said:

In my honest opinion, 3D environment is not an essential to make Doom levels. Doom is completely fine with 2.5D for me.

You're completely right, I just like having the option to introduce some true 3D elements into a Doom map, but it certainly isn't essential.

[Kappes Buur]

antares031 said:

In my honest opinion, 3D environment is not an essential to make Doom levels.

True, not essential but desirable. Especially when one wants stand alone monitors, switches protruding
from the wall, wall details, floor over floor, etc.

antares031 said:

Doom is completely fine with 2.5D for me.

Good for you. :-)

[Edward850]

jazzmaster9 said:

if the mapper is skilled enough It can be one and the same.

The keyword there was "complex". You can be as skilled as you want to be, however vertices still only have 2 axes.

[RestlessRodent]

Could have an extension to UDMF which allows maps to be made in 4 dimensions, now that would be interesting to play test.