Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Der_Kaiser

Hills & mountains in ZDOOM (and other questions)

Recommended Posts

 

I’m working on a map with an outdoor area where I want to have a few small hills or whatever you’d call them. I’m using DoomBuilder2 with the UMDF format.

 

So I made a quick YouTube search and started learning how to do it by watching this video.

 

Here’s where the problems arise:

 

1.- At first I thought I was doing everything wrong, until I realized that the slopes do not actually show up in DoomBuilder2 visual mode. It seems the only way to see if your hill is turning out alright is by actually testing/playing the map.

Of course, in the author’s video the slopes do show up in visual mode. My question is: is this because of the format or the editor? Generally speaking, why would I keep using DoomBuilder when GZDoomBuilder looks much better? 

 

2.- Even after I followed the instructions correctly, the result still sucks. Some slopes turned out fine, some turned out like some sort of impassable HOMish thing. I’m sure I’ve made a stupid mistake somewhere, but as I haven’t been able to find it, I’m starting to think it could be because of DoomBuilder2.

 

Here’s a test wad  and screenshot of the hill I made if anyone wants to check it out:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B96ojRRLfB0OVkdwRUkyX1ZvWFE/view?usp=sharing

 

aCgnGG4.png

 

3.- Should I forget all of this because there’s actually a better/easier way to get this done in ZDoom compatibility??

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Der_Kaiser said:

Of course, in the author’s video the slopes do show up in visual mode. My question is: is this because of the format or the editor? Generally speaking, why would I keep using DoomBuilder when GZDoomBuilder looks much better?

It shouldn't be a surprise, but rendering slopes require putting in the code in the renderer to slope the slopes. GZDoom Builder was started precisely for the purpose of having a visual mode that supports GZDoom stuff.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

I made this some time ago,  I hope it helps!  

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, Ed said:

 

I made this some time ago,  I hope it helps!  

 

Holy crap it looks great, thanks a lot!

Share this post


Link to post

If you don't mind me asking, why is it you were using DoomBuilder 2 and not GZDoomBuilder?

 

There's a discussion going on about why some people don't use GZDB despite it being superior to DB2 in pretty much ever way (given it's essentially just DoomBuilder 3), so I'd be interested to know if there was a particular reason.

Share this post


Link to post

Some advantages of DB2 over GZDB and disadvantages of GZDB over DB2 that I can think of:

-Upon startup, DB2 freezes for a shorter amount of time than GZDB does - notable especially if you want to quickly look into a map just to check something out.

-Some of GZDB's functionality or appearance have completely replaced the functionality or appearance of DB2 without an option to re-enable the older ones, and some people are more comfortable with the older ones.

-GZDB's UI is a lot more complex than DB2's one, which can make it harder to navigate around, and similarly, having more flexibility comes with the cost that sometimes you must be careful to watch out for values of multiple parameters just to perform a simple action right.

-GZDB may be overwhelming for a newcomer to the Doom Builder family of editors or to Doom mapping at all - I remember myself learning mapping and navigating around DB2 without any tutorial, it was fun, now I'm not sure if I'd find it fun if I had started with today's GZDB and seen a hundred of buttons instead of like ten ones.

Share this post


Link to post

Scifista nailed it, complexity and unfamiliarity. I think GZDB already existed by the time I finally started using DB2 instead of the first DB. Maybe someday I'll make the change, but for now, I see no need.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Bauul said:

If you don't mind me asking, why is it you were using DoomBuilder 2 and not GZDoomBuilder?

 

There's a discussion going on about why some people don't use GZDB despite it being superior to DB2 in pretty much ever way (given it's essentially just DoomBuilder 3), so I'd be interested to know if there was a particular reason.

 

Actually, I'm not sure. I've played Doom since it came out, but I just recently got into creating maps. And by "recently" I mean no more than four months. So when I decided to finally learn how to make Doom maps and levels, a basic Internet research led me to DoomBuilder2. In fact, I never heard of GZDoomBuilder until I started lurking Doomworld. 
What I'm trying to say is that, for some reason, it seems that it's easier for beginners to bump into doombuilder.com, watch the tutorials on the site and download DoomBuilder2.

 

Also, like scifista42 mentioned, it seems GZDB is more complex and takes longer to boot than DB2, which may be a turn off for some beginners. 

What I've learned now, however, is that GZDoomBuilder is essentially DoomBuilder3 (like you put it), which probably means I'll finish the map I'm working on and then move completely to GZDB!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×