Why do people still map in Boom format?

[Decay]

I thought the question was "why do people still map in Boom format" not "My source port is better than yours" (or in kb1's case "i don't play doom at all or have a source port but here's a wall of visual garbage for you to suck on"). Very informative from mapper standpoints, well done.

[Fonze]

35 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

Another reason that was brought up to my attention recently was that there is some sort of stigma surrounding ZDoom maps from the ZDoom community itself, even. There is this myth that for some reason if a map is made in ZDoom format then it must absolutely abide to some insanely high standards, use absolutely all of ZDoom's features and replace everything in the game and even after that's done, must have for some reason an amazing story to top it all off.

 

35 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

To conclude, I think conservativism is an issue on both sides of the fence here. We can keep blaming this or that source port as much as we want but at the end of the day maybe we should go back to how doom modding was in the 90s, where every modder was interested in seeing how much they could squeeze the engine to do,

Contradictions aside, it cannot be denied that all mappers/modders compete with each other for the time of their audience. When one makes a zDoom map, their audience is 'people who make time to play zDoom maps,' along with every other zDoom map/mod out there. 

 

Who makes time to play zDoom maps? Lots of people like zDoom, myself included, and will play a map they're excited for regardless of the port, even if it isn't their favorite port. However, if zDoom isn't my favorite port and there are 2 maps I'm equally excited about, one for my favorite port and one for zDoom, then there is a very good chance I'll play the one for my favorite port first, then play the zDoom one afterward, time-permitting. This adds a bit of delay to the potential of the non-zDoom crowd to play a zDoom map, which compounds exponentially given the vast numbers of new maps/mods being made for Doom (in general) consistently. 

 

There are also many people who prefer the zDoom family as their port-of-choice. But of course with zDoom you also have to add in a wider array of mods which may or may not work well (balanced) with some new map. So now do I want to play this new map or this new mod; which excites me more? The one that isn't played will likely still stay on the "to play" list, but the next time I get the chance to play Doom, what about that new-new map? So now do I want to play the thing from last week I didn't make the time for or this new thing? This situation compounds with every new, sweet-looking release, including in zDoom's case, projects made for "less-advanced ports," and let's be honest, if you made a sweet statue using computers and cutting it with lasers, how would it look to be shown up by somebody making a statue with a hammer, a chisel, and some sandpaper?

 

What is my point? When you make something, map or mod, you compete for the time of other people, which is not an infinite resource; in fact, it's a fickle thing, depending entirely on what is going on in their life with what particular Doom-activity they feel like doing when they get time to "Doom." 

 

As such, (and as you said) mappers/modders should try to squeeze as much into their stuff as possible, to maximize the use of their tools; a typical vanilla map should not compare in complexity to a Boom or zDoom map. Many people like to see innovation in maps/mods, because that innovation gives the work a uniqueness that likely won't leave the player with the feeling that they've basically played this same type of thing a hundred times before. That uniqueness adds to a potential player's excitement and gives a mapper/modder's work a better chance of being played.

 

Many people would agree with your point about what makes Doom special, (doing more with less, in a way; pushing engine limits as far as possible) but by that logic raising those limits with a more advanced port would necessarily mean raising the stakes for mappers in terms of adding advanced features, which once again goes back to the "stigma surrounding ZDoom maps from the ZDoom community itself, even," that "if a map is made in ZDoom format then it must absolutely abide to some insanely high standards." Standards which were set by mappers/modders that came before, who's maps/mods are just as appealing today as they were years ago, and who's maps/mods still to this day compete with new releases for the time of players.

[Dynamo]

14 minutes ago, Da Werecat said:

Limits will always be a part of Doom modding, simply because it's so hopelessly obsolete. You're already limiting yourself by choosing one of the Doom-derived engines for your self-expression needs, and not the current Unreal Engine.

 

But the kind of simplicity Doom offers is what allows modders to get shit done. Older standarts also help in this case, which is one of the reasons you're seeing a lot of finished vanilla+ projects, and not a lot of ZDoom releases.

 

As for the story - well, if it's present, then it should be good, no? The thing about conservative projects is that in many cases they pretty much don't have a story to speak of, so there's nothing to criticize. This is probably the main reason for such high standarts when it comes to ZDoom. You can do many new things there, but you're expected to do them well, otherwise what's the point?

Good job on missing literally every point I've made in my post completely. Maybe I worded it poorly but what in the holy mother of fuck does the unreal engine have to do with anything? With doom you can do stuff, you can take a 90s FPS and give it a new identity and new ideas, then if the same stuff can be done under other games that's completely beside the point, and besides the limits I was talking about were related mostly to gameplay, not to stuff like ultra HD graphics. Did you even read the bit about marsdoom's turrets? Can you please go back and read the post again and then maybe you can make a reply that actually makes sense?

The fact that older standards helps is entirely subjective and you are claiming it is an irrefutable, objective fact when it isn't. As a matter of fact, getting stuff to work properly on vanilla/boom is significantly harder than it would be on a more advanced source port for many things.

 

Daedalus did not really have any story besides a bit of dialogue in the last two levels as well as standard vanilla-style intermission read screens, which were apparently the main source of complaint since they were done in a sarcastic style. Like it or not, I absolutely don't see how some truly irrelevant read screens would make you dislike a mod. It's pretty clear that you really have no clue about daedalus or anything else I've said. Go play some doom before claiming you have knowledge on it.

"What's the point" did it ever occur to you that maybe people want to make things without either relying on hacks or simply things like a door that opens horizontally instead of vertically, an ambient sound or something simple like that. Or maybe they just like mapping in UDMF, or maybe there's a thousand other reasons why they'd want to do it without needing to be bashed even though the only thing wrong that they did was not making doom 3 in the zdoom engine. That's "the point".

Well, if anything your post showcases perfectly well what the problems are, and they are purely down to people having very poor understanding of things and accepting limitations for no good reason at all. Thanks for that, at least.

[Dynamo]

6 minutes ago, Fonze said:

 

Contradictions aside, it cannot be denied that all mappers/modders compete with each other for the time of their audience. When one makes a zDoom map, their audience is 'people who make time to play zDoom maps,' along with every other zDoom map/mod out there. 

 

Who makes time to play zDoom maps? Lots of people like zDoom, myself included, and will play a map they're excited for regardless of the port, even if it isn't their favorite port. However, if zDoom isn't my favorite port and there are 2 maps I'm equally excited about, one for my favorite port and one for zDoom, then there is a very good chance I'll play the one for my favorite port first, then play the zDoom one afterward, time-permitting. This adds a bit of delay to the potential of the non-zDoom crowd to play a zDoom map, which compounds exponentially given the vast numbers of new maps/mods being made for Doom (in general) consistently. 

 

There are also many people who prefer the zDoom family as their port-of-choice. But of course with zDoom you also have to add in a wider array of mods which may or may not work well (balanced) with some new map. So now do I want to play this new map or this new mod; which excites me more? The one that isn't played will likely still stay on the "to play" list, but the next time I get the chance to play Doom, what about that new-new map? So now do I want to play the thing from last week I didn't make the time for or this new thing? This situation compounds with every new, sweet-looking release, including in zDoom's case, projects made for "less-advanced ports," and let's be honest, if you made a sweet statue using computers and cutting it with lasers, how would it look to be shown up by somebody making a statue with a hammer, a chisel, and some sandpaper?

 

What is my point? When you make something, map or mod, you compete for the time of other people, which is not an infinite resource; in fact, it's a fickle thing, depending entirely on what is going on in their life with what particular Doom-activity they feel like doing when they get time to "Doom." 

 

As such, (and as you said) mappers/modders should try to squeeze as much into their stuff as possible, to maximize the use of their tools; a typical vanilla map should not compare in complexity to a Boom or zDoom map. Many people like to see innovation in maps/mods, because that innovation gives the work a uniqueness that likely won't leave the player with the feeling that they've basically played this same type of thing a hundred times before. That uniqueness adds to a potential player's excitement and gives a mapper/modder's work a better chance of being played.

 

Many people would agree with your point about what makes Doom special, (doing more with less, in a way; pushing engine limits as far as possible) but by that logic raising those limits with a more advanced port would necessarily mean raising the stakes for mappers in terms of adding advanced features, which once again goes back to the "stigma surrounding ZDoom maps from the ZDoom community itself, even," that "if a map is made in ZDoom format then it must absolutely abide to some insanely high standards." Standards which were set by mappers/modders that came before, who's maps/mods are just as appealing today as they were years ago, and who's maps/mods still to this day compete with new releases for the time of players.

I think you also missed entirely what I was trying to say, and there is in fact no contradiction. I should have worded it better but let me explain. Regardless of the fact that I disagree with the divide you are making between boom and zdoom mods, because while mods steal eachothers time that is absolutely not dependant on what port they are made for, because your example implies there'd be a zdoom mod for every major boom mod - that's obviously not the case. People play what they think looks interesting, the port requirement is relatively secondary. Also, pretty much everyone has zdoom.

 

In any case, when I said "squeeze what you can out of the engine" I explicitly mentioned the various "myhouse.wad" - extremely crude, amateurish levels that are often really bad even by 1994 standards, yet they still serve as examples of people taking the game and applying to them their own imagination. While there have always been role models, that's what doom modding used to be about, taking the game in any direction you wanted instead of having to abide to strict rules and limitations like now, and these limitations are very real, as the last few posts in this thread perfectly indicate. They are not engine limitations, they are DESIGN limitations.

 

I apologize for the double post but I don't yet understand how to split quotes effectively under this new forum design.

[Da Werecat]

6 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

Blah blah blah u bad person not understand things.

I'd maybe write a thoughtful answer to your complaints about my post, but it seems to me that you're not ready for a civilized discussion.

[Bauul]

16 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

People play what they think looks interesting, the port requirement is relatively secondary.

Perhaps, but do you remember the release of Dragon Sector earlier this year?  Great WAD, but Risen3D only.  I wonder how many people didn't end up trying it because it was for a relatively niche port?

[kb1]

11 minutes ago, Gez said:

I'd suggest setting up a GitHub account, and hosting your repository there. Use GitHub's built-in issue tracker and you won't need to have a dedicated forum, which while certainly nice to have, is quite a hassle to handle (fighting spam, moderating posts, keeping the data base secure from hacking attempts (yes that will happen regardless of how obscure you think you are, there are bots)). For general discussion, a pinned thread on Doomworld with the occasional news thread for a release announcement is good enough for PrB+, Choco, Retro, and Crispy.

Thanks! Sounds good.

26 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

Speaking of, didn't you say just above that you were out of this thread? Thanks for insulting the guy and letting us all know about your reliability, I guess?

Yeah, I know. The attitude seemed to lighten up, and some good ideas made it interesting again. Not sure who I insulted, though.

17 minutes ago, Arctangent said:

Man, dude, you are so unironically far up your own ass that it's a surprise that you're not currently in the hospital for a broken neck. This might surprise you, but I'm well aware that I'm mixing in my actual debate points with my very intentionally hyperbolized eye-rolling - that because I'm doing it on purpose, because one, I find your attitude insufferable, and two, this isn't some formal debate in the slightest, this is a casual-as-hell debate that's just as much socializing as it is bringing out each other's points.

 

Which means when you act like an utter holier-than-thou twat with your nose pointed to high heaven, people are going to call you out for being an utter holier-than-thou twat with your nose to high heaven.

 

I mean, you're only digging yourself deeper and deeper into that yourself, what with your finger-wagging attitude of "oh but you were aggressive so now all your points are stupid!!!" and the whole idea that you are the one who determines what someone can take pride in. Seriously, dude, do you read what you write? Are you this passive-aggressively smug in real life, too?

This is how you socialize? You know, socializing involves more than one person, but with your mannerisms, I don't imagine you maintain a crowd for long. Now you admit to mix your thoughts with intentional exaggeration - how do you ever expect to be believable, or gain anyone's respect, or trust?

 

I never claimed that you were aggressive, or that your points were stupid. Misguided, maybe. Apparently, you have some sort of (self) hate that blinds you from understanding my posts. I'm sorry you believe I am holier than you, and that that upsets you. You mistake smugness for a simple observation of the facts.

 

You ask how I determine what someone can take pride in. Yes, I determine what I take pride in, and what I would take pride in, had I been the one speaking. Of course. You're all worked up about something. Apparently, I am in control of your life: As soon as I post, you are compelled to intentionally hyperbolize. What have you gained? Do you want some recognition for having the most offensive reply? What is the purpose?

 

The advise I gave you was intended to be helpful - nothing more. It doesn't mean that I am wiser - I've had my share of embarrassments in my life - times when I could have benefited from an understanding push in the right direction. If you find it useful, very good. If not, so be it.

 

You apparently expect to be able to have the right to spew all manners of nasty insults and slights, but you complain when I notice and point out your behavior. You say that I claim to be "a victim", and drop a couple more ineffective insults. You can dish it, but you can't take it.

 

So, let me ask you this: How do we solve this problem, in a way that doesn't infringe on the other? Cause this type of dialogue serves no one. I will take full responsibility for the course of this "discussion", but I want to know how to solve it. My time is valuable to me. Therefore, my next step is to simply ignore pointless, ill-informed, unproductive replies, and avoid offering my time to useless endeavors. Then, you can "win".

 

[Arctangent]

10 minutes ago, kb1 said:

I never claimed that you were aggressive, or that your points were stupid. ... You ask how I determine what someone can take pride in. Yes, I determine what I take pride in, and what I would take pride in, had I been the one speaking. Of course. You're all worked up about something. Apparently, I am in control of your life: ... You apparently expect to be able to have the right to spew all manners of nasty insults and slights, but you complain when I notice and point out your behavior.

1 hour ago, kb1 said:

@arctangent: Please take the time to formulate your ideas better. Your narrow-minded circular arguments and conclusions lead the community nowhere. No, I do not see myself as a victim, because your attacks are ineffective. I think, if you try to see the bigger picture, and follow the logic to it's total conclusion, you'll see what I mean. If you provided reasonable points, in a polite manner, I would consider each and every point you make...but, instead, you don't seem to want to have an adult debate. You simply insult and attack every sentence, which makes you lose credibility and look like a junior-high-school punk. You are representing yourself when you post. I suggest trying to post words that you can be proud of. Post reasonable counterpoints politely, when necessary, and also give credit where credit is due. I am here to share ideas, and I will not be discouraged by petty pointless non-truths. Why are you here, exactly? Something to think about.

also til you can actually say "understanding all the facts" unironically and not be smug in the slightest

 

14 minutes ago, kb1 said:

So, let me ask you this: How do we solve this problem, in a way that doesn't infringe on the other? Cause this type of dialogue serves no one. I will take full responsibility for the course of this "discussion", but I want to know how to solve it. My time is valuable to me. Therefore, my next step is to simply ignore pointless, ill-informed, unproductive replies, and avoid offering my time to useless endeavors. Then, you can "win".

Take your own advice and pay attention to your words. So many of your posts have this same passive-aggressive superiority while half-assedly trying to toss in some humbling stuff to try and hide it, which only make it all the more insulting for those who see through it. Seriously, you're asking this question despite the entire fact that you're even asking it answers it pretty well. My words are carefully chosen, despite what you may think. It's just that I have no intention of not being genuine with them.

[Fonze]

I like to see talented people cooperate towards an admirable goal; @Graf Zahl and @kb1, I hope y'all work together on this as it sounds to me like you both basically agree on many issues, but unfortunately often get caught up in tiny details (sometimes which are important, granted) and lines in the sand, none of which is helped by other members of this forum, myself likely included.

 

 

 

 

40 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

your example implies there'd be a zdoom mod for every major boom mod - that's obviously not the case.

I think you misread this:

36 minutes ago, Fonze said:

with zDoom you also have to add in a wider array of mods

 

 

25 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

People play what they think looks interesting, the port requirement is relatively secondary.

I agree

36 minutes ago, Fonze said:

Who makes time to play zDoom maps? Lots of people like zDoom, myself included, and will play a map they're excited for regardless of the port, even if it isn't their favorite port.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

In any case, when I said "squeeze what you can out of the engine" I explicitly mentioned the various "myhouse.wad" - extremely crude, amateurish levels that are often really bad even by 1994 standards, yet they still serve as examples of people taking the game and applying to them their own imagination.

I agree.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

While there have always been role models, that's what doom modding used to be about, taking the game in any direction you wanted instead of having to abide to strict rules and limitations like now, and these limitations are very real, as the last few posts in this thread perfectly indicate. They are not engine limitations, they are DESIGN limitations.

 

I have to disagree here; Doom mapping\modding is still very much about creativity and making something unique, but certain design limitations have been established through years of people playing pwads that showcased how poorly they affected gameplay. Take switches who's effect you cannot see. Is it a design limitation to tell mappers not to make switches who's effect you cannot see because "switch hunting?" Yes; that's a design limitation. But that limitation is a good thing and easily worked with, rather than ignored. It's not difficult to add something to convey a purpose to a switch and it reduces chances of players getting lost/frustrated/bored.

 

Much as with any creative endeavor, though, (writing, music, etc) rules exist to be broken and the better you know your medium the easier it is to break the rules in a good, acceptable way. Take Soundblock's "Echelon," which could be argued to have underutilized zDoom's potential, yet it still got a lot of players. Soundblock has been around a while and the success of "Echelon" shows that he knows what makes a quality product without having to pump out crazy feats of Doom engineering. Not a whole lot of 3d floors, save on a few maps, few slopes, save on recognizable things like spaceships, and the detailing was old-school.

 

But 'what did it do right' is the better question: short and sweet maps, with combat taking place quickly, as opposed to dragging on. Despite most maps containing mostly incidental combat, the fights were engaging, fitting aggressive play, with pressure from multiple angles for the most part and aided by the few custom mobs conservatively added to the existing roster. In addition, each small map was interspersed with an also quick story-blurb, keeping the player interested in what was going on as they applied their imagination to the levels to mesh them with the story. While not super-detailed, each map represented its setting well and the use of colors added so much depth that tons of detail wasn't particularly necessary anyway.

 

"Echelon" had players from every major port making the time to play it, despite being a zDoom mapset and despite not fully utilizing its features, so I don't believe it's necessarily a cut-and-dry thing; art very rarely is. Go back to the switch-hunting thing: can switch hunts be used as a design decision to make an interesting and fun experience? I'd say so, given the author does everything else right and utilizes the switch-hunting for a purpose directly related to the gameplay, such as with a horror-style zDoom mod: running from the slasher, find a switch with an obscure purpose; I'd say it can be done. People are great at being exceptions to the rules and that adds something special to any creative endeavor, but it's still best to recognize and respect the rules for general purpose.

[dew]

1 hour ago, kb1 said:

I never claimed that you were aggressive, or that your points were stupid. Misguided, maybe. Apparently, you have some sort of (self) hate that blinds you from understanding my posts. I'm sorry you believe I am holier than you, and that that upsets you. You mistake smugness for a simple observation of the facts.

Oh my fucking god, you're unbelievable.

[Da Werecat]

It's always easier to think that people don't get your brilliant observations than to try and understand why would they say something you disagree with.

[kb1]

56 minutes ago, Arctangent said:

also til you can actually say "understanding all the facts" unironically and not be smug in the slightest

 

Take your own advice and pay attention to your words. So many of your posts have this same passive-aggressive superiority while half-assedly trying to toss in some humbling stuff to try and hide it, which only make it all the more insulting for those who see through it. Seriously, you're asking this question despite the entire fact that you're even asking it answers it pretty well. My words are carefully chosen, despite what you may think. It's just that I have no intention of not being genuine with them.

Did you ever consider that there is nothing to see through. You see, life gets much simpler when you are being true and speaking from the heart, vs. trying to contrive some illusion about who you are. You know, maybe I just happen to know what I'm talking about. Should I claim that I don't? Why would I want to do that?

 

Your words might be carefully chosen, but that doesn't mean that they are truthful, accurate, or productive. They're certainly not nice. Or helpful. Or informative. Sometimes the truth just hurts. Not sure why it seems to hurt you so much. You've never provided any sort of proof or reason to back up your allegations - you have just chosen to be angry - how's that working out for you? I prefer happiness, myself.

 

I asked you what we could do to solve it, and you proceeded to tell me what to do, as if you're actions are beyond scrutiny. Talk about smugness, holier-than-thou attitude. You said "choose your words carefully". Ok. I do try. That's it? You say "asking the question answers the question". That's a bit deep for me...care to elaborate?

 

In looking at your post history, I see a small amount of info, overshadowed by a barrage of negativity. Kinda sad. Luckily, in this age, I can keep from getting any of it on me :)

[Decay]

10 minutes ago, kb1 said:

In looking at your post history, I see a small amount of info, overshadowed by a barrage of negativity. Kinda sad. Luckily, in this age, I can keep from getting any of it on me :)

Remember when kb contributed anything? Yea, me neither, and its been 11 years! Thanks for the insightful posts about why people might want to map in boom format, stellar contribution to the community and discussion as usual.

[leodoom85]

I think that this special topic has to stop. Nothing constructive is originated from this and this topic is going to a black hole that you'll get stuck forever. I mean, what's the point of this if everyone has a different point of view?.

[Edward850]

So that Boom format sure is neat.

[Decay]

That's literally the ENTIRE point of the thread though. People have their own perspectives on why boom or zdoom formats (or any other formats) are preferential for mapping. For everyone to agree is really pointless, some are just more obnoxious about it than others. Having different points of view is a GOOD thing.

[Arctangent]

39 minutes ago, kb1 said:

so many words about something that falls apart by the second sentence

yeah good job with that mate

[SOSU]

35 minutes ago, leodoom85 said:

I think that this special topic has to stop. Nothing constructive is originated from this and this topic is going to a black hole that you'll get stuck forever. I mean, what's the point of this if everyone has a different point of view?.

i just asked a little question and thought that two or three people would explain why but i did not know that THIS would happen.

 

[Da Werecat]

On the upside, useful thoughts were shared as well.

[kb1]

20 minutes ago, Arctangent said:

yeah good job with that mate

Good deal. But, knowing that I was helpful is thanks enough :)

[leodoom85]

Different point of views and ideas is great, for that, I'm 100% agree. It's just that in some point, someone will ALWAYS lose the "original flow of the conversation" and it can start growing like a snowball. And obviously, everyone will lose their head for that deviation. I hope that anyone can understand my point.

[Xaser]

3 hours ago, Fonze said:

I like to see talented people cooperate towards an admirable goal; @Graf Zahl and @kb1, I hope y'all work together on this as it sounds to me like you both basically agree on many issues, but unfortunately often get caught up in tiny details (sometimes which are important, granted) and lines in the sand, none of which is helped by other members of this forum, myself likely included.

I really hope this gets off the ground too, because I'm seriously curious if kb1 can actually code.

[kb1]

52 minutes ago, Xaser said:

I really hope this gets off the ground too, because I'm seriously curious if kb1 can actually code.

You are on the short list of people for whom satisfying that curiosity would be a satisfying endeavor for me. Stay tuned.

[Jon]

11 hours ago, SOSU said:

i just asked a little question and thought that two or three people would explain why but i did not know that THIS would happen.

 

 

The solution to honest questions being derailed is not to stop asking honest questions.

 

(Asides from lacking a "facepalm" button, this forum sorely needs an "ignore user" feature. Or maybe I just can't find it. Modern vBulletins have both.)

[Graf Zahl]

3 minutes ago, Jon said:

this forum sorely needs an "ignore user" feature.

Hover over the user name and you'll see it.

 

[traversd]

I'd like to see it progress as I already have a list of linedef/sector additions I'd like to put forward :)

[Graf Zahl]

That's stuff for later. I'd really like to hear some word from entryway about the whole thing. I don't mind putting a bit of work into PrBoom but to be honest, this isn't a project I'd want to actively maintain, as too much of the code seems to scream 'don't touch me or demos stop working'.

 

Not so much the play code but the global game management, which is still all in the same dismal state as in the original game with endless checks for game mode (i.e. IWAD) or special handling for all kinds of stuff hard coded and what not. All clearly necessary for demo sync but it makes it a rather unpleasant code base to work with.

[jazzmaster9]

14 hours ago, kb1 said:

Did you ever consider that there is nothing to see through. You see, life gets much simpler when you are being true and speaking from the heart, vs. trying to contrive some illusion about who you are. You know, maybe I just happen to know what I'm talking about. Should I claim that I don't? Why would I want to...

Wow, this was so helpful in the discussions of the future of Map formats.

I might switch to Boom format full time now.

[Da Werecat]

Sounds like some doom metal lyrics, actually. Somewhat relevant??

[BigDickBzzrak]

17 hours ago, Arctangent said:

you are so unironically far up your own ass

 

17 hours ago, Arctangent said:

you're only digging yourself deeper and deeper into that

heh