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

The NUTS Debacle

The Ultimate Question  

37 members have voted

  1. 1. Your Favourite NUTS WAD



Recommended Posts

NUTS is notorious for its nests of demons. It's so noxious that it spawned sequel of equally nondescript quality, namely NUTS2 and NUTS3.

Which NUTS did you like the most? The original for being plain and simple? The 2nd and/or 1st Anniversary Gold Plated Plutonic Aloy Coated Eight volume Nuclear Donkey Edition for the smallest number of enemies present out of the whole trilogy? The final instalment for its triple nuts and double mongooses?  

I only like NUTS2 because NUTS is too much while NUTS3 is even more too much. NUTS2's subtitle is epic, there are fake Mancubi here, Chaingunners look like Megaspheres and the shotgun looks like BFG even though it isn't. What isn't there to like here?

Edited by Voros

Share this post


Link to post

You can't beat the original NUTS.wad - it far and away blows the other two out of the water when it comes to the impact it had at the time it was released, and even to this day. Not even highly optimized source ports can come close to handling it, but it's mostly because Doom itself is trying to do way too much at once and can't handle the thousands of monsters at once, thus slowing the game to single digit frames per second (And often it's less than 1 FPS). One time I used the Doom 4 Doom mod on it and fired the Doom4 BFG... 5 minutes later, the engine rendered maybe a handful of frames at best.

 

Sure, it is technically possible to beat them all, but only if you turn off infinite actor heights and employ a don't shoot anything tactic (If you need to run around, let the monsters do the infighting for you)

 

The NUTS series also why most later slaughtermaps that came after its release have their monster counts distributed differently. Sure, someone can make a map with 5,000 monsters, but the secret to keeping it running is never to have more than a few hundred active and in the vision of the player at once.

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, Traysandor said:

Not even highly optimized source ports can come close to handling it

Lol wut. PRBoom+ handles it perfectly, while Eternity isn't far behind (I suspect it has some hidden costs in its rendering that's giving away too much CPU time). ZDoom-based are the only ones that have serious problems with it.

Edited by Edward850

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, CapnClever said:

Crispy Doom is probably the closest thing to vanilla that can actually play NUTS.WAD with modern computer resources.

What kind of CPU do you have? I only have a mid range i3 6100 and it runs nuts.wad on PRBoom+ at 60FPS (interpolation on of course) without hesitation at all times. The 6100 is actually from the last generation sockets, which makes me suspicious about what your hardware is.

12 minutes ago, CapnClever said:

Eternity Engine is a fair bit slower than PrBoom+, though nothing that'd hit single digits

As a neat trick, boot it with -vanilla -warp 1 to disable all the MBF stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Edward850 said:

What kind of CPU do you have? I only have a mid range i3 6100 and it runs nuts.wad on PRBoom+ at 60FPS (interpolation on of course) without hesitation at all times. The 6100 is actually from the last generation sockets, which makes me suspicious about what your hardware is.

Intel i5-2400

 

Out of curiosity, how do you know it runs at 60fps smoothly? I freely admit the method I used for ports that lack a frame counter is sketchy: the fact that I'm recording using an external program at 120fps puts its own strain on my machine and could therefore introduce frame drops regardless of the game. If you have a better way to verify I'd be glad to try it myself and re-perform the evaluation.

Share this post


Link to post

I was using Nvidia Shadowplay's overlay performance counter. As everything it does (including recording) is on the GPU, it has a very minimal impact on Doom's playsim performance on the CPU. Mind you it can't record at 120FPS.

It also helps to be sure that you are running an OpenGL surface (check the video options), to make sure you aren't spending a lot of CPU time on software page flipping.

Share this post


Link to post

I hate NUTS3's skybox. It's blinding to look at. Or maybe that's considered art these days.

Share this post


Link to post
On 14.8.2017 at 11:25 AM, CapnClever said:

For ports lacking a frame counter (underlined for reference),

But Crispy does have a built-in frame counter, just type the SHOWFPS "cheat" in-game.

Share this post


Link to post

Retested and rewrote data given for ports that previously did not use in-game frame counters, as I managed to find a means to bring one up for each of them (thanks fabian and Voros). Eternity Engine's only goes to 35fps for some reason? I made sure to turn on Uncapped Framerate and Interpolation to be sure, might've missed something else that's critical.

 

I don't doubt that better machines can handle some ports far better than mine can. If you're interested in performing this yourself, as a way to compare ports on your machine, I implore you to do so. More data is generally a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, CapnClever said:

Eternity Engine's only goes to 35fps for some reason? I made sure to turn on Uncapped Framerate and Interpolation to be sure, might've missed something else that's critical.

 

v_ticker is obsolete, d_drawfps is the proper command.

 

https://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?p=563008#p563008

 

v_ticker command shows the speed of the gameloop which will lock at 35 fps. d_drawfps is a newer command however, and it will show you the actual frames per second being rendered to the screen (ie. iterations through D_Drawer per second).”

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Litrivin said:

v_ticker is obsolete, d_drawfps is the proper command.

Thanks for the info! That's not on their wiki at all so I never would've found it myself.

 

Main post's been updated with more accurate Eternity Engine fps readouts.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/14/2017 at 7:25 PM, CapnClever said:

Can't say I have a favorite, but NUTS3.WAD gets points for actually pretending to be something:

 

qq5MdBl.png

 

I don't think BPRD had that in mind when making the original, though. These days they (but typically NUTS.WAD) are just used as stress-testers and, although they can be beaten, I wouldn't recommend playing the map for any other purpose.

 

 

What wad is that skybox from?

Share this post


Link to post

it's from Nuts 3. i'd guess it's an original work by B.P.R.D himself, since his WADs often had custom textures and resources in them of pretty good quality.

Share this post


Link to post

NUTS 1 and 2 are basically just gags designed to make people go... well, nuts. Kind of like all those Mario Maker stages that are just 100 Bowsers on rails with bullet bills everywhere. The third is a legitimate challenge map that can be beaten through very skillful use of infighting and projectile leading.

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
×