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

twipley

Members
  • Content count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About twipley

  • Rank
    Green Marine
  1. twipley

    Chocolate Doom

    Great! I have one question though: can absolute paths now be specified in the config files?
  2. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Gamepad (Joystick) Controls

    Fine. I also assume that it would be easy to override (or just disable altogether) the autoconfiguration feature so that any layout can be used with any gamepad?
  3. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Gamepad (Joystick) Controls

    If shoulder buttons are added in, these might, as you say, well make sense from a practical point of view. I guess I had gone full canonical and went without the shoulder buttons. From that perspective, the "tl;dr (most-canonical) layout" makes sense from a practical point of view, since -- at least it seems to me -- strafe is more important and thus should be more accessible, in battle scenarios. The equation changes depending on whether shoulder buttons are there (or made use of) or not, so the results. There is nothing wrong with me in doing it the way you are doing it. The modernization of game controllers might well call for the modernization of input layouts.
  4. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Gamepad (Joystick) Controls

    no it's okay, since without it i never would have seen this. i am very happy to see this, since when i contacted you earlier about the default-layout idea, you had replied that it was not canonical enough to fit in the project's scope. i always felt somewhat different about this, and i am glad that you have reconsidered your position. i also agree that the 'original' layout is nice and was well-thought. "I think Doom's defaults have been chosen with the Gravis Gamepad in mind." -- at least, that's what perspires from the manual, which can be considered a canonical bible since it was released back in 1993. EDIT: how come both your layouts feature 'down to run'? mine suggested 'right to run', instead. quote: tl;dr: the intended control scheme might be "left to fire; up to use; down to strafe; and right to run. here is, straight from the manual: where do our logics diverge? they should have met and converged.
  5. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Yeah, I think that's about what he said! (Or, at least what I inferred from it!) Although, I didn't understand all of the repercussions, so I asked him if he could publish those "unmolested masters" in order for us all to test on. More choices means more stuff for reviewin', right? :)
  6. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Chocolate Doom now has implemented such-packs support! :applaudes: EDIT: beaten by fraggle. That being said, more pack reviews would be needed! EDIT: beaten by fraggle, too. (hehe) Awesome work by fraggle in the past weeks, first off adding a hardware-based-scaling prototype, then support for such-packs. :applaudes: :) I have two questions in mind: a) as for the sound effects (http://www.perkristian.net/game_doom-sfx.shtml, for example weapon, monster, and washing-machine-switch sounds, they are not stored in MIDI form and therefore a sound-effects pack would not be needed in order to reach original experience, right? b) I have asked MI if he could publish uncompressed versions of his pack, which he said he would do. If I remember correctly, he told me in an email that it has to do with the volume level, which might be best not to fiddle with using in-port volume sliders, which would best be left at 100% (in order to prevent degradation or something?). That being said, I have noticed Chocolate Doom, probably in order to match the original game, has that slider set to 50%. Would not that go against the recommendation stated above, therefore inducing (if I did understand correctly) degradation? Or perhaps did I just misinterpret, which might well be the case. In any case, I am leaving this here in order for all to reflect on.
  7. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Hello world! Back in early January, I had emailed Bobby in order to ask him if he would be interested in giving us some input. I have not much to do with his reply since for me it reads like Chinese, but I am guessing others might find it enlightening plenty.
  8. I have always played Doom using the keyboard, as I think it is offering a greater challenge this way. However, I am now configuring a gamepad in order to play it that way. Weapon cycling is made through the shoulder buttons. For the rest (fire, use, strafe, and run), just for fun I have been seeking default controls, so as to be playing the way developers intended it in the manual. key mappings from the manual: i.imgur.com/xaVBScg.png; "If you are using a joystick, use button 1 to shoot and button 2 to open doors and activate switches. Gravis PC Gamepads have a third and fourth button. These can be used as a Strafe and a Run button, respectively." (1 to fire; 2 to use; 3 to strafe; and 4 to run.) However, it has revealed itself kind of hard to know which is button 1, button 2, and so on. I cannot just assume button 1 for Doom developers to be button 1 for Logitech developers (my gamepad being http://www.amazon.com/Logitech-963335-0403-Precision-Gamepad/dp/B00030AX3Q/). Indeed, there seems to be no industry standard in the definition of internal button orders. I have stumbled upon different links, driving hypotheses in the regard of determining intended mappings: 1) http://www.epanorama.net/documents/joystick/pc_special.html#gravispad -- 1 for left; 2 for up; 3 for down; and 4 for right; which was the popular PC gamepad back in the days of Doom development; however, I am not sure of the posted internal button order; it would have to be tested by someone who has access to that device; 2) http://pineight.com/mw/index.php?title=USB_game_controller#Gravis_GamePad_Pro_USB -- if Gravis has kept the same button order for the USB version of this gamepad which was made like five years later (which I reasonably doubt), then the original Gravis-gamepad button order would be 1 for left; 2 for down; 3 for right; and 4 for up; 3) if the manual took in mind the button order of the snes, which was in vogue back then, then the a, b, x, and y buttons would translate to 1 for right; 2 for down; 3 for up; and 4 for left; -- resulting control schemes would be: gravis: left to fire; up to use; down to strafe; and right to run; usb-gravis: left to fire; down to use; right to strafe; and up to run; nintendo-snes: right to fire; down to use; up to strafe; and left to run; In summary, additional info and research would be needed to determine the very mapping the original manual referred to. EDIT: I have performed some more research on this matter. I have stumbled on a list of games which came out with support for the Gravis gamepad (http://www.mobygames.com/attribute/sheet/attributeId,26/offset,200/p,2/so,1d/). I have then tried to download the manuals for those games. Only one result came out as pertinent: http://www.abandonia.com/files/extras/24746_game_extra_1.pdf (Mortal Kombat User Guide) -- which mapped button A to red, B to blue, C to yellow, and D to green. Add this to both of those links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gravis_pc_gamepad.jpg http://www.emulation64.com/guides/7/3/ Button 1 - Lynx Button B (Gravis Gamepad - Red Button) Button 2 - Lynx Button A (Gravis Gamepad - Blue Button) Button 3 - Lynx Option 1 (Gravis Gamepad - Yellow Button) Button 4 - Lynx Option 2 (Gravis Gamepad - Green Button) and "perhaps" then, judging from the small evidence weight, the intended control scheme is "left to fire; up to use; down to strafe; and right to run." EDIT2: It would still be relevant to receive confirmation, either from someone who could test this original gamepad at home, or who has access to its manual and could scan the relevant part for us to archive. EDIT3: from the Gravis PC Gamepad SDK: _____ || ---------------------------------------------- | \____||________ X-Axis Joystick A, X-Axis | __ GRAVIS \ Y-Axis Joystick A, Y-Axis | / \ GamePad B | Button A Joystick A, Button #1A | \__/ A C| Button B Joystick A, Button #2A |______________ D | Button D Joystick B, Button #1B \_____| Button C Joystick B, Button #2Bwhich means: _____ || ---------------------------------------------- | \____||________ X-Axis Joystick A, X-Axis | __ GRAVIS \ Y-Axis Joystick A, Y-Axis | / \ GamePad 2 | Button 1 Joystick A, Button #1A | \__/ 1 4| Button 2 Joystick A, Button #2A |______________ 3 | Button 3 Joystick B, Button #1B \_____| Button 4 Joystick B, Button #2Bso, the second set of buttons in the doom manual would have been referring to the "joystick b" pair of buttons; tl;dr: the intended control scheme might be "left to fire; up to use; down to strafe; and right to run."
  9. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Gentle bump, so that people be informed of the above edit. :/
  10. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Both versions sound quite different. Especially, in some particular respects. I am quite a critic, although my musical tastes (and audition!) are not acquired enough for me to adequately judge. At any rate, though, it is an outstanding advantage that both works (packs) were performed in such a complete independence from one another. That is, nobody copied no one in their technique. Two independent minds have done it their own way. I am not to be a critic here. I could not; I do not even have the vocabulary. I (as others would) might be interested in reading more development in this regard. I am just happy that two such independent efforts produced the respective results they have. We are lucky to have something like this to compare. EDIT: I believe my preference (this is really a layman opinion, about which even I am not sure!) is Roth's pack for listening outside of the game, as more of the music seems to stand out; and Blume's encodings for listening inside of the game, as the music do not seem to thrust itself too much to awareness. More testing is needed before developing this opinion and grounding it into direct experience rather than speculative anticipations, though, as I myself have never, ever, played the game using such packs. I am stating this swoon opinion because I feel this thread would benefit from such inputs.
  11. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Hey, thanks for such an informative post! I hadn't realized the extent of the lengths you guys travelled, performing all of those subtle modifications over the original outputs. I am not sure of my opinion on this. On the one hand, you guys sure are going over for quality, and are very meticulous in their technique in doing so. On the other, though -- I hope my judgment is not clouded by the fact that I am, in terms of audio mastering, technically illiterate -- some part of myself is left wondering the pertinence of such modifications. While I realize these are applied for the common good, such techniques as multiband compression, peak limitation, cutting off mirror frequencies, and increasing the music volume (in comparison to the sound one) leave me with a touch of uneasiness. For example, if the original Doom experience is having more sound than music reaching your ears, then so be it! (Isn't it?) Although, as a purist, I might be biased. However, I think part of what the community (at least, the Chocolate-Doom one) is interested in, is in "unmolested" music. "Nothing beefed up, [so as to be] giving the pure sound of the original tracks to people who don't own one of those Roland devices." I have a hard time writing all of this without sounding like bashing both of you. Trust me, this is the farthest from my authentic intention. If I could talk to you guys face to face, you might understand that better. My delicate manners seem somewhat obscured by the coldness of all this text.
  12. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    Here is -- I believe -- most of the relevant material from that thread: LogicDeLuxe answered: You also need loop data, though. The FLAC has to repeat itself while the fading notes and reverb at its ending is still playing. The exact point where the original MIDI ended has to be stored somewhere. LogicDeLuxe answered: I played the MIDI's provided in this thread earlier to the end, until the last note and reverb is over.Unlike the MP2 tracks, this don't clip, really. I mastered them a few dB quiter than those MP2. There are some multiband peak compression involved on very few occasion. And the peak limiter softens some peaks slightly. I sure compared every mastered track carefully to the original recording at the same RMS loudness to be sure that there is no significant difference. I am the last who would overcompress or clip a recording just to make it excessive hot. The RMS matches those of the late 80's and early 90's which used to be a good compromise between loudness and resolution usage. I usually master at -14 dBFS RMS sine, and this one is even slightly softer. In my experience, there are only few cases where even more dynamic is important, which are mainly classic, some jazz styles and audio dramas. Most mastering guys probably would have edited this much more aggressively, I guess. Compare this sound to those mainstream CD's released over the past few years, for instance. Btw. I am a TurnMeUp supporter. Other than this, I cut off the mirror frequencies above 16kHz with a FFT filter and did a phase true subsonic filter below 30 Hz to save some power. (Lowest note in those tunes has a base frequency at about 45 Hz.) No noise reduction involved, since the SC-155 has already a pretty good noise ratio. Thus no need to mess with it. Looping is one not so trivial think to do. The problem is, that I would chop of the reverb if I'd just cut the end. You could insert it to the beginning in order to prevent this, but then, it won't sound like a real beginning anymore. Thus, the best think to handle this issue would be an engine handling this, ie. restart the track from the beginning while still playing the reverb of the last note.Do you mean the OPL3 and the MU5 example? If yes, it well could be the case. Some of my cables have its colors wrong on the RCA jacks for some reason, and I just quickly made those examples without checking the channels. I did for the Sound Canvas recordings, though, I think.
  13. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    I guess you're right. I meant he would have liked people to use SC-55s. Because, it permits hearing Doom the way it was designed to sound like.
  14. twipley

    [SEEKING] Intended Doom SC-55 Music

    This, or inquire about the method each of Roth and Blume used. Because, isn't after all the only needed equipment the Roland sound card? It is what he intended people using. I really wonder what is the cause of differences between both above encodings. EDIT: I've informed both Roth and Blume about the existence of this thread.
  15. (I do not let my torrent client opened. If you need a seed, leave me a note and I will do so in the following days.) It might be interesting to compare both of these. kkaden (over at github) has noted some differences between the two. The quest is to find or attain the original, intended, authentic Doom audio experience.
×