everennui

I would love to see everyone's prize masterpiece. If you spent over 50 hours on your map I would love to see it.

So I have come to the conclusion that probably a huge amount of maps are designed for pistol start. I know I can't be the only to think this. My reasoning for it is that it'd be tedious to test map 01 everyone you wanted to test map 02. After I've thought about it for a moment I think you could make a save point at the exit of the penultimate map and that wouldn't desync(?) your save when you test. ...or you could jot down your munitions and use a console command to recreate how you would have started. I heard someone reiterate my previous thoughts and I felt like I should probably share my new idea regarding this topic. I don't know how I feel about continuous play. Just an idea I had.

Sweet!!

curious. are you playing on a laptop? maybe you have to push the function (fn) key, too.

Does F2 work? You can also bind a key to "special autosave" if you want to do one button saves. bind y "special autosave"

I've never checked /newstuff. I usually just search in wads/mods and play anything that looks interesting. You can always search the archives by username if you find a map that you think looks enjoyable.

I think it's because there's so much content on Google from years and years of ZDooming. @StevenC21 In the future if you see something on the wiki that says, "deprecated" (in red) it means that it is recommended that you don't use it.

If you're using UDMF format, what you are asking is possible. This is a tutorial for water in UDMF format. You can easily make it a bridge by keeping the type as "1" (Solid) (instead of "2" (Swimmable) like it is @ 0:35 of the video). Use this one instead.

It's kind of important to specify the format that you are mapping for.

What does appreciation have to do with it? I can appreciate something and not like it. Right? I appreciate Wolfenstein 3D for pioneering my favorite genre of games, but that doesn't mean I have to play it.

...and this is a great point. Is it, "OKAY" to do this? I don't even really like Scythe. Scythe II on the other hand.

I can see why trolls, troll some times. You can't say anything on the Internet without people losing their mind. What a thrill. Doom to me has suffered from the, Goldeneye EffectTM. At the time, there was nothing better, and because of this, it was the ultimate experience. Almost 25 years later, the levels don't hold up. They're better than I can do, but they're not better than any of the wads on the, "Doomworld Community Top WADs of All Time" list. You guys wanna flip what I say and turn it into your own platform to circlejerk each other and I'm just sitting here with an opinion. Doom is great. The levels in the first few years of its life were not very good. Doom 2 was better from a gameplay perspective, but aesthetically I feel like they went backwards - in general - from Doom, The First. Again, it feels rushed. Considering it wasn't a priority to John Carmack at the time, and he was working on the next big thing... I think there's probably some truth in my claim, but I don't know for sure. I'm not even saying that any of them aren't talented. I'm saying that they were new to the art, and it showed. My whole little diatribe about Doom's levels mentioned Sandy Peterson once, and it was after saying something like, "All of them were bad, but John Romero's weren't as bad." I'm not personally attacking anyone. I respect all of them as programmers and game designers, but I (capital I) don't play Doom for Doom, I play Doom for FreeDoom. I play it for the pwads.

There is no other way.

They didn't... in my opinion. The levels are very BAD. They don't hold up to me at all, and I don't understand how people can like them. I'd much rather play something from one of the numerous legendary wadsmiths that are so easy to find. I don't know think of any of the level designers as particularly talented level designers at the time of Doom's release. This changed as they got more experience. Romero is Legendary in my eyes because his levels actually were cohesive and had some semblance of my reality in them. In spite of the limitations of the level editor. They were the first "true 3D" environments that anyone had ever made in the genre, and because of this they didn't have anything to pull from for inspiration. The tech was a lot harder to use than it is now. A lot of the environment had to be translated to 3D in a very abstract way. The graph was where they'd spend a lot of their time. Doom and Doom II's levels are very different, and in a lot of ways, because of the monster AI, this is perfect for the mechanics of the game, but I think, had they spent another year or more developing the level editor and getting more experience with it, they could have done something really special. I'm probably oversimplifying things. There are other factors like processing power that should be considered, but without any thought to these things and taking it for granted that a telephone can play Doom these days - Doom's levels just don't interest me much. Something about the game has always made me feel like it was rushed. Especially when you juxtapose a Sandy map with a Romero map. Edit: I mean they weren't talented in creating a 3D space. The other games that they made before Wolf/Doom were very nice for their time period.

Been working with portals.

Just took one. 85. 1 error.

I'm just really confused by this accidentally woman comment. Through the immense flames of this dumpster, that comment is the most confusing. "Accidentally woman?" I've heard that a lot of people who have survived suicide attempts immediately regret the decision. No matter how tough life gets, suicide is never a good choice. Life is so ebb and flow and you never know what's around the next corner.

for boom or zdoom? I think the way I'd do it would be to use a 3D floor and make it invisible to show the texture animation and then when that's done, make it passable. I think these should be flags you can add in the ANIMDEFS lump.

If it answers the question, "Where's all the data?" ...then it is more than acceptable here. (IMO)

@qbanicbind y "special autosave" You can save at any point by going to the options menu. if people are bitching about the difficulty, you're probably doing it right. provided you can beat it yourself. edit: I now see that I'm in Doom 2016 thread. :/ Should I get this game? I've been thinking about it.

I'm a killer clown from the ICP gang.

I don't have the technical know-how to do it, but wouldn't it be kind of cool if the default textures were randomly picked? I don't think that it's ruined. It's one of my favorite textures.

I disagree. What about the mood? I think since the SNES and probably earlier, people have thought, "how can it get any better than this." that effects your worldview, and remembering these games brings your sentiment back to an earlier time. I'm on mobile so I can't really go into it to much. When you think of a game, do you think of just the game, or do you think about everything else that was profound to you at that time? I go all the way back. Every game has a feeling around it. Looking back at older games, there's this overwhelming sense of wonderment with technology. It's so multifaceted to me.

I know. I know. I need to activate windows. Watch it in crystal clear HD. https://www.rockstargames.com/reddeadredemption2/

From what I've heard, they aren't likely to make a PC port for the first game, as the code for it - by the admission of Rockstar - is pretty much held together by bubblegum, and many people were surprised that it worked at all. I can't imagine the next game not having a PC port. GTAV has been very successful for them in the PC space, and it's not likely they won't try to imitate that success with RDR2. I wouldn't be surprised if we had to wait a number of months after the console version to see it though.