CapnClever

When posting a WAD or Mod in this forum, it's crucial to provide context. Don't expect people to download unless they know what they're getting into! Here are a couple of checklists that, when followed, will end complaints about the what-ifs and get that vital feedback loop up and running immediately. Strongly recommended: Screenshots, screenshots, screenshots. Even two or three will do wonders in attracting attention. What port(s) did you test with? Nevermind if it's supposed to be vanilla, limit-removing or Boom-compatible - if you tested in GZDoom then write that. What map format did you use? Common formats: Doom/Doom2 format (vanilla or limit-removing), Boom, UDMF, and Doom-in-Hexen. For advanced ports (e.g., GZDoom) does your map/mod expect any of the following: Freelook? Jumping/crouching? Specific compatibility settings? Software or hardware rendering? If your file's meant to work in simpler ports (e.g., PrBoom+) and you're unsure, then you can probably disregard these. Which IWAD did you use? Doom II is assumed, but if you used Ultimate Doom, TNT or Plutonia then please mention it. Mapsets are assumed to start on MAP01 (or E1M1 for Doom1 maps) and play continuously until reaching an unedited map. If one of these isn't true, explain exactly which maps are in your set so players don't have to hunt around. When you post updates, update your file in the opening post. Go ahead and make a new post to bring attention to the thread, but point people back to the opening post so that everyone downloads the most recent version. Other suggestions: How much content is there? For maps: Is it a single level, a full 32, or something in between? For mods: Are there new textures? Enemies? Weapons? Gameplay features? If your file is supposed to follow a certain limitation, like vanilla or Boom, that is probably worth including: just don't write it instead of which ports were tested. Does your map contain specific gameplay themes? Maybe it's a sandbox/city map, or a slaughtermap, or it's puzzle-oriented, or it's run-and-gun. (If you don't know these terms, don't worry about it). Roughly how difficult is the gameplay? Mention if map difficulties are implemented; compare to Doom1/2, Plutonia, or other well-known wads (e.g., Scythe, Alien Vendetta, Valiant). One last important note: Before releasing your wad to the world, create a text file containing all relevant information using one of the following .txt templates: 1 2 3. This text file should have the same name as your wad file does. These text templates have been used since 1994 to ensure all relevant info about your wad stays packaged alongside it as it is transferred from site to site. You must do this before uploading to idgames. Thanks for reading! Changelog:

Check the YouTube playlist here! Doom has an incredibly rich history when it comes to mapping. Over the course of many years, various styles and themes have been invented, discarded, improved upon, played with, and everything else in between. One might even say that there's been enough time to notice certain trends that follow an evolutionary process, from the IWADs to the modern-day megawad. With that in mind I introduce Evolution of the WAD, a Doom show discussing and showcasing the history, content, and legacy of Doom mapping through its uncountable iterations. While all that sounds impressive, the gist of the show is that I play some Doom maps for at least a couple hours and a bunch of people more knowledgeable than me talk about those maps and where they fit as a representative of Doom mapping. I'm hoping it will provide some degree of enlightenment to those who watch, even if the opinions on the show aren't necessarily reflective of all community perspectives. As for what we'll talk about, just about everything is game! We may focus on episode on a particular mapper, or a particular mapset, or a particular trend seen throughout various maps, or a particular limitation or source port that is epitomized in various maps. We'll try to keep it fresh so it's always something worth tuning in to. In addition to the YouTube videos, episodes will also be broadcast live on my Twitch channel here, where you can ask questions during the show and we'll do our best to answer them. We're still working on the format as a whole, and suggestions are welcome.

Incompatible savegames are typically there so that the game doesn't outright crash when you try to use them. I'm unaware of any solution that can handle a corrupted save, unless there are those who know how to edit the savegame binary directly (which will have varying results depending on the state of the savegame). Based on the screenshot it looks as though you're allowed to try to continue loading the game, even though it doesn't expect it to work. Have you tried hitting Y to attempt a load? Given this error message, in spite of asking for REVERIE.WAD, I'm guessing that you're loading out of a different directory than before. Have you moved your Doom files anywhere recently, perhaps out of the Steam folder into something more exclusive? It's possible that WinMBF in its undeveloped state doesn't know how to handle these situations correctly, but it should still probably load just fine.

I'll quote some sections that fraggle linked as a starting reference: To use an example, let's look at the remastering of Strife, called The Original Strife: Veteran Edition. When you purchase this game, it comes with a copy of the source code for you to compile and run for yourself, or to adjust and make something else, or just to look at and study. Even if you don't buy the game, the source code is freely available on GitHub, and you can find all the DLLs used to run the game online legally as well (I think: I haven't confirmed this with every library but I believe this is something required by the GPL). What you won't be able to obtain or create legally on your own are the following files: strife1.wad (original game's IWAD) SVE.wad (Veteran Edition assets) voices.wad (original game voice file in WAD form) strife1.wad and voices.wad are from the 1996 Strife game, and Night Dive Studios has the legal right to distribute these files when selling the game. SVE.wad, however, is specific to this release of the game, and there's no other way to get it legally (whereas the other two could be theoretically used if you'd purchased the game back in 1996). Given the GPL, it is effectively these files that are sold, though you're also being sold the convenience of a complete game package that runs as intended. As this example is a case of a source port being sold as a standalone version for profit, I think this answers the question neatly. (In fact, Strife: VE had a more significant legal problem to justify in dealing with reverse-engineered code, which a regular ol' Doom source port doesn't.) If standalone packages like The Adventures of Square and Blade of Agony simply don't distribute or require the IWAD assets then there's no problem. At most, the ability to sell would come down to intellectual property (Square wouldn't have issues AFAIK, but BoA's based on Wolfenstein). Anyway, to be abundantly clear, any GPL-based source port (i.e., most) is a theoretical launch point from which to make a commercial, for-profit game. Depending on the port, you might not even have to touch source port code! Actually making a game from its scaffolding, however, is an entirely different matter. Not only would you have to write music, produce sound effects, design maps, and draw textures, enemies, weapons, items, furniture, and miscellaneous stuff like the HUD and the menu; but ideally create them in such a way that wouldn't interfere with intellectual property issues. That's an enormous effort! And even then, we've seen these efforts in the past, like Action Doom 2 selling a physical CD copy. It's not common because this is a Doom hobbyist's forum and you're talking about professional-tier work that diverges from many of the aesthetic facets found in Doom. I'm sure no one who's worked on Freedoom has ever dreamed of making it a commercial product, and for good reason.

I think, before we can make a breakthrough on this topic, you have to answer why is true. Because I see a number of people suggesting the opposite. I'm guessing that your argument stems from the "beg" part: begging evokes a sympathetic reaction from the audience in an attempt to gain monetary compensation, and I would agree in general that this is an unethical practice. But I'm gonna say there's a difference between people who take up begging itself as a job of sorts (e.g., along the streets of a well-populated city as others pass through) and people who are vaguely providing a good or service and are vaguely asking for compensation in return (such as on Patreon). A beggar isn't even remotely providing a good or service: the most a payer can theoretically get is a sense of compassion. It's possible that a crowdfunder is being disingenuous and isn't planning to provide the good/service, but that's being unethical through dishonesty rather than guilt-tripping. In a later post you suggest some similar examples, one of which you suppose is unethical: I see no ethical difference between "person making a mod and asking for compensation, some of which will undoubtedly go to living expenses", "team making a mod and asking for compensation, some of which will undoubtedly go to living expenses" and "person being offered compensation, some of which will undoubtedly go to living expenses, for a mod". Other than what I mentioned above -- wording the message in a way to guilt people into giving money -- these exchanges are virtually identical. If you wanna say that boldly stating invested money will go towards living expenses is unethical, as an attempt to engender sympathy, then I can understand your perspective. But I also would be treating that part of the message, regardless of what it is, as a very low priority in my decision to invest (thereby making the ethicality pointless). I've noticed this as a complaint of large charity events, as well. In the case of Games Done Quick, I've seen comments of those not realizing that "100% of donations go to [insert charity organization here]" doesn't mean 100% of the money goes toward the intent of the charity: that's a pipedream. Nonprofit organizations, including charitable ones, still have to deal with operating costs and even salaries. The idea of doing extra work without compensation may be a virtue, but I don't think expecting compensation should be a vice.

Given the upload date of your video, the latest GZDoom version out at the time was 2.1.1. Since then, GZDoom has been updated to version 2.4.0, then to v3 where its latest version is 3.2.0: in that time, numerous changes have occurred, some of which may break the functionality of old mods. As a starting point, I'd recommend downloading GZDoom 2.1.1 if you haven't already (here's an archive of GZDoom versions) and try using your version of Project Brutality with that. You might have to dig deeper with older versions, but I figure you'll be on the right track.

This is a wild guess as I do not have Project Brutality (much less the exact version you're using) but if you have to install GZDoom independently of this mod, it's possible you may require a specific version of GZDoom as well. Errors where there were none before are typically the result of an incorrect setup, so you'll have to make sure everything was exactly as it was prior to your reinstall before you can be sure. In the future, threads involving specific inquiries about a mod would be better posted in the "WADs & Mods" forum, as it'll receive more appropriate attention there. (Also, I wouldn't expect a quick response for an incredibly specific question: not everyone checks this place regularly.)

Here's your beginner's link. If you're having troubles after reading that, let us know: we'll go through it with you and then update the page to accommodate.

This hypothetical scenario is too vague. On the one hand, Doom2 as we know it came out in late 1994 and, to speak nothing of source ports, the ability to extend the game as necessary to create this as a simple PWAD with DeHackEd elements is 100% impossible, even to this day. On the other hand, by the time this would have been possible (let's say 1998, supposing a very determined modding team with a very specific vision of Doom in mind) I'd already have moved on from Doom at the time, and in general far fewer people would have played it since it would only have been available to those interesting in modding back in '98. (Realistically it would've been far longer on the timeline, if you take into account existing mods that only add to the gameplay without modifying other aspects.) So I don't see a particularly satisfying answer either way. For sure it would've been far less impactful, even in 1998, because it would've been a complete departure from the original executable not only in points of engine capability but also gameplay. Doom1's approach to 8/9-map episodic progression is something I believe people (including myself) prefer compared to Doom2, providing a far more effective compromise to the whole "pistol start vs continuous" issue occasionally discussed here. The added weapon and enemies are significant, yes, but I don't think they'd have far from universally caught on in the modding scene: there's a sense of purity from official creations, regardless of the unofficial quality. (Then again I'm not sure there's been anything that comes close to what would have been the efforts of a Doom2 PWAD in seamlessly applying to the original content.) So it'd probably have a sub-following within the community, kind of like what we have with mapping and modding based on Doom1 today. It's hard to come up with interesting points here because of how much this would affect... well, everything. "How would you have liked it" is the best question you can ask here? If Doom2 doesn't exist as an id Software product, does that mean The Ultimate Doom exists earlier? What happens to 90% of the classic Doom2 PWADs? How different would the community be in a universe without an official SSG and slew of enemies that kept the gameplay exciting after all this time? What's the direction of ports when the source code is released? How are Doom 64, Doom 3, and Doom 2016 affected? You're removing an incredibly crucial piece of the puzzle, and a lot of future events become very difficult to read into without it.

I can do you one better. Behold: the Status Updates of People I Follow activity stream! Just stick that in your custom streams and you're only ever two clicks away starting from the front page.

I know this is a cool video an' all, but we don't need three threads for it in the last four days.

It utterly slipped my mind to post the incoming message regarding a new episode, for which I apologize. The next Evolution of the WAD is already on YouTube! It's a showcasing and discussion on TeamTNT's Boom engine and its feature set, and how it was used back then (as well as a peek into how it's used now). Episode 9: TeamTNT - The BOOM Engine

To start, I'm going to use the DoomWiki description of slaughter map so we don't get tied down on semantics: Now not everyone may agree with the above, what I think we can say that the defining aesthetic trait is the "horde": that which the player will "slaughter". The earliest documented cases (PUNISHER.WAD, as well as SQUARES.WAD) are certainly far denser than what was found in the original Doom1 and Doom2, with Plutonia's "Go 2 It" noted for its popularity (being in an IWAD) but is also more refined. And naturally, just as with any aesthetic choice, it's possible to be either lazy or diligent with its usage. It's also easy for a critic to make a hasty generalization after seeing absurd examples (maybe something like NUTS.WAD), or to simply hand-wave the entire trope as uninspired, thoughtless, or (at this point) cliche. I struggle with the same problems when it comes to highly-textured, highly-atmospheric maps that don't even humor the player with engaging monster placement. It's not going to be something that everyone enjoys coming into Doom, especially seeing as how it's not present in the original id maps. As for why this dislike comes across with such toxicity and vehemency, well, you're dealing with a subcategory of map design that has historically been most liked by thoroughly experienced players. Hell Revealed was developed by an early champion of the demo community. Anyone who's only spent time in Doom1/Doom2 will be completely lost as to how to deal with modern slaughter maps, which assume a certain degree of aptitude and understanding about weapon and monster characteristics. It also doesn't help that balancing such encounters to be just challenging enough to be interesting without being tedious, overwhelming, or luck-based is incredibly difficult, and that few players are willing to persevere when this balance is not met precisely. This isn't to say that all slaughter maps are hard, but generally the mappers who try to make good use out of hordes are utilizing them to challenge the player. Sometimes it's fun to give the player a BFG and frag 50 zombiemen, but this should be used rarely. Some people aren't going to like the style a priori, but I'd say most people aren't willing to invest time and effort to appreciate the design (or become quickly discouraged when faced with a bad sample) and delude themselves into not liking it. Not that they necessarily should! But it's easy to dismiss potential when one hasn't taken the time to observe and understand. As a side-note, a lot of mods aren't going to play nicely with slaughter maps, primarily because mods aren't often considered with gameplay diverging greatly from the id maps. So you might get a lot of people that don't like slaughter maps because the careful balance assuming vanilla gameplay is thrown out the window.

Here's a condensed clip containing just the matches. And here's Alfonzo vs 40oz while I'm at it.

It's not quite as convenient, but you can include this filter in your activity streams. Then you'll find it by clicking "Activity > My Activity Streams" on the top bar, and it'll be under Custom Streams called "Recent Status Updates". (I made it a while back for easy searching, and also so I'm not counted as having viewed a member page because of extreme paranoia.)

The POBLA3.TXT is stronger evidence than the MMMUS.WAD timestamp. Having found nothing further to sway one way or the other (save a comment from kxmxeii that may or may not be firsthand) I concede the point: looks like Evilution probably would've been the first 32-level megawad. On the other hand, I haven't heard Memento Mori be glorified as the first 32-level megawad anyway, just as one among the first and as a major community project. I don't know if Evilution holding this title would've mattered all that much, though TeamTNT was a lot more vocal about their releases. (By the way, I forgot to mention H2H-XMAS.WAD, another early megawad that came out December 18 1995, which had the courtesy of adding its freaking release date in the README.) --- To try and bring this thread back on-topic, I'll add my two cents actually talking about what I think of Evilution's level design, rather than handwaving it as undeserving of its fame. In examining the flow and layout, the mappers generally seemed more concerned with using the new textures given to them in interesting and meaningful ways in order to provide players a sense of fascination and wonder, rather than "constructing a map" as it were. There are plenty of setpieces to go around and certainly enough maps that are also fun to play through (I would disagree with the OP that Stronghold is a weak map in this regard), but it doesn't strike me as the focal point of the project. TeamTNT really wanted to make something that would stand out beyond Doom, I think, and to an extent they probably inspired at least a few mappers through Evilution alone to complement Doom's artistic assets rather than replacing them entirely (like Batman Doom). Unfortunately, the gameplay is lacking, especially when compared to its Final Doom sibling. It's hard to fault Evilution during such an early period of Doom mapping and, if anything, Plutonia was a masterstroke by the Casali brothers to intentionally aim for a craftily-difficult mapset: over the years players got better at the game and eventually grew to love the challenges available as early as 1996. I imagine most mappers were more attuned to the likes of Heretic, which favored architecture over combat.

The Innocent Crew (TiC) isn't credited with Memento Mori: they're just called "The Memento Mori Crew" (see MMHELP.TXT), which is probably why unlag5 doesn't count it among TiC's works. Memento Mori II is similarly by "MM2 Crew" (see MM2.TXT). If you take a look at anything TiC made, they're clearly authored as such, even when it's just one member. In fact, here's their website where MM1/MM2/Requiem are labeled under "stuff where TiC contributed", so even many years later they don't consider it theirs. Even then, your timeline doesn't explain the 1995/01/11 timestamp on MMMUS.WAD, unless you're suggesting they had the music finalized at least 11 months before the maps. That's like forever in pre-Quake months! I'm still betting somewhere in the first half of 1995. For the record, DoomWiki explains the error with regards to the Top 100 list, though there's no source. And as for TNT, what I linked to earlier and also this confirm Evilution as having been ready around late October. But I mean, we're trying to pinpoint dates for a hypothetical timeline anyway. Who knows when Icarus would've come out if Evilution had been released sans Final Doom? A lot of people say it seems rushed, a consequence of Evilution's delay and angry posters. Anywho, I apologize for getting us so off-topic with such a trivial matter.

This is a solid point. Just as an aside, however, Memento Mori easily predates even a theoretical late October 1995 release of Evilution. As it is easy to forget, the idgames upload is based on the updated version, not the original: MMMUS.WAD has a timestamp of January 11 1995. While that isn't necessarily the release date (comparing MM2MUS.WAD and MM2.WAD shows a 44-day difference) the info of Memento Mori states: so the worst-case would be 5-6 months after MMMUS.WAD's timestamp, or July-August 1995 (though more likely before then). In addition, there's BF_THUD!.WAD (29 levels from January 11 1995) , OBTIC.WAD (19 levels from January 26 1995), and Cleimos II (a full 32 levels from November 20 1995, though this barely loses out). And I think it's fair to think of Serenity/Eternity/Infinity trilogy as a full three-episode replacement for Doom1, even if they aren't packaged as such. If we're truly looking for a 32-level replacement as a "megawad", then Memento Mori counts as the first to my limited knowledge, but I think it's safe to say that other projects were just as ambitious right around that time. Getting way off-track, though. Really! 'Cause I found Icarus's soundtrack the most impressive part in my own playthrough of it. Again, this calls back to it being less of a Doom game, and the soundtrack reflects that. If you want songs that complement Doom, then Evilution does a better job... perhaps because a quarter of its songs are still from Doom II, so they can't sound completely alien to the rest of it. It's probably why so very few tracks from Icarus and Eternal Doom are recycled. I still say TeamTNT's later works are better at what TeamTNT was trying to accomplish (that is, Doom yet not Doom), which is also to say if you're not looking for that then they'll seem worse instead. If you require further evidence, Daedalus: Alien Defense pretty obviously strays even farther from Doom's archetypal elements (nevermind that it's supposedly a sequel to Icarus). And to reiterate, I don't think of Evilution as especially poor quality or anything. It's got my favorite secret levels among the IWADs, for starters. I just think it overshadows a ton of PWADs in the minds of many because of its IWAD status, especially those who haven't stepped beyond the boundary of the official games. I don't think we'd see all these related projects if it were not an IWAD.

I would argue that TNT: Evilution is remembered primarily because it's an IWAD: nothing more, nothing less. There are enough well-made encounters in the first two episodes that it was remarkable back in the day (or at the very least unique among the IWADs), and that a community project managed to string together a thematic and even structural consistency throughout its 32 maps is nothing short of impressive (compare to Memento Moris 1 and 2). There are plenty of interesting ideas to be derived from its setting: from the obvious "you're in the same place but it's completely different" Wormhole; to nonlinear capacities found in Crater and Habitat; to disorienting vertical usage seen in Deepest Reaches, Lunar Mining Project, and Storage Facility; and the myriad gimmicks and optional bits spread throughout. To me, Evilution is a game that is Doom-and-not-Doom in that it uses the basis of Doom to make something that suggests a different video game. (This is in sharp contrast to Plutonia, which tries to be a game even more Doom than Doom with its calculated and at times absurd approach to encounters, distilling the elements of the original's gameplay into a formula that many believe holds up to this day.) But these aspects aren't quite enough to put it on its lofty pedestal among "the classics" that are represented by Doom1 and Doom2. If you want superior examples of Evilution, look no further than TeamTNT's later works in Icarus: Alien Vanguard and Eternal DOOM III. Both of these PWADs do a much better job at providing Doom-and-not-Doom: Icarus with its juxtaposition of repeated elements and scattered settings; Eternal DOOM with the discarding of Doom gameplay entirely, focusing instead of exploration and maze-progression; and both in terms of aesthetic and thematic consistency. Evilution by comparison is a half-finished approach, trying to be something else but not bold enough to break out of the shell of Doom. Icarus had the player traveling between an interstellar vessel, the planet it orbited, and a number of wacky simulations; Eternal DOOM moved you between a science fiction setting and the medieval one; Evilution provided the same techbase into Hell. I mean sure, Evilution's single-level gimmicks are memorable, but Icarus contains quite possibly the first serious usage of ghost monsters, and Eternal DOOM set the bar when it came to puzzle-oriented design. Neither of these two are remembered nearly as fondly as Evilution, for which I posit two major reasons: Not IWADs. It's a big deal! Most people are going to have played the IWADs before anything else, and that will only become more evident over time as all can be purchased simultaneously. Icarus and Eternal DOOM are even less Doom than Evilution, and history has shown that people prefer Doom's gameplay in Doom's engine (see Scythe, Valiant, and try to name anything divergent after 2005 that didn't use ZDoom or, rarely, GLBoom). Even if Evilution is a half-complete job in this regard, it's still "better" at being Doom. So it's true that TNT: Evilution fills a particular niche when it comes to the IWADs, and that it's different enough to be commended for those differences. It might even be more presentable as a commercial product than its contemporaries (though that may well be due to id Software's influence). But I don't think it deserves the same limelight that Plutonia does, certainly not 20 years later, and especially considering Icarus was actually released before Final Doom hit the shelves. My belief is that it's a matter of authoritative bias, that the power associated with IWADs makes it more memorable than it actually is. For evidence look no further than The Master Levels, which are also official id Software products and virtually never mentioned because they didn't happen to be packaged in a form that delivers the ever-important label of IWAD! Precedence is important, of course, so stuff like Doom1 and Doom2 are cherished simply for being the first of their kind. But I say everything else should be fair play, IWAD or no. And with that in mind, Evilution doesn't hold up.

I'm trying to find a map similar to BOOMEDIT.WAD (here's a video of it in action) but showcasing only features in the original engine. I realize that vanilla isn't capable of much in the first place, but a playable means of comparing the two would prove useful.

You can see at this archived page that Team Eternal (not to be confused with Team Eternity) were the main drive behind Eternal Dooms I and II. I was, however, able to find a Usenet posting authored by Ty Halderman that suggests TeamTNT were working with Team Eternal by the release of Eternal Doom II. So it's hard to say who exactly was involved with the in-between business: Eternal Doom I was definitely Team Eternity only, and Eternal Doom III was TeamTNT, but the interim is unclear.

YouTube video's up for Episode 8. Next episode's planned to be about the Boom engine and what effect its features had on later maps.

You might wanna post in the thread that already exists for this mod. It's suggested there that players should be using v3.1: if for some reason that isn't working, then your description of the problem is useful as a bug report.

On this forum there are some differing opinions as to whether or not "Doomguy" from Doom1 and Doom2 are, in fact, the same person: Stemming from that, I don't think there's any conclusive evidence to suggest that the protagonist you play as in either installment of Final Doom is necessarily the same protagonist in the first two games, even if it's the same protagonist in the first two games alone. Therefore, the answer to your question is likely no. It's better to think of Doomguy as an avatar rather than an actual character.

Only a map that demonstrates what mapping features exist and their most basic usage: linedef actions, sector specials, stuff like that. A wad that shows off tricks (such as SPCIAL2B.WAD) is also quite neat, but not as mundane as what I'm currently looking for. I am not aware of such a wad existing (so far as simple /idgames and internet search engine queries go). If I can't find one I might take the time to build it myself.