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

FireBastard

Members
  • Content count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About FireBastard

  • Rank
    Mini-Member
  1. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    I love it. Couldn't be farther from the truth - regards me anyway. Criticism cuts 2 ways. I can take it, can you? Here's a challenge: I'll gladly discuss any issue you think I'm incorrect about Graf - If you think you can carry on a civil discussion without resorting to rants and name calling. The issue will be resolved mostly on objective merits or reliance on accepted terminology. I've clearly explained the differences between definitions and scripting. IOW it should be obvious to anyone that what you claimed is not true. It was an objective description without calling anyone an "idiot" etc (except of course quoting you to illustrate petty name calling skills). If you have anything to dispute my post facts say it or just shut up:) It's preferable to have accurate facts when discussing ports to avoid false information being spread. There's enough of that now even on new web sites. Let's learn how the various ports attempt to give flexibility - that's how maybe someday some of the various methods can be consolidated so everyone doesn't have to learn new rules for every single port.
  2. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    Thanks for not reading my post and skimming over the hostile name calling by Graf, which I only "quoted":) IOW anyone reading his post would have noticed he is the one that used those words (and not just me either). So you obviously think he's flaming, whether you realize it or not:P I agree it's a total waste of time to convince those whose only purpose is to stick up for something that's total BS:) Fucking up the definition of words is not the way to discuss various ports. For sure, it's impossible to discuss game code in the abstract. One good source for background is reading Carmack's various decisions and changes of direction as he thought about how to make the game flexible, yet not hackable (as he found out was easily done with DLL additions). This is all about what could be done, not what is done. IOW, the options open to any of the port authors is up to them. If they have the code available, then obviously they can do it (doesn't matter where it came from). Randy has done that many times - borrowed code from somewhere else. So has JK (DEH reading for example). In fact, that's the sign of good coding, using code already done (too bad it's not done more). All this is pretty easy to explain from a coding POV. Setting up definition tables is much easier than adding scripting. ZDOOM's SNDINFO, SNDSEQ, MAPINFO, DECORATE, ANIMDEFS are all various easy ways to add flexiblity to various parts. That's exactly what XG and DED do. They are not scripting though. That's all. So please don't call those scripting. They are just methods to add/change variables in the game or generically gaming options. Scripting also does that, but it's a "logic" type of effort vs just setting up a bunch of "tables". Since some here clearly don't know what the DOOMSDAY words stand for here they are (lifted from DOOMSDAY docs, including upper case:) XG = Extended General Line and Sector Type Reference (like BOOM added stuff, just a more flexible way. And this is what ZDOOM cannot do directly:) DED = Doomsday Engine Definitions Reference Does this: THING DEFINITIONS, STATE DEFINITIONS, SPRITE DEFINITIONS, LIGHT DEFINITIONS (like ZDOOM's DECORATE just more powerful). Also includes: DECORATION DEFINITIONS, DETAIL TEXTURE DEFINITIONS, GENERATOR DEFINITIONS, SOUND DEFINITIONS, MUSIC DEFINITIONS, TEXTURE ENVIRONMENT DEFINITIONS, MAP INFO DEFINITIONS, FINALE DEFINITIONS, TEXT DEFINITIONS, VALUE DEFINITIONS, MODEL DEFINITIONS - some more stuff like ZDOOM, but way more flexible. Notice the use of the word DEFINITIONS IOW, this shit isn't scripting. And that's what I disagreed with in the first place. Oh, last but not least: WHAT IS INFINE? InFine is a very simple scripting language ... Sure, they are more "complicated" because they can do so much. It takes time to learn, but actually pretty simple. But what do I know since all I do is actually read what the port authors themselves say (including comments in source).
  3. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    Flames - really? Where did I call Graf names like he called me names? (don't count me literally quoting him<g>) All I did is explain the difference between scripting and a definition language. In fact, if you look at EDGE and ETERNITY you'll see that's how they define all this - not as scripting. The least you can do is be accurate :P
  4. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    But you just did Graf:) Pity you can't argue nicely on the scripting issue as accepted by the normal coding community:) XG is not scripting. DECORATE is not scripting, DED is not scripting (could also go to EDGE and ETERNITY for more examples). ACS is scripting, InFine is scripting, FraggleScript is scripting. Simple really once you understand that the goal of a method is not the same as the normally accepted terms for the method implementation used. But nevermind, some people will just never admit they were wrong:)
  5. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    That's funny Graf. Way to go. That's your answer every single time with no facts to back you up. What I'm describing is the difference between the way an engineer looks at a bridge vs an artist. You are the engineer and see the girders, nuts and bolts, but fail to appreciate the big picture such as captured in a photograph. Again, you are wrong. That's exactly what we are talking about here. By expressing you narrow POV, you describe a philosphy that is merely YOU. For example, you mentioned somewhere that you prefer command line over graphical interfaces for DOOM tools, yet that is a minority opinion and merely a philosophical difference. You are entitled to this, but then so it the next guy. This discussion is no different. You said several things which I disagree with and can prove it's not so. Learn to deal with it. No, for every single post that I disagree with you on, you get petty, offensive and start slinging mud as soon as you can. You have never been polite with anyone or anything you disagree with. Arrogant might be a more appropriate word here. No, I (sic) "hot" you again!. Please reread the ACS stuff. Both you and Toxicfluff just don't see the connection. Doesn't matter where he got the code, the point is only that JK could (and looks like he is) do ACS in DOOM. Has nothing do do with if he changed it or not. Yes, the original goal of JK was merely rendering, however, that's not really true since the XG, DED, InFine and countless other changes really say something else entirely. People repeat things so much they can't see what is right in front of their eyes - he actually changed much more than just the renderer. No, what it proved is what a "fucking" shallow mind you have(that wasn't very nice Graf). Rather than thinking that maybe you just don't understand what I'm getting at (or want to know), you just resort to mud slinging. To refresh your memory, XG, DED and InFine are 3 different ways of approaching the problem of redefining the gaming options. In many ways much more sophisticated and flexible than ZDOOM for what they do (although an ACS addition would be welcome). Nope bud. You again draw engineer conclusions where the topic has nothing to do with what their goals, merely the technique used. IOW, is this scripting or not? That is the topic. Neither one is scripting. Since you fail to see my point about DECORATE vs XG, let's review. You said XG was scripting (see above) and I say it is not. No more than DED is. They comprise a definition language, not scripting. Now Infine is scripting:) Obviously I am :) (told you that before). That's why I conclude your words are not worth "shit". (Nice going again Graf). There is nobody in the community that can look at source code and tell you the quality of a nodes builder. Yet you actually said you could do that. That's a joke if I ever saw one. Only the most egotistical coder would make such a claim. I don't think Carmack would say such a thing bud. The only thing you can do by looking at source code is a "style" issue, which includes important things like comments. In that regard I like JK's code much better than Randy's. Your style is to quickly accuse the other person of what you do right way. I never even come close to the insults you sling willingly at me and port authors who are not here to defend themselves. Here's a good example of how you like to twist things around: See, there you go. You call me names again (very rude - show me where I called you a "moron" Graf) and you actually state things the opposite of what actually happened. It is you that did not like being challenged Graf, not I. I actually explain why I say what I do. You OTOH, behave like some little kid with all the instant name calling and bragging. The facts are you were factually incorrect in a news post about GLBSP and node builders (and that upset you) and you take a subjective/philosphical opinion and treat it as if it were fact - because you say so of course. XG and DECORATE are not scripting. Period. Why? Simple, the goal of something does not define what it is. That's a total distortion of accepted terminology. For the record: you always say "this will be my last post" when you know that you are completely offbase. So predictable:) This post is too fucking long -- sorry
  6. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    Read very carefully what I said. This is truly about philosophical differences. Just because it isn't recognized as such does not mean this it is not. It's simple. Goes like this. JK could implement scripting anytime he wants to since he obviously knows how to do this. Whether it's in HEXEN or not has nothing to do with what I said. From the comment made, sounds like he's doing to do this - like I said, it would be simple for him to do so. The changes made in ZDOOM have nothing to do with my descriptions. It's similar in how BOOM is DOOM yet it isn't. Again an abstract description that covers much more than specific instances. So ACS isn't game code? My what a short POV we have here. ACS is indeed game code since it can radically change the behavior of gameplay. IOW, a matter of perspective again. Technically you can add just about anything to ACS - so all this really defines are the different methods/limits of implementing game changing code. Nothing else.
  7. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    Same ole Graf. Just can't believe that he's wrong. You need reading glasses both for your own posts and what others write. I'm talking about philosophical concepts within the confines of what was being discussed - which is ... drum roll .. things Graf doesn't like because he can't imagine how they might be useful. I'm not going to make endless posts about DED or EDF or DDF or countless other methods (see VAVOOM), since that's not what this is all about. Instead, it's merely appreciation of other solutions (and that scripting does not address at all). That you dare to accuse me of personal attacks is funny since that's what you do every single time anyone or anything is contrary to your POV. Hint reread your own post to see how hostile you get. If anything I merely said what you said, except of course it was the opposite from you POV. You should be able to take what you dole out so freely, yes? Err, no right? Btw, what I meant about the JDOOM code is that the author is perfectly capable of doing ACS scripting, not that JDOOM per se now has ACS. So the gotcha is on you. You are so damn literal the forest can't be seen by you because of all the trees in the way. Don't be so desperate to spit on anything or anyone that disagrees with you. Think outside of the small box. Complicated is in the eye of the beholder. What you say is definitely a shitload (your words kid). How you want to now say that XG is like scripting (like ACS) is beyond me. You said: it's not different at all. That's bull Graf. It's more like DECORATE, or do you want to call that scripting too? Think conceptually, not in absolutes. So you think ugly is fine? Well the world around you doesn't think so - otherwise why do all the new games spend so much time on looking cool(er). I really don't care how much source code you looked at. Has absolutely nothing to do with if you are right or wrong. Reminds me of the boast you made that you could evaluate a nodes builder by looking at the code. That was damn funny since there is nobody else that would have the gall to make that claim. But you did. Rather than again resorting to personal attacks take the time to discuss this in the objective manner you claim others can not do. So far all I see is a complete disrespect for anything you don't like. That cuts 2 ways boy. You give no respect, you get no respect and you deserve no respect. Keep it clean Graf and don't be such a baby. Learn to admit you can't possible speak for everyone, that you are merely 1 opinion (not final at all), nor can you possibly know everything at all (yes that is actually a possibility). Remember the other huge mistake you made (which showed you made stuff up) claiming glbsp was based on "old" code, thinking the code was similar to BSP2.3. Big raspberry on that one.
  8. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    You bet! That's hitting the nail right on the head - it's not scripting, more like DECORATE (in zdoom terms). Although scripting is nice, XG is a $hitloa& different from scripting. All the talk about "interpreted" is also pretty damn funny, considering how ACS is completely interpreted it certainly doesn't help make the code run faster.... What a strange criticsm to make, but that's typical for this forum. Even now, ZDOOM doesn't come close to what you can do with XG. Let's see them "invent" new specials that are easily used just by setting them in your editor versus endless scripts. Yeah, it takes some learning to get the concept, but once learned and developed, takes on a whole new meaning. DOOM64 did that in spades. In some ways this is like zdoom's DECORATE, which also is very weird to those who have never gotten into frames, etc. IOW, rather than take the time to learn something new and different (and don't let them convince us that scripting is "natural": pure bull). Not everyone approaches new concepts with an open mind. Obviously Graf is so strongly biased towards ZDOOM that he can't look at the issue from an objective point of view. Same ole Graf at work here. Don't let it bug you, since as you can see his remarks apply equally to zdoom :) I'd like to see both. JDOOM can obviously do ACS since his HEXEN code does just that. More a difference in port author philosophy - which I respect - not that it's not possible. Ditto for ZDOOM - relatively speaking it's graphically ugly - personally wish zdoom would get with the program on that one - but that's his decision. (And NO zdoomgl isn't the same thing, playing catchup is both tiresome, plus zdoomgl is changing the rules too). IOW, let's cut the port authors some slack here vs what everyone is seeing as bashing. No need for that.
  9. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    WTF? You sure like to take a discussion down a notch don't you. I'll be blunt too. I can see that you can't take criticism the same way you deal it out. Seems I read you posting that somewhere where you tore apart some texture work and you seemed to think it was perfectly justified how else would they know right? Hey, this is a level playing field Bud, that was the same negative attitude you've shown here. If there's someone that can't take criticsm, I'd look somewhere else. You can't just go around pissing on anything you don't like and not expect someone to disagree with you. IOW, what makes you so special that I can't disagree with you? You should be to handle a discussion with someone who has a different from yours, otherwise don't post. Especially when you post stuff that is factually incorrect or merely opinion. Isn't that legit? My god man, all you did disagree that the source made a difference as to how cool a port is. That just doesn't make sense to me. It's my opinion and I have the simple right to disagree with you. Frankly, it's not nice to have a slagging attitude towards the hard work put out by port authors and modifications with nitpicking. They don't work for you. Show us your work for a change and see good you take criticsm :) My vision is one of appreciation, not nitpicking on what is obviously hard work.
  10. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    Sure and imagine if the sun explodes tomorrow and you're dead. My god man, can't you ever stop with coming up with excuses for the silly things you post. Whether the sun explodes or not has nothing to do with how much fun a port is to play. Imagine if every game that was released was evaluated on if the source was released. Too bad the world just doesn't operate that way. Read, very few care about these things. You also have absolutely no idea why he does what he does. I don't either. And I have no idea of how "impenetrable a wall" you represent. IOW, cut out the muck raking comments - that's what slagging means. Try for a more positive attitude. If you don't know, don't pretend to know. (Like did you ever bother to look and realize that BSP2.3 and GLBSP are far removed from each other codewise - you were 0 for 3 in those posts). For some weird reason, I think that the sun won't explode tomorrow and it's going to be a nice sunny day to enjoy. *Remember* there's a whole lot of benefit to having a positive attitude. Some of us will take our chances bud and enjoy what's there without all the worry. FYI: Using FEAR as a tactic makes you a great life insurance salesman :)
  11. FireBastard

    Best Source Port?

    *Frankly* I can't see where the source code has ants pants to do with how good a port is. It's ridiculous to imagine that *everyone* wants to look at the source or cares. He probably has his reasons and you should respect those reasons. He doesn't work for any of us does he? If the damn thing is stable, reliable and good looking, WTF graf, let it be. His attitude has to be respected. Is there some rule somewhere that says if Graf doesn't like it that's the end? Jesus man, you need to take a break from your constant slagging. Why don't you post something you've coded and the source of course so we can return the favor bud. Frankly I recommend this port to anyone that likes JDOOM and want a bit more of the ole BOOM and MBF style flavor added. Visually much more stunning than ZDOOM, although it lacks scripting, that's not exactly something everyone does. Last time I looked some of the most amazing levels had no scripting at all. Can't wait to see Edge work released either - wooot.
  12. FireBastard

    glBSP 2.05 Released

    Bad mood? Not a chance, just correcting you. Are you in a bad mood - seems like it? I've tested close to a 500 levels for that matter. Who give a flying f. about that. I bet some here have tested 1000's of levels. I'm not making any wild assumptions about you at all - can only read what you post here. You clearly have posted things as fact that are not fact, now 3 times: 1 for zennode mods, 2 for speed and now on source code and GLBSP. GLBSP, although it says it's based on BSP2.3 is not even remotely similar to BSP 2.3 code in any way. I think that was just some common courtesy displayed there nothing more. You would know that if you actually understood the code or actually looked at both of them. But whether it's "slow" or "old" is not the point. It's all about what works better with real OGL ports vs zdbsp or regular levels with tricks. Isn't that really what users are interested in? I think so. Can't see where anyone would need the source code to evaluate any of the "fast", "reliable" or "stable" comments. Using the source code is hardly possible anyway. Maybe you don't like the style, but you'd have to be an egomaniac to claim to be able to evaluate. Not even Lee K would make that claim. Meaning there isn't a person alive that could verify "stability" or "reliable" just by looking at the source code. Maybe one, but he's god or something like that. Anyway bud, it's the final results that count, nothing more. If you care to actually do some objective investigation there are algorithms to evaluate some basics. If memory serves me, seems there's one in warm or was that zennode or both (lol?). Anyway one of those. Seems there's another one in deepsea. But I did mention warm and the "holes" I'm talking about has nothing to do with sloppy mapping - think BOOM specials and those little lines floating out there to control things like thrust. Where have you been? All I'm only pointing out is that you can't make the claims you made - nothing to do with a bad mood. It really depends on the level and the port. JDOOM and LEGACY in particular are not happy with zdbsp. The world just got bigger.
  13. FireBastard

    glBSP 2.05 Released

    Don't think so bud. You again made a booboo here. Fastest depends on the level and setting. There are some levels where it's either deepbsp or zdbsp regards speed. Big aaahh .. stretch .. yawn .. aahhh since for the latest trick machines who really cares if it's 3.4 seconds or 3.8 seconds. Give it a rest. GLBSP sometimes can screw things up if you build from existing nodes - which you would know if you actually did this instead of guessing. IOW actual editing/level experience in this area helps before making these wild ass claims. Many would disagree with you anyway since this very much depends on the level. Here's something to broaden your experience. Run zdbsp with GL nodes turned on and then visit some GL enabled port, esp with skies, etc. Now do the same with GLBSP and use a factor 16 value and of course -normal. Damn, saw a level not too long ago with stairs into the sky and a sky on the floor too. Display went bezerk in ZDOOM. No mistakes in the level either. So one can always find levels that favor 1 node builder over the other or a port. Sure Randy compensated specifically in his code for his own quirks. Too bad it doesn't apply to other GL ports. Reliable tends to mean that the level displays as intended. Using that definition ZDBSP has some serious problems like falling through fake bridges - even in ZDOOM. Nothing to do with bridge object stuff - this is about "reliable" and zdbsp just doesn't cut it for many class act levels that exploit these tricks. Stable? Have no idea what you mean by stable - is that a place where you keep horses? :) glbsp nor deepbsp nor bsp nor warm crash given the right resources. zennode is good too, except it needs more than 1 sector and a bit more memory. Just about all the legacy guys use zennode. And please don't rant about legacy, that gets old. It's a very cool port too. All the ports have their strong points, just like node builders.
  14. FireBastard

    glBSP 2.05 Released

    Obviously that could be done. I don't think anyone here is that stupid yet. Not the same as having a nice tight package. Guess you missed the point I was making bud. You made it sound like it was very hard, it isn't. Helps to know how they both work. Btw, anyone who actually does this hack job will be prone to setting mistakes since the option keywords/stuff betweeen the 2 is not even close. Did you know that GLBSP will not work correctly unless you override certain options? Try it on ZDOOM and you will get some surprising results on certain combinations. Sure helps if you know the innards of both programs.
  15. FireBastard

    glBSP 2.05 Released

    Depends on your talent :) I looked at both of these critters. Not that hard bud. Solution: Just graft the GLBSP code into ZENNNODE - since there is already code in GLBSP to work with existing nodes. When I looked at both it became obvious that the problem is not that difficult - just a grunt coding drill. Quickest way is just to tack the GLBSP code at the end of ZENNODE. This preserves the indepedent coding models used. Although not quite as elegant as a tight integration, it works :)
×