Zeddy Ryan

Hello everyone. I am making a small collection of maps requiring the original Doom IWAD file, and these maps contain some custom textures. I have two questions related to this. 1) I've been working under the assumption that including unmodified Doom patches and flats within my own WAD file is frowned upon, and possibly illegal. How true is this? This is more of a curiosity, because I have no reason to include any unmodified Doom assets in a WAD. 2) All of my customs textures are actually modified Doom 1 textures, but I don't know if they are "different enough" from the originals. Here are some examples. Example (a) Here you can see that I took the original Doom patch COMP03_4 (shown on the pillars on the right and left) and made a shorter 32x32 equivalent of it (shown in the middle of the image, though tiled twice vertically). I also made a 16x32, 64x32, 40x64, etc. The point is, I took an original texture from Doom and basically stretched and shrunk it in various ways to make what amounts to different-sized versions of the original texture. Example (b) Here you can see two pillar/support textures that are made of elements from WALL47_1, WALL47_2, WALL42_3 from DOOM.WAD (I keep detailed records of the original sources for each texture I make). Compared to the first example, these ones are more distinct from the original sources, though they are still obviously modifications of the originals. I also have some horizontal variants of these ones. Example (c) Here is a texture (actually two patches combined into one texture) based on COMP03_2, COMP03_5, COMP04_7, TOMW2_1, and TOMW2_2 from DOOM.WAD, though I personally did a lot of detail work on the black/green screen. So my question is, can I release my WAD with these slightly-altered textures in them?

Hades is my GOTY by far. No other game comes close.

I have a nasty habit of drinking 2 Litres of soda in one sitting. I never drink more than 2 Litres per day, though. Also I only do it when I'm working on Doom maps. I do mathematics research for money right now, and I never have the desire to drink soda when I'm working on math. I wonder if that's some kind of sign. EDIT: I'm overweight, by the way.

What galaxy will be unable to interact with the Milky Way? According to your definition of "exist", that galaxy won't exist, and by the symmetry of the situation, neither will the Milky Way. Unless you only allow for things to exist relative to some observer, which is not at all what I mean when I talk about things existing or not.

I usually play Doom with the music turned OFF.

What are some examples of people being unfairly banned/punished for making people feel unwelcome? And who, besides yourself, feels as if they're walking through a minefield when they spend time on Doomworld? What you're describing sounds unpleasant, but that hasn't been my experience with Doomworld (my account is relatively new, but I've been lurking for a long time). EDIT: Three days later, still waiting for a response.

Assuming that whatever can't be interacted with simply doesn't exist might be pragmatic, but there's nothing logical about it. Why couldn't there exist things that cannot interact with the universe? Maybe there are other universes, completely separated off from ours. What about the parts of our own universe that exist outside the observable universe because they are too far away? Most galaxies we can observe right now will eventually become so distant that we can't, even in principle, ever detect any sign of their existence. Do things cease to exist simply because they get too far away?

How could you possibly know that?

If two people have logically-contradictory beliefs, then yes, I'd agree that at least one of them has to be wrong. But which one is it? We can perform experiments and measurements all day long and come up with a best guess, and I'd be convinced by that under normal circumstances (I can't imagine life otherwise). But I don't believe that is the same as truly knowing the answer, full stop. I guess what I'm saying is that while I do believe in objective truth, I'm not convinced that me or anyone else knows what is objectively true. We just have our beliefs that are supported (or not) by evidence that comes to us through the filter of our subjective experience. If I'm not mistaken, your original post that I responded to wasn't merely claiming that wrongness exists, but was also specifically about some actual beliefs that are wrong. "I don't know why you're giving these things credence that they don't deserve". This is actually taking a stance one way or another. Which is fine, but that's all you're doing. You're just saying what you believe, not why anybody else should believe it. My criticism might seem ridiculous. But the OP is questioning the very nature of truth and falsity, and your response to this questioning assumes that an answer has already been established. To be fair, I don't know how to talk about reality/truth/falisty without some kind of logical circularity, but it sure is fun to talk about it anyway!

This response didn't include any actual argument against the OP, just mere disagreement. It presupposes that the whole matter of objective vs. subjective reality has already been settled, once and for all, with no room for doubt, and people who don't share your view are "just wrong".

Experiments don't "prove/disprove" things. They provide evidence for claims/beliefs. Just because something has always been observed to happen a certain way in the past, doesn't mean it necessarily must happen that way each time in the future. All it means is we ought to believe it will happen that way in the future. Also how do you know there "there are no unprovable concepts"?

The recent ports were my first time playing Doom 64, and I like it. I only don't like the look of the first few levels, where it's all just generic metal textures with not-at-all-subtle colored lighting because hey look we have colored lighting in Doom now.

Visualizing a Doomspace in my head is a very important part of my map creation process. But it's very hard to control. When I deliberately try to envision what a map should look like, for example when I'm working in Doombuilder or attempting to draw a map on paper, the spaces I think of usually feel wrong, fake, illegitimate. They don't have a sense of place. But when I'm relaxed, sleeping, or working on some unrelated mundane task, visions will come to me, usually just a glimpse of some small part of a Doom map. Sometimes I see spaces that belong in a current project. Other times I see spaces that are valid per se, which can be the starting point of a new map. The key is that they feel real, authentic, like they couldn't be any other way. It kind of feels like they're not really my creation, because I'm merely envisioning what is meant to be there. As for whether any of this translates to my maps being good maps, I don't know. I'll have to release something first, but that's still a few weeks away.

This is unfortunate. I'll have to figure out some alternative way of setting things up. Thanks for answering!

This doesn't answer the question, really. I am asking if there are separate commands for turning clipping on and off, instead of a toggle. Same for targeting, and really any toggle-like command.