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

kb1

Members
  • Content count

    2218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kb1

  1. Yeah, it's a dick move. You see companies doing this: Creating some proprietary "standard" and pushing everything related to said company through it. The devs will get used to using the standard, and use it for everything. I think the hope is that it will lock consumers to a particular platform. Sort of like those 'Buy 10 subs get one free' punch cards, or Food Lion's MVP card - Companies think it locks people to their brand. Really it just makes things difficult for everyone involved, but that's how it goes.
  2. I am completely anxious to check this out!
  3. kb1

    PNAMES/TEXTURE1/2 sucks.

    Kinda takes the edge off when you don't explain said point. Really? Heh. I must be thinking of the sprite marker, which is definitely used. Still, the P_ markers are useful for editors when identifying lumps. Both are valid uses, of course. Are multi-patch textures really used that often these days, except for, maybe, switches? You make a good point, though: improving one patch instantly improves every texture that uses it. Let me break it down: The confusion stems from the fact that 4 types of changes can occur with texture wads. Texture wads can: Add new patch lumps - You can tell because the lumps have names not found in the IWAD. Replace IWAD patch lumps - The texture set's patches match an IWAD patch lump. Add new textures - The texture names are not found in the IWADs. Replace IWAD textures - The texture names match IWAD texture names. With both types of Adds, the process is simple, and it's what I was describing in my first post: Just copy the IWAD's PNAMES and/or TEXTUREx lumps and append the new resources to them. Done. For the Replace variety, you have to make a decision: Do I want to alter the appearance of the IWAD textures, or do I want to convert these resources into Adds? Unless it's something like a TC, or, say, a hi-res texture replacement pack, you probably want to convert the "Replaces" to "Adds". Because you want to make a large texture WAD that includes textures from multiple texture sets, for the rest of this post, I will assume that you want any and all "Replaces" to be changed into "Adds". Note that all texture set combine issues stem from duplicate names, in some form or another. Here's a procedure you can use to combine texture sets: Preliminary Steps 1. Use good tools. I have to stress that having good tools is the way to go here. At a minimum, you want a tool that can load both the IWAD, and a single texture set, and can show the patches and offsets that comprise a texture, the raw patch images, and the composited texture itself. 2. Make sure each individual texture set is defined properly (PNAMES/TEXTUREx, vs. the included patches). Some may include all the IWAD PNAME/TEXTUREx definitions, some may not. In other words, a texture set could simply replace patch lumps, without having any PNAMES/TEXTUREx defined. That's ok for now. What you don't want is a PNAMES/TEXTUREx set that defines patches that don't exist in either the IWAD or the texture WAD. Fix any inconsistencies. Prune any patch lumps with non-IWAD names that are not defined in either the IWAD's or the PWAD's TEXTUREx lumps. Then, prune any entries from PNAMES that define patch lumps that don't exist in either the IWAD or the PWAD. The idea is that the game should be able to load the IWAD, followed by the texture set, and be able to use those textures on walls without issues. So, in this step, verify that each individual texture set works. 3. Make 4 lists in a spreadsheet program that can sort: IWAD patches, IWAD textures, PWAD patches, and PWAD textures. Fill the IWAD patches with all the patch lump names in the IWAD. Fill the IWAD textures list with the names of all the textures in the TEXTUREx lump(s). Sort each list by name. 4. Experiment with your texture tool to figure out the best way to rename a patch. A good tool will let you rename a patch in one place, and it will update all textures to match this new name. When the time comes where you will need to rename a patch, the rename has to occur in the patch graphic lump, in the PNAMES definition, and everywhere the patch is referenced in all the textures that use that patch. Figure out how and in what order this works best, with your editor. For each texture set Using your lump editor, load a single texture set PWAD, without the IWAD. Delete all textures that match IWAD textures, both in name, and in looks. Go through all remaining textures, and compare the names to the texture names in the IWAD and PWAD Textures spreadsheets, and if any match, rename the PWAD textures to a unique name. Write this new name into the PWAD Textures spreadsheet. This ensures that all textures will have unique names. If there's no match, add the existing texture name into the PWAD Textures spreadsheet. Go through the PWAD's patch lumps, and for each patch lump, see if its name is in either Patches spreadsheet. NOT FOUND: If a match is not found, add the patch name to the PWAD Patches spreadsheet. FOUND: If a match *is* found, you must devise a new unique name for this patch - a name that cannot be found in either Patches spreadsheets. Rename the patch lump. Add the NEW name to the PWAD Patches spreadsheet. How you perform this step depends on what your tool can do. Hopefully, it lets you rename a PNAMES entry, and it will update all textures. At any rate, you must rename the PNAMES entry, and that change needs to be reflected in all the PWAD textures that used the old name. Save the texture set PWAD. Final Step Load the IWAD, and grab the PNAMES and TEXTUREx lumps, and paste them into a new PWAD. Open up each edited texture set PWAD, and move the patch lumps to the new PWAD. Append the texture set's PNAMES and TEXTUREx entries to the new PWAD. Done What's important to note is the way Doom loads its resources. For duplicate lump names, Doom always loads the *LAST* one encountered. This is true for individual patch lumps, and also for entire PNAMES and TEXTUREx lumps. Some ports will auto-concatenate PNAMES and TEXTUREx datasets, but if you want your texture set to work across all ports, you have to do the work to provide replacement PNAMES/TEXTUREx lumps yourself. So, if you make all texture and patch names unique, and all patch lump names unique, there are no conflicts. It's a pain, but it doesn't have to be confusing. I'm sure you know all of this, but because of some of the rudeness in this thread, I wanted to provide an exact set of steps to clarify my thoughts. I hope I didn't miss anything - it's not the easiest thing to type out. I did assume a good knowledge of the tools and procedures involved. Hope that helps. Again, using good tools is half the battle. The other half is avoiding "Replacers", and avoiding duplicate names. What is a numpty? :) How to improve: I think ZDoom's additive PNAME/TEXTUREx parsing handles things pretty well. The big remaining problem is duplicate patch and texture names. Since you basically have 8 characters, this is a real issue. Map formats can/may improve on this, so you could specify "BrickTextures:BRICK12" in a sidedef, but that's kinda awkward. "T_000123" might work for texture sets, allowing for 1 million textures, though it requires coordination amongst texture sets, and it removes the usefulness of having a texture name. I'd vote for long names, but that requires a custom PNAMES, custom TEXTUREx, custom sidedef struct, and custom sector struct. UDMF to the rescue!
  4. kb1

    Things about Doom you just found out

    That's very odd. Do you think it's a sample, or just a generated sine wave, or something?
  5. kb1

    PNAMES/TEXTURE1/2 sucks.

    The PNAMES/TEXTUREx system is quite powerful, and, if you follow the rules, it doesn't have to be difficult. Had id done just a little more work on it, it would have worked a lot better (like, if it supported multiple P_START/P_END markers, for one). Especially if the IWAD is Doom2.wad, by far the easiest thing to do is simply add new patches, and new entries to the PNAMES and TEXTUREx lumps. Because Doom2 is always loaded, you know that those patches will exist. This should be done with tools vs. manual editing. There's a couple of reasons for using P_START/P_END. First, it tells the texture engine where to start, when searching for the matching patches. Second, it lets WAD editors identify the lumps inbetween the markers. The root of the confusion is that Doom makes textures out of multiple patches. This was most likely done to save memory and disk space. But, by making all your new walls consist of a single graphic, one entry in P_NAMES and one entry in TEXTUREx will get the job done.
  6. Doom did pretty well with its particular lack of story. Like most things, it depends on the specifics. Story wasn't necessary in Doom, obviously.
  7. kb1

    How are other people emotionally?

    That is awesome. Great job! What were you expecting? I don't mean that sarcastically. What I mean is that the way you feel is something you have control of, if you take it. You can do things to change how you feel, positively, or negatively. But if you just expect to feel good, you're leaving it up to chance. Go do something you've never done before, or visit a friend, or take a walk. Go on a hike through the woods. Ride a bike. Actually, exercise is supposed to promote the production of enzymes and hormones that naturally improve your outlook, as well as your health. Physically go to the public library and check out some books. You can be happy, but it sometimes takes work to get there. Give it a shot.
  8. kb1

    Things about Doom you just found out

    Yeah, it sucks when they turn blue.
  9. kb1

    Could a intelligent animals play doom

    You're right - that makes no sense. It's also not what I said. I said that it's wrong to take those pieces, form a hypothesis, and then claim that it has to be that way, just because the pieces almost fit. The situations you describe can be recreated at will, and observed. These 'pieces' *fit*. *This* is the scientific method. On the other hand, the Evolution debate goes something like this: "Son, I know it was you that eat the cookies off the table. I know I didn't eat them, and your sister wouldn't lie about it. And I've never seen any of our 3 dogs eat cookies off the table, so you must have done it!" Sure, it sorta fits, if you claim to "know" certain things, and use that "knowledge" to back other similarly-discovered knowledge. It's a bad foundation, and nowhere near worthy of being called truth. Woah, you just skipped a bunch of steps. Before you ever get to the 'not proven wrong' stage, you gather evidence, you do tests, you test the tests, in an effort to suggest that you may be onto something. The burden of proof first lies with those generating their hypothesis. By the way, I like how you take my statement that conjecture is not fact, and try to use it to disprove my theory, yet you can't seem to apply it to your theory. But it doesn't really apply, because I never claimed to know the facts. I only claim to know that Evolution has not been proven as fact. The record is right there, just scroll up... I never claimed otherwise. Keep trying. So do I, that's my point. Further down you say that scientific truths are truths, regardless of what you choose to believe. Why do I "need to show" that something untrue is untrue, when it is untrue. I have the authority to judge the believability of anything I see, don't you? Isn't that what you've been doing? Being ridiculed by people that aren't thinking through a problem is not much of an insult. Never mentioned feathers... Name calling, tsk, tsk. By the way, what is a "brid"? Actually, it was MetroidJunkie that said that. My reasonings were my common sense, and the lack of proof. The *lack of*. Not a few little things yet to be explained. Oh, and the others: The extremely small probability of a beneficial mutation, followed by the extremely small probability that that mutation produces what would be described as a new animal, on top of the extremely small probability that such a new animal would find a mate of the same new type that was also viable for breeding. And, all of that on top of the fact that life has supposedly only been around for a few billion years or so. And, on top of all that, the extremely small probability that some chemicals rolled on down the side of a volcano, in just the right type and proportion to create a living cell, capable of absorbing nutrients (that had better also be present), excreting waste, and being able to not only survive all of the other chemicals and conditions present, but to be able to divide itself in such a way as to end up with 2 copies of each other, also capable of doing the same thing. Multiply those odds together, and consider the age of the Earth vs. the length of generations of the various lifeforms involved, and, purely scientifically speaking, God is more likely. You're nervous that someone might believe my theories, presumably because there's common sense in them. I suggest it's something more along the lines that you wanted to strike up a debate, and when it didn't pan out, you're hurling insults as a form a reputation damage control. I can tell, because, instead of having a civil discussion (albeit with a bit of humor), you've resorted to cursing, name calling, and general lack of any attempt to devote any real constructive thought towards the possibility that life is governed by processes more divine and beautiful and bizarre than anything man has conceived. I would like to make sure that people have the chance to continue to think rationally about what they've been taught, vs. having some doctrine crammed down their throat. You seem opposed to this, instead choosing to "pull down their pants" by calling them ignorant, uneducated bloody hypocrites, and asking "where's the fucking holes?", then ignoring them as they are presented to you plainly. Do you think your insults hide this? The name calling, attempts at insults, and lack of dimension are what crush your believability - I had nothing to do with it. I never said Evolution was wrong because it was missing a few things. Your question: "where's the fucking holes then?", so it was along those lines that I was answering. The probabilities discussed above are all that is needed to convince me of the sheer unlikeliness of Evolution being the driving factor in the diversity of life on Earth. Ever wonder why a mother cat will raise a baby squirrel, bunny, or duckling, that has lost its mother? Ever wonder why most babies of all species are cute? You think that's because of "random mutation...if the offspring lives, rinse and repeat"? Do you even think about these things? There's more going on than the cold hard facts of science, and ignoring them is missing the very meaning of life. Please stop getting pissed because there are people that think differently than you, and embrace this fact. How boring would it be if everyone believed the same thing? Until I know differently, I choose to believe what makes the most sense to me. Isn't that what we all do? It's not an attack on you. You act like I stole your bike. I'm fighting for my right to believe what I believe, and to express it on an open forum, in a civil manner, after a question was presented. You're fighting my right to believe what I believe, and to express it on an open forum, in a civil manner, after a question was presented. Couldn't you have expressed your thoughts without going on the offense? Anyway, I've managed to say what I needed to, and explained my view. Hope it meant something to someone.
  10. kb1

    Things about Doom you just found out

    Nothing weird about it: This stuff is fascinating! Thank you! I am amazed at how much use id got out of their resources. Actually, that's not what's amazing. What's amazing is how well it worked to fool...me, anyway: I have to admit that, in 25 years of Doom, I can't honestly say that I've seen more than a couple or so. I would love to compile all the posts from all the threads where people have noticed texture/flat/sprite re-use, into one big document, just to see the extent of re-use. I know there's a lot: Missiles vs. lost soul, barrel and cyberdemon death, and many more. You can't really blame id, either: Doom has a *lot* of graphic resources, and 2 guys did it all. And, if you're as good as they were at it, why not get some re-use? Nice find!
  11. kb1

    Could a intelligent animals play doom

    You can't start out with "scientific method", and then discuss mere theories as fact. The amount of conjecture you present as fact is only topped by your use of insults as convincers. You may beat up your friends that way, but in intelligent discussion, it just looks try-hard. You assume to know what I know, just like you know Evolution - two stories, both flawed for the same reason. My God, you're not "informed", nor have you "pulled my pants down", though that seems to be the goal. You say you "proved me wrong" with theories. Do you realize how asinine that sounds? The "literature" breaks down when the people involved start claiming to know the truth about events they have never witnessed, using spotty, incomplete evidence. I've considered the literature, and I'm not convinced. My cat just had 5 beautiful babies. You know what they look like? Kittens - perfect kittens. And, Momma is a perfect cat, born from perfect parents. If you consider the short amount of time that life has supposedly existed on this planet, these mutations must be massive, and happening all over the place, in every birth, for the number of distinct healthy creatures that have existed/do exist. Every account I've seen of mutations is extremely rare, and is usually a grotesque deformity that absolutely is not beneficial. So, you've got significant mutations being extremely rare, with beneficial mutations being extremely rare, in an extremely short (in terms of Evolution) amount of time. Evolution theory just doesn't add up, not by itself. Usually when man crossbreeds an animal, the animal is sterile. So, there's yet another extremely rare occurence: An animal, born with a mutation that qualifies it to be classifiable as a new animal, with a new genetic makeup that disallows breeding with the the type of animal it was born from. One has to agree that, in the theory of Evolution, at some point in time, the offspring must be considered a different animal that cannot breed with the parent species. Cats are not dogs, after all. So, it's logical that you would need for there to be a male and a female of this new species, around each other at the same point in time to breed. When you stack all of these probabilities, and consider the amount of time since the first cell on Earth, there's no way to win that lottery. You seem to possess some intelligence, from what I've seen. You've shown your hand, and I called your bluff. Instead of devoting so much energy trying to "teach" an uneducated person who has spent no time on the subject, why not use that intelligence to question conjecture presented as facts, and consider for yourself if things add up. Who knows, you may one day figure it out. But, you'll never figure it out just blindly believing conjecture as fact. Often, the people that present this information have agendas, and have been paid to produce results. It's not often that these professionals go against their colleagues, which may or may not apply here, but it's worth consideration. You haven't been able to sufficiently answer the questions I presented, to my satisfaction...but that's okay. I don't expect you to be able to - there aren't sufficient answers yet. What I do expect, is the realization that there are questions that cannot be answered with a quick comeback. What I would hope, is that these questions spark a tiny bit of curiosity, which can be interesting to everyone. I feel that I am in an awkward position. It's as if I am playing Hide and Seek with a child, trying desperately to avoid crushing the child's spirit as he thinks he's outsmarted me by standing in plain sight, facing the corner of the room with his hands over his eyes. You've taken pride at "proving me wrong" and insulting my intelligence, while I am amazed at how easily you accept theories wholesale, and refuse to consider the questions at face value, not knowing that you don't know. You don't need to tell me. Just think about it on your own time, and see what conclusions you arrive at - that's my best wish. I will consider the facts as they are revealed, and I reserve the right to change what I believe, when and if it seems appropriate. After all, that's what intelligence is for.
  12. kb1

    Could a intelligent animals play doom

    @Nine Inch Heels I don't disagree that there are pieces of the puzzle. But it is wrong to take those pieces, form a hypothesis, and then claim that it has to be that way, just because the pieces almost fit. You can't say it is true, and neither can anyone else. It reminds me of those shows where they've dug up some ancient culture, and the commentator goes on to say: "This room is where they performed rituals to speak to the gods." And, there's literally a busted up floor, and a few bricks. In a few thousand years, they'll be digging up a radio, and claiming "This is an ornamental box where the king's most prized possessions were preserved for the afterlife." What I provided is food for thought. But it looks like you've decided to turn it into some personal campaign to insult my intelligence - again without having any real knowledge to base it on. Ironically, you chose to actually consider any of it - not a very wise move from someone who feels so capable of judging intelligence. In this sentence, you understand about people devising stories about things they cannot fully explain. Yet, Evolution is fact, because... what? I suggest that you open up your mind to the possibility that things are not necessarily what they seem. Or, risk drinking the koolaid. And, no, you may not see my monkey.
  13. kb1

    Boom sight bug

    Yep, looks like a cut/paste/modify bug, like P_DivlineSide.
  14. You can try removing and reinserting the floppy, and trying again. This causes the disk to land in a slightly different place, which just may help align it better. If you're lucky, you might get one good read, though it's a long shot.
  15. kb1

    Could a intelligent animals play doom

    I would like to see your toddlers know which berries to eat, which plants to extract water from, which branches will support them. Let's see your toddler swing from one tree to another, 100 feet up. Couldn't help yourself, huh? When in doubt, sling some shit. Hey, monkeys do that :) What animal language do *you* speak? Holes? Common sense says otherwise, for those endowed. Sure, Evolution plays a role in tweaking things to match the environment. But going from a amoeba to birds, trees, whales, tomatoes, people? Of course not. Lack of proof, for one. No Scientific Method. Just a story that half-ass fits: Here's the story: Steal underpants ?????? Profit!! So, let's take an example: Dinosaurs to birds. To believe the Evolution story, at some point, the dinosaur had to endure mutations that happened to benefit the dinosaur enough to allow it to bypass its siblings, and survive to reproduce offspring that also benefit from this mutation. Rinse and repeat. For this to be true, in a single mutation, that dinosaur would need, at a minimum, to have its bones hollowed, and to grow wings well formed enough to support flight. Because, if the bones are not hollow, it weighs too much to fly. And, if the wings are not fully formed and perfect, SPLAT! Now, one could argue that the bones could have become hollow over many generations. But, this is not beneficial if you can't fly - it makes your skeleton weak, after all. So this theory violates the Evolution rule that mutations must be beneficial to survive. One could also argue that wings could form over many generations. But, is a wing, not capable of flight, any benefit over having an arm, with a hand that could pick things up, or a hoof that assists in walking, or claws that assist in fighting? No, both of these "mutations" would have to occur at once, in a single life, and without inhibiting the dinosaur-bird's ability to reproduce. Can this new dino-bird even have sex? How would he hold down his conquest, with weak bones and wings instead of arms/legs? :) Ridiculous. And, genetically speaking, can a dino-bird that has sex with a dinosaur actually reproduce? A dog cannot hump a cat and create dog-cats. Seriously, I don't claim to know, but it seems a bit fishy to me. There's 2 things I want to know: Why do most Evolutionists believe that one theory cancels out the other? In other words, if Evolution is true, what's wrong with the theory that God created Evolution? Talk about telling your ass from your elbow... Why are people that don't believe in God, so threatened by God? Yeah, I know a few animals that play Doom...
  16. kb1

    Could a intelligent animals play doom

    Of course they could. Animals have just about all of the faculties that humans have, except for the annoying ones. Just today, when I pulled up to work, my friend squirrel ran about 100 feet towards me, saying "hello", and asking me for a peanut. He recognized me apart from everyone else that pulls up, and he knows I am his friend. There are 3 problems that I see, that would need to be overcome: Controllers are typically designed for human hands. No one really knows how other animals see. There are a lot of theories, yes. But what about how our eyes mix colors? Frame rates? Animals may have difficulty seeing the screen. And the biggest issue: incentive. Doom appeals to our sense of adventure, to our desire to hunt for sport, and a lot of other things which do not seem to interest animals. Yes, animals explore...to sense dangers, to hunt, to find mates. But, for fun? Lack of focus. One quality that makes humans unique is our ability to hone in and direct our focus, for hours at a time. This is not seen often in animals. You could always provide a treat when the animal accomplishes something in the game. But, I don't know if such a correlation can be made. I've found that many people have a way of "looking down" on animals as lesser life forms, which I find ridiculous and ignorant. I've found the opposite to be true. I see animals as brilliant, resourceful, in tune with nature, generally in peace with themselves and others, and innocent. You don't see them stabbing each other in the back to climb the ladder of success. You don't see them launching wars. They don't generally take much more than they need, like humans do. Of course they could play Doom, or a thousand other unexpected things. But, they don't want to :) Humans are the mutants.
  17. kb1

    Crispy Doom 5.2 (Update: June 20, 2018)

    The fact that people are taking the time to post suggests that a lot of people love the port (which suggests that, no, it's not sinking.) And, asking for something to be added or changed is not the same thing as "complaining." Sure, it could be labeled as such. That's like labeling "I'm hungry" as a complaint. Calling it a complaint infers that not enough food has been served, when, in fact, blame was not included in the statement. It's a matter of degree. Notice the difference between these two statements: When I'm using (source port P), and I do (action X), (result Y) occurs. This can be annoying, because (reason Z). Could you consider adding (option Q) to your menu? (Source port P) sucks, because every time I do (action X), (result Y) occurs. That's just stupid - why would you make it work like that? Fix it, or I'll have to switch to (source-port S). Yes, both could be considered complaining. But, in #1, the user takes responsibility for being annoyed, explains why it's a problem, and asks the author to consider making a change. In #2, the user insults the port, the functionality, and the port author. And then proceeds to threaten to abandon ship (good riddance) if the port author does not comply. Both types of posts can and do occur in most all source port threads. Why do you single out Crispy Doom as being the port that receives complaints?
  18. kb1

    PC Doom sound effects VS PSX Doom sound effects

    Yep. It's the same reason hi-res texture packs never universally catch on, and why some people still play with 320x200 res, with vanilla bugs intact, etc. For every Doom fan, at some point in time, after having been exposed to Doom, love occurs :) Whatever resources happen to be there, when that happens, become baked into that experience, complete with emotion. This is when logic stops controlling the decision-making process, and nostalgia takes over. I think that pursuit of that original feeling drives a lot of the modding efforts for many of us.
  19. kb1

    Things about Doom you just found out

    Those cacos look badass, especially the one on the right. For 3D model Doom, *that's* the look!
  20. kb1

    Favorite "Creepy" Map?

    I have to second Nightomb. Nightomb is a pure vanilla "adventure". It pulls off some tricks that don't feel like tricks at all. It's the first map that felt like I was playing something other than Doom, and it left me with an unexpected unnerving feeling. Spooky, indeed, and awesomely so. I can't put my finger on what it is that made it that way. I am almost universally unphased by such things. Who else is never spooked by Doom maps, but got uncharacteristically freaked out by a map/mapset? If so, which map/mapset?
  21. Care must be taken these days, because there's been a few spinoffs: Graf's version for Visual Studio with UMAPINFO, and another with an SR50 fix, if I recall correctly. I have also been planning a version which is a test bed for the Compatible Doom Extensions stuff, but that hasn't started yet. Even finding the very latest source is not as straight forward as it could be. PrBoom-Plus is sort of unique in the world of source ports, in that it's basically finished - it has accomplished its mission statement, so to speak. I suppose that's why entryway is not very active in the source. But, I agree: Code rots, no matter how well it's written, and it needs to be kept up-to-date.
  22. kb1

    PC Doom sound effects VS PSX Doom sound effects

    That always bothered me too. To "solve" it: Random pitch bend effect - especially useful when you kill a bunch of monsters at once Perkristen's "restored" sounds with better dynamic ranges
  23. kb1

    How are other people emotionally?

    Never said it was easy. My point is that you're right - it's not the ideal environment for learning any more than a basic overview. But, if you can pass the tests and get that diploma, people respond positively and will hire you. And, when that happens, you start to gain real experience, which is the best way to learn. Right now, what's important is not learning, per se, but rather being able to pass the tests (which may be slightly easier, which is why I mentioned it). That may be cynical, but that's basically how it works. In a couple of years, you'll look back on it like it was a breeze - you just have to get through this part. You'll get there :)
  24. kb1

    Things about Doom you just found out

    Yes, P_RemoveSlimeTrails() tries to do the right thing, and, on the surface, it looks like a solid function. But, I believe it is missing a step. I think it should grow some segs by 1 unit, based on the angle of the seg and the angle of the split. If I can find the time, I have an idea. Nice to know that there is a visual way to detect them from the map editor. If a program could automatically detect them, it could also fix them.
×