Idea for a nerve-racking level

[logjon2]

I was just playing around in wadauthor when I came up with an idea I thought was pretty cool. I loaded the level up with about 30 cyberdemons, that weren't deaf. Then I placed them outside the level, where they could do no (physical) damage. During play, when you shoot something, becuase they aren't deaf, the roar and stomp around, creating an awful mess of noise. This can really take a toll on the player's bravery, just ask my cousin (the first victim of my new "trick").

[Kaiser]

can't you just do that via Fragglescript/Zdoom by placing the sounds? and have them repeat?

[Aliotroph?]

This trick is good. It should work with Vanilla DooM. You should tell Doom_Dude before he finishes Vilecore 2.0. The problem is it fucks up the kill score.

I almost forgot this one: level six in version 1.1 of the shareware DooM had a sargeant in the void in the middle of the maze.

------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[mystic]

Some wads use that trick to make ambient sounds, replacing a monsters sound with the desired sound effect.

------------------
Creator of 'The Mummy Phuquers' and 'Mystic' series of Doom wads.
also creator of ANDYDM1.WAD (my favourite)

MYSTICMEG IS CUMMING SOON
http://www.murray6.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/liam/6.gif
http://www.gtroad.net

[Doom_Dude]

Sounds like something that may cause crashes and such....

------------------
http://www.newdoom.com/hosted/themegawad/sig/vilesig1.GIF
The Megawad (http://www.newdoom.com/hosted/themegawad/)
Deathcore & Vilecore Ver2.0 is coming!
Gimme a wicked weapon a mean assed monster in a kewl level and an engine that delivers.

[The Undertaker]

Nah, just it will be impossible to get 100% kills unless you place the monster in a crusher have it be activited near the end of the level. But it seems all the ports have ambient sounds so it would be easier to use those.

[logjon2]

Yeah, I know, but the level I'm working on right now is made to be compatible with non-ported versions of doom.

BTW, I cut the number of cybies to two strategically placed for maximum mental damage. Won't screw up the kill count too bad. I really don't know too many people who would want to go hunting for cybies like that anyway.

[logjon2]

"Sounds like something that may cause crashes and such...."

?

[Aliotroph?]

Shouldn't cause any crashes. You could always put the monster in a hidden sector anyway.

------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[logjon2]

I didn't think it would. I was just quoting doom dude (I think) and wondering about the reasoning behind this.

[Aliotroph?]

Yeah, it's not the kind of thing they tell you in the manuals. That's probably why he brought that up.

------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[Stphrz]

Just put 'em in an isoloated sector where you need the sound. Then later in the level you can set a two sided linedef as a walk through trigger for a ceiling crusher in that sector. This way you end up killing them all and preserving the kill score. You can propogate the sound using another very thin sector as a conduit.

------------------
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me? -Captain Beefheart

[deepteam]

Or just make them the same "SECTOR". Usually a bit cleaner looking and for sure less work. Remember, although everyone talks about "sectors" as a geometric area, it's not really a geometric area.

In DeePsea all you have to do is click the "sector" where the "sound enemies" are located then click the sector where you want to "hear" the sound and issue the "merge sector" command (the last sector is the one where all the properties are taken from).

Or, in other editors (including DeePsea), you can just edit the sidedef references to point to the same sector.

[Aliotroph?]

Or when you draw sectors you can just make separate areas part of the same sector. This only applies to editors that work like DEU/DETH, etc. Otherwise, just do what deepteam said.

------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[deepteam]

Maybe if Deu/Deth "drew" you could do it. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

Only they use dot-to-dot and then a series-of-steps which could make the sidedefs point to the same sector. IOW, the "other" way I mentioned. Manually changing the references is almost always the way it's done in all other editors.

Usually one is adding details to a level when this kind of problem appears. There are other situations where "merging" is pretty damn useful. I used that feature a lot in making XTHEATER.

One reason I do that is because I split areas (creating more sectors) and then later decide I really didn't want to do that. So I just merge them back together and delete any lines I don't want.

[Stphrz]

I still think a separate sector is the way to go. You may not want the crushing ceiling to be in the part of the map the player is able to enter. You don't need a thin sector between them. You could just use a small sector within the the sector containing the badguys and merge it with the sector the player is in. The sound will then propogate properly.

It does no harm to think of a sector as a geometric area or a collection of separate areas (even though it's just a ceiling, floor, light level). In fact it's necessary to visualise level construction. Any sector with out sidedefs referenced to it is useless and unused anyway. It can't be rendered or entered during play.

------------------
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me? -Captain Beefheart

[deepteam]

I disagree with using the term "SECTOR" to define a geometric area without qualification. This is a pure case of being too comfortable with a subject and not seeing the inherent confusion. [how log solves his problem is up to him]

Simple put, in the DOOM universe it's just not a geometric area. Since it isn't, why call it something it's not?. All that does is lead to an immense amount of confusion, especially to beginners.

Many posts and documentation sites are technically incorrect when they describe their examples and "actions". Invariably the term sector is used in the geometric sense.

The problem with that is that one can't possible understand many aspects of level design. That one little "detail" confuses the hell out of them.

Visualizing a level is really a totally different subject. You think of the TOTAL 3D space described, not just the "sector".

In my mind I don't think of "sector" at all, it's the "game space", just like it is in Quakex .. etc. Do you think of "brushes" in Quake or the game space generated? This is no different. What's happened is that certain persons propagated this mistaken concept - especially when not much was known - and then even when it was known.

Even that book that was written had it wrong. Right up front Benner totally mispoke on sectors. Then later on the definition is reversed and now all better. But that's hardly the right place to correct it.

It's easy to avoid this confusion by making the distinctions clear. Sure, once you know what's going on this disappears, but believe me, the number of beginners that get sidetracked by this are frequent.

I'll be the lone person who refuses to propagate that as a blanket misnomer http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

[Aliotroph?]

You don't want to know how I thought of this when I first read about mapping. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm3.gif

I think Stphrz missed what you were trying to say. You mean sectors don't represent a geometric area because they can be comprised of multiple areas in different parts of the level. I think this is what you meant when you mentioned putting monsters in the same sector. Maybe a good analogy is countries. The United States is one big country but some of it's areas are seperated by quite a huge space. The same can happen with sectors. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

Yeah, I know DEU can't "draw." I just used that for lack of a better term. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/wink.gif

------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[mystic]

I have to say I think its less confusing to think of sectors as geometric areas, I have always saw them this way, even though I know they are not, like Stephirz (hehe) says "it's necessary to visualise level construction"

Deepteam looks at things from a coders perspective while stefirz (LOL) and myself see things from a wadster point of view. In the end it doesnt really matter as long as we get the job done.

I hope this isnt one of those long drawn out arguments where we all keep repeating the same stuff to each other for a few days.

------------------
Creator of 'The Mummy Phuquers' and 'Mystic' series of Doom wads.
also creator of ANDYDM1.WAD (my favourite)

MYSTICMEG IS CUMMING SOON
http://www.murray6.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/liam/6.gif
http://www.gtroad.net

[Stphrz]

No, actually, he meant sectors have absolutely nothing to do with geometry. At all. Which is correct. However, for a sector to be of any use, ie for a player to be able to stand on the floor or view the ceiling defined by a sector, it has to have sidedefs which reference to it. The sidedefs which in turn compose linedefs, have everything to do with geometry. When I think of gamespace, I think in terms of rooms and geometric shapes like stairs, platforms etc. At first. Then comes the task of breaking these structures (which are not defined by the doom engine) down into sectors with the appropriate arrangement of linedefs. I would never have got the hang of editing if someone had first tried to explain sectors to me for what they actually are. Sectors are a rigidly defined but nebulous (practically abstract if you ask me) game construct that would be extremely difficult to separate from gamespace especially for a beginner. In fact that's one of the reasons I like Wadauthor so much. I said before my brain works screwy so maybe that's why. No Mystchik (heee) there will be no arguments here today. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm35.gif

------------------
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me? -Captain Beefheart

[Aliotroph?]

Okay, you're making sense now. I had a few problems with sectors in the beginning. I was shocked initially to find out about 10 sector level contests.

Sectors kind of remind me of objects in Java. Those can have multiple references pointing to them, which means any object should only exist in memory once. Of course, this isn't what setors are really like, but something seems similar to me. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm32.gif

------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[deepteam]

Gee guys, the WHOLE gaming thing is totally abstract. ALL of it. It's a pure math game that simulates varying degrees of reality.

Math in general is taken as "fact" when it's ALL abstract constructs that people use as if they are real. Convenient yes, "fact" no.

This mimicks exactly what my point is: People learn something and then take it as
"fact", hindering a true understanding.

Everyone is different, so subjective rationalizations only apply to one's self. I make levels and I don't think of sectors as a geometric area. In fact, even those that say they do don't really.

Proof: You really look at the "lines on the screen" (LINEDEFS) and then you interpolate the "sector" heights into that. Everyone looks at the "lines", NOT the SECTORs. They are just misidentifying what they see.

IOW, the term "sector" is being used to describe the LINEDEFS (sector heights are imagined only) as if they were one and the same. And that is exactly the reason why I object to the term. It takes countless exchanges many times to understand what a person has done wrong because of improper terminology.

One doesn't draw sectors - one draws LINEDEFS (in those editors that can actually draw) and those connect to SECTORS. Prefabs are a collection of LINEDEFS, etc.

This is normally not a problem, until one wants to understand a level (math) for what it is.

Math is a game of made up rules. None of it actually exists. That is appears to fit your life is a nice convenience, but that doesn't alter the fact that 1+1 = 2 is actually just a make believe rule everyone accepts. If you go back in time, you'll find that 1+1=2 is a totally foreign (abstract) concept and they would fail to comprehend http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

Another reason it gets so confusing is that the term "sector" happens to be perfectly good geometry term (look it up) - lending it authenticity - only thing is, it's not applicable in this case.

[Aliotroph?]

I think sectors may have been given that term because even though they don't actually represent any geography, they were designed to represent geography from the point of view of of the guy building maps. Unfortunately for the mappers, a slightly more abstract view of sectors is needed if you want to be able to do those weird tricks in the game. It's a case of "it's not a bug; it's a feature!" My evidence that sectors were meant to be thought of by mappers as geometric areas lies in the lack of cool sector tricks in the DooM games by Id (methink Carmack and the mappers probably didn't have the best communication). http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif We may look at lines, but when we do heights and lights, we often look at the shapes of the sectors. DooM doesn't seem to like sectors that aren't closed polygons anyway (although I can see some neat uses for such things).

BTW: I think the math example is too simple. 1 + 1 = 2 in writing is an abstract thing, but it was derived from the FACT in the real world that if you have one object and you get another one, you will have two. That'ss not very abstrat to me. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif



------------------
"Killed Aliotroph?"
- obituary from Perfect Dark

[Stphrz]

A sector (what it really is) can only be portrayed or represented by numbers. A number representing ceiling height. A number representing floor height. A number representing the lighting level. A number representing a floor flat. A number representing a ceiling tile. A number representing a special type (ie damaging, lighting specials etc.) A linedef, though also by strict defintion abstract, can be represented at least in part by something far more concrete. A line drawn between two points on a piece of paper, or on grid rendered on a computer monitor, or even a length of thread stretched between your fingers. If you can represent something in a visual fashion it is necessarily a less abstract concept than something you can't. Like in your example: 1 + 1 = 2 is abstract. It can be made concrete however in any number of ways. Grab one apple, put it on a table. Grab another apple put it on the table next to it. Two apples. How do you make the concept of sectors in and of themselves concrete? You cannot. Lotsa luck trying to explain to somebody inexperieced in Doom editing what a sector is without using linedefs a frame of reference. You will confuse them to the lowest depths of hell if you try. In the end, it could be argued that practically everying is abstract to some degree.

------------------
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me? -Captain Beefheart

[deepteam]

Right - EVERYTHING is quite abstract. From a practical POV, we just "accept" things as being "fact", otherwise we'd get into an endless philosophical mess.

It's nice (and necessary) to step back every once in a while and realize that all of this is founded on an imaginary basis - no matter how useful it is in real life. That's what throws people off all the time - they "use math" illustrations with real world examples as if that somehow makes it inherently "real".

Here's one that's interesting: there's no such thing as a real 90 degree angle in the real world. And yet you can buy tools of all kinds that have 90 degree stamped all over them. Does that make it real?

And strange as it may appear to some of you, the connections (to math) that appear so obvious (because we grow up with it in the Western World) are not obvious at all if they were not taught to you. You have to learn them.

There were (maybe still are in South America) cultures where the concept of TWO apples vs THREE apples is quite foreign - no matter how many times you stack them on the table and YELL at them http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

IOW, there are cultures that DO NOT COUNT. No one invented the level of abstraction required for that. Yes, they get along just fine http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

Historically, just go back in time (not that far really) and you'll find that simple fact. During the middle ages, not many people could do even simple math.

The Romans had a hell of a time - because they didn't have a proper way to enumerate numbers. LOL: please add XV + XXIV + L (no cheating by mentally converting to the arabic notation), now multiply them. And if you wanted to give the guy a heart attack, ask him to divide.

I'm just explaining the history a bit so you can see that all attempts to make any part of this "real" with examples doesn't make it so.

Now we get back to where we started, that sectors are not an appropriate method to describe the "area" of a level.

Geometry is only a variation of math and nothing in it is any more real than "numbers". IOW, a LINE is just as abstract. Believe it or not, a "point" is abstract. To repeat, anything and everything you attempt to do to connect it to the real world is only a convenient coincidence. A pure mathematician could care less if his math can be applied to the real world.

So what we have in DOOM is a full 3 dimensional coordinate system (also incorrectly described as 2.5d). The DOOM implementation has limits, but the basis is complete 3D just as much as QUAKE. If that wasn't true, I couldn't have made a DOOM to QUAKE converter! (Yes, all this stuff converts to brushes - just another format.)

Back to SECTORS (as in the lump name). SECTORS just lend the 3rd dimension to the coordinate system. They could have given points x,y,z coordinates (as they do in QUAKE) and not needed SECTOR reference.

As you can see, the whole final visualization is 3D geometry and using just ONE of the dimensional aspects to describe an area is completely offbase. At least a LINEDEF has 2 coordinates (x,y). Phrased as a question: What describes the most about a level area, the SECTOR or the LINEDEF?

If anyone still interested, here's how I explain how the 3D geometry in DOOM is created by the various elements in a level.

The vertex is an X,Y point in space. Linedefs use X,Y coordinates to describe the 2 dimensional space. For the height (or Z) coordinate, the Linedef references Sectors (via the sidedefs). [See sectors are easily explained in a logical and fitting fashion.]

In conclusion, one can convert all "points on the map" to a a full 3D X,Y,Z coordinate. Other attributes of the DOOM structures (types, flags, etc) are arbritrary game description rules that are not related to the basic geometry.

[Stphrz]

I was trying to point out that there are things/concepts that are less abstract than others. Our senses are the least abstract things that exist. If someone is born blind, then sight may be abstract, but hearing, touch, taste, and smell remain concrete. Even animals without the slightest capabililty of asbract thinking understand sensory input and what it means. Getting an abstract concept across to someone is way easier when you can put it in some sort of context to one or more of their senses. Even if, in the end, it fails to convey the full limits of the extent of that concept. You are right when you say it doesn't make it real. It does allow something to actually be done with it.

Why in DeepSea can you highlight a closed polygon as a sector and move it or scale it. Why can you, like in Wadauthor, automatically convert a sector to a door?(I'm pretty sure you can do these things among others in DeepSea). For more reasons than just convenience. Putting abstract concepts into concrete practice requires such. Everything you said is correct. That's not what I was getting at. What I was getting at is how do you go about the concrete task of level editing. If you, by some mistake, create an unclosed polygon in your map, one of two things is likely to happen. In the area of the the error you get a visual anomoly. Concrete. Something is wrong. Or the game crashes (as it did with earlier versions of the Doom engine) and a nice error message glows in your face. According to the strict dictates of the abstract, nothing is amiss. How could it be? Sectors have no form in the abstract. Yet the Doom engine absolutely requires that a closed shape of lines each have a sidedef that references the same sector for nonanomalous depiction of 3d space.

Your presentation of a sector is a good one. For someone like me who has made a half dozen maps, made all the blunders you can possibly make, then spent countless hours fixing them, it fits. I understand it because of experience. I think, however, your definition would fail to convey something critical to the unintiated. It's what I outlined above: That a group of lines referencing a sector (via the sidefs) must be a closed shape (I know there are exeptions to this under certain conditions, but I'm considering editing newbies here). If it's not, visual confusion or a game crash is very likely to be the result.

------------------
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me? -Captain Beefheart

[deepteam]

Nope, either it's wet or it's not. Either it's abstract or it's not. It's a black and white concept. That some may feel more "comfortable" with some relationships doesn't change that basic definition.

You can stick your finger in a cup of water and get it wet or you can jump in a pool and get wet all over. The basic concept is that you got wet. Degrees of "wet" would be along the lines of a (not relevant) philosophical digression, which I'm trying to avoid.

I'll put it a simpler way, either it's "real" or it's not. By "real", I mean exactly what you were trying to argue with - anyone born has a natural ability to determine it with "senses".

However, "senses" are totally different. Abstraction has to do with the "mind/id/imagination" and senses have to do with "organs" that are little factories built to do a specific job - They have little imagination http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

If someone is born blind, then they will NEVER know about sight in any form. The only "abstract" thing they will know is the -learned- knowledge that there are others who have something called sight. It's like someone telling you about the abstract concept of 5th dimensional math. Sure you know it's "abstract", but that doesn't help you understand it one bit. For most of us, it will remain all Greek.

Actually the latter points to your misuse of the term "understand". Basically understand means "to perceive and comprehend the nature and significance of"

I don't think my dog understands the nature and significance of too many things - if any at all. He does obey some of the things I've taught him http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

Sure, it's nice to try to relate abstract concepts to "examples" - did I ever say otherwise? However, to relate them to the WRONG example is absolutely a mistake - which is where I started. The term SECTOR is frequently used incorrectly, hence leading to much misunderstanding. Hope you don't mind, but I used you post as an example.

In an editor, one does NOT highlight a "closed polygon". What you are attempting here is a circular definition. The "not closed" thing was an abstraction invented by DEU and really has nothing to do with polygons as such.

Furthermore, the mechanism to help edit has nothing and everything to do with my objection to sectors as a geometric area. In fact, it actually shows you the flaw in the first place. It can "light up" all over the map.

If one is taught that "sectors" are geometric areas (as many are) then this simple phenomenon will surely confuse them.

Actually DeePsea rotates and scales LINEDEFS as do ALL editors. What you term a "sector" is only the translation by the editor to linedefs.

IOW, you can do that from pure linedefs. In sector mode, the editor grabs all the linedefs that share the same sector - giving you the illusion that sectors somehow are known directly to an editor. In DeepSea, the linedefs to rotate/scale do NOT have to have the same sector reference at all.

Similarly, you do NOT convert a sector to a door, you really convert LINEDEFS to a door.

I hope you can see how this is flawed by sticking to "sector" interpretations. ALL EDITORs made (whether they state so or not), really operate with LINEDEFS.

They search the 2D space to find LINEDEFS and then infer from that the possible SECTOR references. Get the cart and horse in the right sequence and I hope it makes more sense then it ever did before. And then you'll understand why editors make cetain mistakes too!

So yeah, putting abstract concepts into practice using the PROPER terms is essential to really understand the underpinnings.

One does not create "unclosed polygons", one creates LINEDEFS with invalid sector references. I tell you, all this "sector" stuff is pure crap. All it leads to over and over is pure confusion for beginners and even for experienced designers.

The "abtract" terms assigned have convinced you that "unclosed polygons" are what is happening and that's just not the truth.

You just fell prey to the very thing that I keep harping about. Inventing and using abstract terms incorrectly leads to many other false conclusions.

What happens in the game is again a totally different ball park. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with improper use of the term SECTOR. Mistakes may or may not crash the game or whatever, so what?

And you DO NOT need closed shapes for DOOM. Heck, a LINE will do just fine - or 2 lines - or more. They don't even have to connect. See DARKHOUR for a zillion lines that DO NOT connect to see what I mean. It plays fine though.

There are no "strict dictates" of the abstract (see first paragraph). That is something you just made up. I'm only arguing how giving the wrong terms the wrong meaning leads to invalid conclusions.

NO LEVEL has "form" in the real world. So what? I have no idea what that is all about. Again unrelated. That's why not everyone can make levels - they can't handle the abstraction in their mind.

My presentation of "sector" is only to give someone a basic overview of what one is getting into when they start creating levels. Then I give a definition of all the DOOM terms and how they relate to one another and how they relate back to 3D space.

It's a bit presumptuous to think that I leave it at that. Read the DeePsea help files and you'll see that I bitch about the exact same thing there http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif And I go into pretty precise detail about how it all fits - including an exact description of "sector not closed" - an unfortunate term I inherited.

Conclusion: One CANNOT state that a sector is a geometric area, nor that one can "visualize" sectors, because one doesn't. One sees/visualizes LINEDEFS first and then the Z coordinate. Editor always operate on LINEDEFS, not sectors. That's just a clever trick we do http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif
======================================

Oh, and I retested VRACK2 with a GE256 - way faster than the Voodoo3, so easier to minimize video overhead - and a reject makes 1 fps difference in the area of all the enemies - 15fps vs 16 (max is 35- the DOOM tic rate). Some moron claimed he went from 4fps to 45-50fps (PIII750) so clearly people post total crap just to argue http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm35.gif

[Stphrz]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Trebuchet MS, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, serif">quote:</font><hr width="100%" size="1" noshade><font face="Trebuchet MS, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, serif" size="2">From the Deepsea helpfiles: How a Sector should Look</font><hr width="100%" size="1" noshade></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your explanation for unclosed sectors and how to fix them is excellent. But like you said in the helpfile, you are trying to mimic a real room or area. In your explanation you ultimately have to come down describing sectors in relation to areas or rooms. I read through other sections of the helpfile as well. There are other instances where you have geometric areas labeled as sectors (ie in the create door from sector section). Even though sectors don't look like anything, you have to pretend they do. Otherwise you can't convey the ideas and concepts toward making a Doom level that looks proper. That's the point I've been attempting to make. I don't find fault in this at all. The explanations do a good job of getting the point across.

I know that editors work with linedefs. I know that sectors are not geometric areas. I know that it's just an illusion when you appear to working with sectors in any editor. I was talking about the terms the editor in question (Deepsea) used. ie "Create door from sector." I also submit that this is indeed more correct than wrong in any case. Sure, it's the linedefs that make the door, but consider what is happening when a player actually opens a door during the game. What is happening anyway? The ceiling of the door rises off the floor allowing the player to pass. A sector value is being altered. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm40.gif The linedef values do not change. Linedef values never change. Linedef values cannot change.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Trebuchet MS, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, serif">quote:</font><hr width="100%" size="1" noshade><font face="Trebuchet MS, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, serif" size="2">Oh, and I retested VRACK2 with a GE256 - way faster than the Voodoo3, so easier to minimize video overhead - and a reject makes 1 fps difference in the area of all the enemies - 15fps vs 16 (max is 35- the DOOM tic rate). Some moron claimed he went from 4fps to 45-50fps (PIII750) so clearly people post total crap just to argue
</font><hr width="100%" size="1" noshade></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where did THAT come from?. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm6.gif Anyway that's more than a 6 percent increase in framerate. That would only increase with slower comptuters. Since Zennode can build a reject table on a map the size of Vrack2 in under well under 15 minutes using a p200 there's no good reason not to include optimized reject tables with wads. IMO.

------------------
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me? -Captain Beefheart

[deepteam]

I "inherited" a bunch of nutty terminology. Just because from a marketing POV I use it, doesn't mean I agree with it http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif [When in ROME ...]

In the help I called it an unfortunate choice of words or something like that.

I totally agree that explanations become clearer when one relates to "examples". Since a level mimics real objects, it makes sense to do that.

That is not my argument though, which keeps getting lost in all this. I disagree with the INCORRECT use of abstract terms and then incorrectly implying other things.

Remember, you said: "It does no harm to think of a sector as a geometric area". THAT's the point I'm arguing about. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's like saying: it does no harm to think of alcohol being just like water http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif

You can interesting conclusions when a false statements are used.

If nothing else, maybe somebody got a better idea of how a level is made. http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smilies/cwm5.gif

PS: Actually, Editors DO work with SECTORS, just not the way you describe it. They also work with vertexes and with sidedefs. It's the interplay of these elements that gets all screwed up when people keep talking about "making sectors". Pure crap.

===============================

I was actually only testing VRACK2 to solve a ZDOOM bug (turns out it was FMOD). Remember, vrack2 is an UNUSUAL level in the number of enemies. So, it's hanging by a thread in contesting my original statement that a TYPICAL level has little to NO difference in speed (I only thought it was interesting as I'll explain, but I have to explain all over again why your reasoning doesn't follow.)

Even 15 vs 16 is not detectable. Almost ALL of the time I maxed the framerate - in fact, usaully I exceeded it by a long shot and had to disable back buffering to not get overlapping frame flicker.

Guess I should have emphasized the point that the speed of a VIDEO card reduces that bottleneck and more clearly shows the difference (or lack thereof) of a reject.

What makes you think a slower processor will show more of a percent difference?

As I said before, there is much more time spend with screen I/O then there is with the piddling enemies check. Remember, I'm talking 800x600+, not that ugly lowres crap.

ZDOOM is by far the best port to test out my contention, since the screen code is much more efficient that any of the others.

MOST of the old-time reject arguments that everyone accepts is for 300x200 where the video overhead requires only 1/8 the bandwidth both in processor power and memory speed. A P200 is about 8 times as fast as a 486 (which plays the largest stock DOOM level just fine). New 100/133 SDRAM blows away the old Pentium memory and even more so the old 486 stuff.

Although a 6% difference is an academic point, I doubt that it will be much different on a slower machine since the same -proportion- of time is still spent on video/graphics code. Just because a machine is slower doesn't mean more time is spent on the reject - the ratio stays the SAME, because exactly the same code executes. Just slower http://forums.newdoom.com/UBB/smile.gif Old video cards suck hard.

Btw, those timedemo's show you nothing about any of this. Playback is just playback - think about it. So the difference you saw before is just statistical differences in machine behavior.