What about Legacy v2.0 vs GZDoom?

[Jive]

Anybody to tell me what is missing to GZDoom (apart the Legacy specific features for lightings, that may be replaced by the Zdoom ones)?
http://forum.drdteam.org/viewtopic.php?t=232
I just discover this port.
I tried my Vile Flesh Legacy version, and all seems to be compatible, apart the lightings and the fragglescripts. At least, it don't hangs the engine, like with Zdoom and ZdoomGl!!!
My 3D floors are compatible, and are well displayed.
What sucks is the lightings, obtained with the help of dehacked.
I don't know what to think about this port, which seems so great, which a very well alive community.
Can you help me to have a good idea?
And what about Legacy v2.0 vs GZDoom?
Thank you!*bang*

[rustyslacker]

Jive..I don't really see what you're asking. Are you looking for a GZDoom feature list, or editing specs, or what?

[DarkWolf]

The FS scripts should work with a little bit of tweeking. Most of the extended Legacy functions are copy-pasted over with only a few being removed or changed.

[Jive]

rustyslacker, I ask your friendly point of view about GZDoom, compared with what should be Legacy v2.0

DarkWolf, thank you to refresh my old memory: I totally forgot it, but now, I remember what Hurdler said to me about Fragglescript when he was implementing it within RainBowStar... It was his first steps with this scripting thingy, and we had a lot of fun while experimenting it!!!

[rustyslacker]

Hmm...GZDoom seems nice. It's got some cool features, although I haven't figured out how to use slopes and 3D floors. I'd love to see slopes implemented in Legacy 2.0.

Hopefully there will be a hi-res sprite pack distributed with Legacy 2.0 (although this is not in GZDoom, GZDoom supports hi-res sprites [through DECORATE, I think] and so it's sorta relevant.)

[g6672D]

I think that content is for the users to make and not the programmers.

On the topic of GZDoom, it may or it may not run Legacy levels. my sidescroller level crashes immediately when you try to run it through GZDoom whereas another one worked. But I like it for playing Strife. It's a pretty nice engine. :)

As for Legacy 2.0, it's not yet comparable because it isn't yet released. :(

[Danimetal]

So far, the specs for Legacy v2.0 in what is pure mapping possibilities are below GZDoom´s. GZDoom takes ZDoom (extended ACS, DECORATE and a ton of Hexen inherited stuff) and adds GL mode, FS, 3d floors and also 3d slopes (only seen before on Vavoom). Legacy will support ACS but, as far as I know, without ZDoom´s extensions. As for decorate and sloping I don´t think Legacy is going to support them soon. In a sense, GZDoom is a highly advanced engine in terms of editing possibilities.

Anyway, Legacy v2.0 specs feature things that Legacy users will find enjoyable (hubs, Hexen support, ACS, bugfixes, polyobjects) plus completely rewritten code (supposedly faster and more stable) and a new netcode for multiplayer games (supposedly faster than the current one). I don´t think Legacy v2.0 will differ (in what the core of mapping and playing is) a lot from v1.42 but everything it will have to offer will surely be seen in the bottom of it... Once I said in a thread that Legacy v2.0 shouldn´t be the answers to all the questions but an enhancement over what Legacy already is.

Discussions about Legacy lagging behind other ports and stuff have taken place in these forums but, well, I don´t think anybody is tied to a certain ports so if an specific feature seduces you, you can always get a port that supports it... Still Legacy feels different from other ports in my opinion, more like an enhanced Doom. It feels great to me.

Edit: About what Jive asks, an opinion about GZDoom... Well, as a port you can think on ZDoom terms and then start adding 3d floors and nifty OpenGl features (transparences, reflections...). If you liked ZDoom you´re sure to like this port... Well, not my case. Supporting GZDoom and it´s community it´s a personal matter of preferences.

[Aliotroph?]

Based on my experience testing Legacy 2.0 is faster than 1.42. However it doesn't yet have all its features in, so the difference is probably not totally representative of what we will see in a stable release.

I can't comment so much on GZDoom since I haven't bothered to play it yet. I guess I should try it next time I want to play a ZDoom map. It's been getting a lot of praise for having a good feature set. Graf has been getting some criticism from the Legacy community for using code and not crediting it properly. I can't comment on that either though since I'm not familiar with any of the relevant code in either port.

It's like danimetal said though; you can use all kinds of ports and having loyalty to any one or two shouldn't be anything political or based on a sort of tradition. Just use what feels right for the task and provide help and encouragement where you want to. :)

[rustyslacker]

I agree with dani: Legacy feels much like an enhanced DOOM. Some ports, Risen3D and jDoom especially, feel like a different game. GZDoom is kinda in the middle.

[Aliotroph?]

I agree there (still can't comment on GZDoom). ZDoom also feels nice. It has a very classic feel to it but it still has modern controls and neat maps. Legacy has typically been a lot like this too. Conveniently the maps made for Legacy are very different from ZDoom maps in general so it's lots of fun to play both.

[Danimetal]

There´s something about the scrolling and turning in ZDoom that I never liked... Maybe it´s the whole uncapped framerate thing but it seems too smooth for me. Lighting is also very ellaborate in ZDoom (I don´t mean lighting in maps, but the overall light dimnishing effect, seems to have much more levels than the original Doom... Build engine maybe?) and that´s something I like a lot...

As Rusty said, some ports really don´t feel like Doom a lot and, for me, they´re the most advanced regarding graphics treatment... JDoom is supossed to be a lot like Doom and looks wonderful but I always feel as if the player slipped a little on the floor when moving. Vavoom felt horrible back there when I played it XD!!. Fortunately for me, Legacy GL (though horrible, I rarely use it nowadays) still feels like Doom.

As for map design, that´s it... ZDoom and Legacy maps are really different most of the time. There aren´t many Legacy maps out there lately as people seem to be losing interest on it but back then maps had a different style. ZDoom maps tend to be really ellaborate in terms of detail and (sometimes) really absurd in terms of monsters to beat... Anyway, the only thing responsible for differences between maps is mappers themselves :).

[DooMAD]

There´s something about the scrolling and turning in ZDoom that I never liked... Maybe it´s the whole uncapped framerate thing but it seems too smooth for me.
You can turn that off, that's the first thing I did when I got it, heh.

Look for the line "cl_capfps=false" in the *.ini file and set it to "true".

[Danimetal]

You can turn that off, that's the first thing I did when I got it, heh.

Look for the line "cl_capfps=false" in the *.ini file and set it to "true".
What about doing the same in Legacy v2.0?. There was a lot of requesting and some problems due to FS relying a lot in the capped framerate but I don´t remember where the discussion went.

[Pyramyd]

To me Legacy seems like classic old-school Doom, with a few key features that 'should have been' in the original game. I remember back 7 or 8 years ago when I would be mapping for vallina doom and thinking, "man I wish I could make a REAl 3d bridge, or scroll textures the other way!" To me the new ports are cool, but they almost take something away from the feel of the original game. I've even heard many people say jumping in Doom is blashpemous *laugh*

[g6672D]

Don't like jumping? TURN IT OFF THEN!!! :D

[Jive]

I've even heard many people say jumping in Doom is blashpemous *laugh*It's a Boom feature, no?
And it allows much more interesting gameplay.
I definitely love all of the Boom features, unexploited most of the time, like all the Legacy features...
It's just a pity to don't have good mappers exploiting those features, obtained after a hard work on the code!!!*confused*

[rustyslacker]

I thought it was PrBoom+ that added jumping, because it wasn't in original Boom/PrBoom.

[Heidi]

Zdoom is one big bug that heppens to load wads :D

[Danimetal]

A lot of people would say the same about Legacy. Well, they would say "Legacy is a bug that won´t even load in my box"... I don´t think ZDoom is that buggy, in fact, is pretty sturdy but not my cup of tea.

BTW Jive, I´m currently working in some Legacy map trying to do something with all these features :).

[Aliotroph?]

ZDoom and Legacy are both pretty bugged. :D Legacy has a GL error and then Windows won't reappear. ZDoom manages the same thing without even using GL. Legacy crashes with segmentation violation errors; ZDoom just crashes. Legacy crashes loading the wrong maps; ZDoom can never figure out which iwad to load with a map and just gets it wrong. etc, etc etc.

Legacy feels a bit more like how I want DooM to feel. ZDoom looks it though. :)

[Graf_Zahl]

Maybe it's time to answer some questions:

1) Although I added FraggleScript to GZDoom it hardly means it is fully Legacy compatible. Some more specialized things most likely won't work as expected.


On the topic of GZDoom, it may or it may not run Legacy levels. my sidescroller level crashes immediately when you try to run it through GZDoom whereas another one worked. But I like it for playing Strife. It's a pretty nice engine.

There's a bugs forum. ;) If you think it is something fixable feel free to report it with a link to the level.

Graf has been getting some criticism from the Legacy community for using code and not crediting it properly.

Actually there is very little code directly coming from Legacy in GZDoom. Only a handful of FS functions and a few fixes for 3D floor problems were taken from Legacy's source. The rest ofthe FS code I use comes from the old abandoned Eternity version and both Fraggle and Quasar have given me permission to use it. I try to credit my source properly. If that isn't the case somewhere please point me to it and I'll change it.


ZDoom can never figure out which iwad to load with a map and just gets it wrong. etc, etc etc.

ZDoom doesn't try to figure out the IWAD you want to use. It shows a dialog where you have to select it yourself. But don't make the mistake and click 'Don't ask me again', because that function doesn't do what you expect!

[Planky]

Alio, who was critising Graf? I haven't seen anything like that on the forums?

[DooMAD]

It was on the IRC channel, possibly a misunderstanding over the origins of the code. I can't remember who first mentioned it now.

Also, Happy 21st! :D

[17:13] <DooMAD> Today's Birthdays
[17:13] <DooMAD> Planky (21)
[17:16] <DooMGoaT> planky gains another ring
[17:17] <DarkWolf_> Wood still grows after you cut it from the tree?
[17:17] <DooMGoaT> sentient wood does

[Grazza]

I thought it was PrBoom+ that added jumping, because it wasn't in original Boom/PrBoom.No. Jumping is not supported by either Boom, Prboom or Prboom-plus.

Perhaps you're thinking of mlook (the second most "blasphemous" port feature ;) ), which is available as an option in Prboom-plus's glboom.exe. However, this is done without affecting behavioural compatibility - autoaim still works as normal.

[g6672D]

I like jumping and mouselook. Don't knock 'em! And no point discussing bugs since I only use GZDoom for Strife. :)

Oh yes, HAPPY BIRTHDAY PLANKY!! *party*

[iori]

His point is that Jumping and Mouselook are added by ports, which many doom purists avoid

[Danimetal]

As long as you can easily disable any added feature (except, of course, the possibility of playing with naked sprites) I don´t see the point on complaining about them. If everything was to stay as it was we´d still be playing Doom in 320x200 using the command line: it is a wonder itself that such an old game is still developing so it´s no wonder that new things are added.

[DooMGater]

As long as you can easily disable any added feature (except, of course, the possibility of playing with naked sprites) I don´t see the point on complaining about them. If everything was to stay as it was we´d still be playing Doom in 320x200 using the command line: it is a wonder itself that such an old game is still developing so it´s no wonder that new things are added.
I agree completely, but it is interesting to see that a growing number of people are going back to vanilla DOOM (or use ports without added features like -chocolate doom) I guess people like DOOM as it is. When they want eye candy and stuff and things, than they play Doom 3 (or soon Prey... ) But when they want to play DOOM they just want to play the original mother of all FPS. So what I want to say is that the MOST important point for _any_ port is compatibility with the original. Doom95 was not so bad from this point of view...*flip* . Too bad that the mouse does not work under XP....

[jetflock]

whatever floats your boat. this is all really a big comparison of apples and oranges.

[Jive]

DooMGater, I totally disagree with you, and my site is the alive prove that you are wrong.
It's entirely dedicated to OpenGl mode, and I have nearly 1 million visited pages. The number of downloads is awesome, and never stop growing.
Pixelised Doom is just horrible and reserved for blind guys, or poor ones with no money for a decent graphic card.
I know that you can find men loving old women, but the normality is to love beauty...
LOL ;)

All the graphical companies are playing a sort of war to build the best OpenGl cards, with antialiasing pushed to its extremity, and you talk of the pleasure of pixels...

Pixels.... Muhahaha!!!!

Knee Deep ][ - Bloodbath (E1M4), Map32 in onemore2, by Aug & Ben Sze (http://doomwadstation.com/dlw/BestShots/OneMore2_Map32.jpg)
Try to give me a shoot like this one without any of the modern features...

And GzDoom would not have existed, nor any of the most popular ports, if there wasn't a public for this kind of work!!!
*wave*

[Aliotroph?]

Pixelised Doom is just horrible and reserved for blind guys, or poor ones with no money for a decent graphic card.

LOL I'm blind and poor and I still play in GL mode. :D When you are blind there are interesting ways to get around the poor part though. ;)

[The Undertaker]

I don't know about you but if I ever want free trilinear filtering with a LOD bias of 10 I just take off my glasses.

[rustyslacker]

I play sometimes with the extra features, but I still use vanilla Doom regularly, with keyboard-only controls.

[Jive]

I don't know about you but if I ever want free trilinear filtering with a LOD bias of 10 I just take off my glasses.Muhahahaha!!!!*flip*
I made a study of the capacities of filtering and antialiasing effects on a map, and the results are really awesome, particulary for the AI one.

Detail - 800x600 - AA 6x - On/Off.jpg (http://doomwadstation.com/dlw/Forum/800x600_AA6x_On-Off.jpg)

More about it here (http://doomwadstation.com/dlw/4xAA_NoAA.html)

[Aliotroph?]

Antialiasing looks good. Filtering just gives you blurry textures and only looks good sometimes.

[rustyslacker]

Meh, who cares about a few jaggies compared to the video horsepower those features require?

I know I don't. *giddy*

[iori]

what else would you be needing the horsepower for in Legacy?

[Danimetal]

For a map made entirely of custom models to achieve maximum detail ;)?.

[Aliotroph?]

Hehehe, 3D floors eat enough horsepower as it is. So do dynlights on some cards. If Hurdler really wants to add PPL then that will take even more (though surprisingly little, since that stuff works ok on a GF2).

[rustyslacker]

I'd like to make a map composed entirely of 3D floors. My PII would have a hell of a time running that. :)

[Macro11_1]

Hmm just wondering, are 3D floors actually rendered by your video card (GPU if im not mistaken) or are they rendered by CPU?

[Aliotroph?]

I imagine even a lot of the DM stuff Mystic, Al, and Rellik did would lag a PII. Lots of 3D floors there, and in Al's case corona effects.

[g6672D]

I can imagine all the needed calculations to draw them would go to the CPU and then it gets rendered by the card.

[Hurdler]

Hmm just wondering, are 3D floors actually rendered by your video card (GPU if im not mistaken) or are they rendered by CPU?

"both". The CPU send the proper polygons to the GPU. For the GPU, rendering a normal floor or a 3D floor is exactly the same.
The overhead with 3D floors is because there is no BSP culling for them. If you have a lot of 3D floors hidden by other 3D floors, they are all sent to the GPU, even if not visible at all.

[smite-meister]

The overhead with 3D floors is because there is no BSP culling for them. If you have a lot of 3D floors hidden by other 3D floors, they are all sent to the GPU, even if not visible at all.
Really? Because it would not seem too hard to link the 3D floors to subsectors during map loading.
Then you could use the BSP to cull them too.

[Aliotroph?]

Wouldn't that still not help with 3D floors that were just stacked?

[Hurdler]

Really? Because it would not seem too hard to link the 3D floors to subsectors during map loading.
Then you could use the BSP to cull them too.

Yes, for sure because I haven't done something special for having translucent 3D floors (execpt sorting them). If they were culled, I would have gotten some strange results.