What do you want in future port of doom

[OzzyPapat]

*plop* mmmmmhhh YEAH....!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope to find in future port of doom , what i hope to find is:

The Ghoul engine of soldier of fortune with a lot of blood and guts and the particule FX engine of Max Payne 2 to have a lot of smoke coming after shoot and to finish the HAVOC engine included to shoot enemies dead on the wall and see them fly with bullet hum... *bug* do you think i'm crazy *alienate*

Sorry for my poor english *book* *drinky* *zzz*

[doomjedi]

Splitscreen (like in Legacy), multiplayer with tons of game modes (like in Skulltag), total user customization and editability including bots AI and such.
much faster engine - both framerate and loading time (even with models and hi-res textures)
3D glasses/googles support
Much smarter bot AI including CTF AI and other
Voice commands
Vehicles and turrets?
Easy to customize skins, + build-in random level generator (like Slyge) included with multiplayer map support
advanced multiplayer weapon pack with multiloading, sniper zoom etc...

...I'm already in love with an engine that will have all those features :)

[rustyslacker]

Add to that a scripting language that will streamline movie making, 3D floors, and a great community and I'm in love with that port too.

[OzzyPapat]

Yes but with my option :) ;)

[lucius octavion]

HEHEHEHE...

The eye candy and FX of doomsday
The speed and cool stuff of risen 3d
The frame stuff and scripting of zdoom
The 3d floors
SLOPES
High sound quality!
The pure fun gameplay of skulltag
translucent stuff
glowing 3d models!
realistic weapon bobbing and footsteps
and everything there is!!! :D :D

[rustyslacker]

Haha lucius, that would be a graphic whore's heaven.

[The Undertaker]

I want ASCII Doom (just look at ASCII Quake (http://webpages.mr.net/bobz/ttyquake)).

[rustyslacker]

Awesome. ASCII Unreal Tournament looks cool as well.

[sitters]

An modern 3D engine, that also can handle the 2.5 D engine.:)

Greetings.

[Illdo]

The combination of Zdoom's DECORATE and Edge's DDF...
The support for 3D models...
3D floors and slopes...
Vehicles and turrets...
A built-in word processor which will compete with Microsoft Word...
Basically all the Doom ports combined into one.

[Aliotroph?]

I want ASCII Doom (just look at ASCII Quake (http://webpages.mr.net/bobz/ttyquake)).

Modern ATI cards let you play any GL game in ASCII. :D ASCII Morrowind was impossible. *crazy*

I don't want vehicles at all. Those just aren't DooM. I don't care much about physics either. For that kind of DM I'd just go play/mod a Half-Life game.

Eye candy is fine so things like particles and shaders are ok though. Having nice dynamic lights that are easy to customize is always good. DooM is really about maze crawling so anything that enhances that claustrophobic feel is good (well, big urban maps are fun too...).

So the list:

ultra-fast networking
stupidly high sprite limits
fully customizable lights/particles/shaders
flexible and FAST scripting language
make-your-own linedefs
splitscreen
some nice bots

[rustyslacker]

Modern ATI cards let you play any GL game in ASCII.
How? I have an ATI X600! Post a tutorial or something!

[Dutch Devil]

Maybe some gimmick that makes the AI of the monster better, like they duck behind crates call for reinforcements retreat when outnumbered etc.
Maybe that the screen would't shake a bit when you fire your weapons, like you feel the reciol of heavy weapons.

That turret idea sounds like music to my ears, I see myself getting behind one and shoot them to pieces:)

[OzzyPapat]

What do you think of the engine of tenebrae " port of quake ", it's gonna be wonderful on doom , next time i gonna post some picture of my ideas

[The Undertaker]

Its under smartshader Rusty.

[rustyslacker]

I really should reformat this computer. The motherboard and video got switched, and I still have Nvidia desktop manager apps installed on the damn thing.

[Aliotroph?]

lol If you don't got the Catalyst Control Center you can't do the ASCII. :p

[lucius octavion]

Haha lucius, that would be a graphic whore's heaven.

Well maybe that's what I am! hehehe! *diablo* *laff* Actually Im not I just listed all the awesome stuff that some graphically greedy person would want in doom! heh. it would be pretty nice though... hehehe

[The Undertaker]

CCC bah, too much .NET bloatness. ATT (http://www.guru3d.com/article/atitraytools/189) FTW

[doomjedi]

What do you think of the engine of tenebrae " port of quake ", it's gonna be wonderful on doom , next time i gonna post some picture of my ideas

nice port, but too slow on my computer...
Anyway I prefer gameplay and functionality to graphic perfection

[Impcruncher]

hmmmm.....
dynamic lighting
.md2 file support
.3ds file support
.max file support
.mp3 file support
and thats it

[rustyslacker]

Anyway I prefer gameplay and functionality to graphic perfection
Agreed. That's why I'm really not a big jDoom fan..

[DaniJ]

But jDoom doesn't change the original DOOM gameplay, so by that you're saying DOOM plays badly(?)

[General Greivous]

But jDoom doesn't change the original DOOM gameplay, so by that you're saying DOOM plays badly(?)

Actually I think underneath it all he's saying he'd rather play Quake ;)

[ace]

But jDoom doesn't change the original DOOM gameplay, so by that you're saying DOOM plays badly(?)

The reason I prefer ports like Legacy and ZDoom to jDoom is because of the fact that do me, after 12 and a half years of existence, the original Doom setup can start to look bland. With ZDoom, even adding so much as sparks with flickering lights, a quickly modifiable skybox, weather, and slopes alone can make for a whole new experience. The gameplay, I think, will always remain the same, even with scripting and innovation, but everything else about Doom simply gets old, and I don't think spicing up its looks changes that much.

That being said, I do still enjoy jDoom for its eye-candy, and I refuse to use anything else when playing classic Vanilla wads. Plus I really enjoy the jDRP models, especially the ones being made for 1.1, which look fantastic (keep working on it, they're awesome! ;)). But in terms of editability, I much prefer extra options that Legacy or Zdoom can provide, and I quickly run out of interesting/new ideas even when working with Boom.

[General Greivous]

The reason I prefer ports like Legacy and ZDoom to jDoom is because of the fact that do me, after 12 and a half years of existence, the original Doom setup can start to look bland. With ZDoom, even adding so much as sparks with flickering lights, a quickly modifiable skybox, weather, and slopes alone can make for a whole new experience. The gameplay, I think, will always remain the same, even with scripting and innovation, but everything else about Doom simply gets old, and I don't think spicing up its looks changes that much.

That being said, I do still enjoy jDoom for its eye-candy, and I refuse to use anything else when playing classic Vanilla wads. Plus I really enjoy the jDRP models, especially the ones being made for 1.1, which look fantastic (keep working on it, they're awesome! ;)). But in terms of editability, I much prefer extra options that Legacy or Zdoom can provide, and I quickly run out of interesting/new ideas even when working with Boom.

IMO if you can overcome a lack of slopes and 3D floors and still make a good map then it just says that much more about your abilities as a mapper. So far in all the maps I've made for The Exiled, I haven't used any 3D floors or slopes. I used graphical enhancements to add to the atmosphere and minor scripting, sure, but anyone whose played Map01 can tell you that its of good quality. I for one have no problems coming up with new ideas even with a lack of Boom support. Then again I'm an extremely artistic person, so perhaps it sjust in my nature to overcome limitations.

[ace]

I assume by "new ideas" you mean "never been done before in at least 5 other maps that have been released?" Because that's highly unlikely. In terms of architecture, yes, it is extremely easy to come up with something that looks new when you put your mind to it. But what are you doing when playing the map? The usual formula is kill monsters, get key and more monsters come, go through locked door to either get a new key or exit. Perhaps there's a door opened by a switch or a floor you have to lower/raise. Maybe a puzzle once in a while. It's simply very difficult when working with Boom/Vanilla to spice that up in a way that people haven't seen before.

Visually, yes, it's easy to come up with new ideas, and it's easy to come up with ideas that you haven't done yet in your map. But when dealing with making something truly creative in terms of gameplay, there isn't much you can do with Vanilla doom, new graphics/textures, and DeHackEd alone.

The fact of the matter is that the high level of Doom editing in terms of gameplay and detail has been here for about 8, maybe 9 years now (before then we had the n00bic maps from the mid-90s... *shudder*). But when it comes to making something unique, and not just challenging, in terms of the actual playing of a map and not just by how it looks, you require much more. You don't need 3D floors or slopes to make a Doom map look good architecturally, but you may certainly need more things like scripted events to break the predictable formula to a generic Doom map.

Looks are simply one thing and one thing alone, and having a different look and sheerly that will not change the fact that it plays the same, even if it's a nice change of pace in visuals.

[General Greivous]

Well, as I've always told anyone who complains about Doom sourceports not having this or that: Go play Quake.

[ace]

I never said Doomsday didn't have enough for it too be good, only that I prefer editing for other ports. For editing flexibility, Vanilla isn't the best choice. I enjoy the eye-candy for playing vanilla wads in jDoom, but considering the features you get with other ports and the fact that at this time it isn't even Boom compatible, if you're going for anything more than making a simplistic Vanilla-style map then it's really not the port to use.

Just because I don't like making plain-ish maps doesn't mean I don't enjoy playing them. I wouldn't keep around Requiem, Icarus, Mordeth et al if this were the case. But I feel too limited with Vanilla and Boom (though it does offer more features) to be happy mapping for them, which is why I don't use jDoom often, unless I feel like playing a Vanilla map.

Besides, I much prefer playing Doom to Quake any day. :p

[rustyslacker]

But jDoom doesn't change the original DOOM gameplay, so by that you're saying DOOM plays badly(?)
Not at all. It's just that I don't care much about making the game look über-pretty. jDoom and ZDoom have the same gameplay, so why should I prefer one over the other?

It's a rhetorical question; don't answer that.

Still, it's a great piece of software, and neither you nor skyjake should take this as an insult to your work.

[DaniJ]

Still, it's a great piece of software, and neither you nor skyjake should take this as an insult to your work.No I didn't take it as an insult. I proposed that question as I was genuinely interested in your collective responses :)

Yes, BOOM support is currently pretty high priority on my TODO list (expect almost full support in 1.9.1). Currently in 1.9.0-beta4 a fair number of the BOOM features have been implemented other than the generalized line types (but then 100% of those can easily be recreated using XG...).

[General Greivous]

Yes, BOOM support is currently pretty high priority on my TODO list (expect almost full support in 1.9.1). Currently in 1.9.0-beta4 a fair number of the BOOM features have been implemented other than the generalized line types (but then 100% of those can easily be recreated using XG...).

;)

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/2412/transp3qe.th.jpg (http://img54.imageshack.us/my.php?image=transp3qe.jpg)

[rustyslacker]

Actually I think underneath it all he's saying he'd rather play Quake ;)
Me? Rather play Quake? Hell, no!