Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Doom Editing Digest Vol. 01 Nr. 041
From: owner-doom-editing-digest
To: doom-editing-digest@nvg.unit.no
Subject: doom-editing-digest V1 #41
Reply-To: doom-editing
Errors-To: owner-doom-editing-digest
Precedence: bulk
doom-editing-digest Monday, 7 November 1994 Volume 01 : Number 041
Re: Solid object
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from YEU.
Re: Consistency failures
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from YEU.
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Announcing Nemodm.Wad Deathmatch Only
Re: Node building
Re: Consistency failures
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Invunerability factoid
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Re: New Service
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
Re: Shareware vendors profiting from YEU.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian Todoroff <btodorof@osiris.ac.hmc.edu>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 1994 19:18:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Solid object
> Anyway, I had this idea, but I don't have the time to make a snazzy WAD
> to show it off. What I did was to make an object in a ray-tracer and slice
> it into about 12 layers. Then I put each layer into a different transparent
> texture and put them together in a Doom level. Et voila, a solid object!
> Looks pretty good over about a 90 degree viewing angle. Could probably be
> improved with some careful addition of other lines. It's not even _that_
> slow.
>
> Hopefully this will steer the conversation away from shareware blah blah blah.
>
> Steve.
>
This sounds really cool, could you either post it somewhere or e-mail me
your test wad. (I assume you made some basic wad that used it.) I've been
thinking of playing around with raytraced images for DOOM and I'd love to
see your results.
Brian
------------------------------
From: cgasparo@cymbal.aix.calpoly.edu
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 1994 22:35:33 -0800
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from YEU.
>Anyway, I had this idea, but I don't have the time to make a snazzy WAD
>to show it off. What I did was to make an object in a ray-tracer and slice
>it into about 12 layers. Then I put each layer into a different transparent
>texture and put them together in a Doom level. Et voila, a solid object!
>Looks pretty good over about a 90 degree viewing angle. Could probably be
>improved with some careful addition of other lines. It's not even _that_
>slow.
>
>Hopefully this will steer the conversation away from shareware blah blah blah.
>
>Steve.
Hey! I did that but I did it like this:
| | | | | |
- -+-+-+-+-+-+-
| | | | | |
- -+-+-+-+-+-+-
etc to 6 horizontal lines, I don't think I need to finish the drawing.
I aligned the textures and it looked great! A tad (year right) bit
slower when viewed but it worked. I just did a simple sphere to see how
it would look and it looked pretty good, just aligned the textures and
viola! Like you I don't yet have anything to show it off in and why
waste bandwith for one trippy thing that isn't precisely small (500k).
You can view this one from all 360 degrees and it looks pretty nice.
And you heard it here first from Steve and Steve!
Steve H.B.
- -
------------------------------
From: "Dewi Morgan (PC GROUP)" <D.Morgan@bradford.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 10:46:58 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Consistency failures
On Sun, 6 Nov 1994, Paul Griggs wrote:
> Hi All
>
> I wonder if anyone knows why when I try to run the wad files I have written
> I am getting consistency failures?
> I have two levels I have written and both crash out:.. only it seems when a
> rocket is launched at the other player from a reasonably close distance..
>
> Both exe's are the same and both wad sizes are the same..
Its happened to me, even in the official wads (not that is surprising,
they are packed with bugs), and I think it is something to do with one
machine thinking that the player hit by the missile is dead, and the other
not.
I think it is always the firer of the missile who thinks the other player
is dead (overoptimism, perhaps?), and the target believes he is still
alive.
I dont think this is a bug with your wad (though maybe there is something
you are doing that makes it more likely), but more a bug with the doom
.exe.
- D.
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 94 12:40:05 GMT
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
>>On Fri, 4 Nov 1994, Matthew Ayres wrote:
>>
> Walnut Creek CDROM (the company I work for), sells the "Toolkit for DOOM"
> CDROM for $19.95. It has over 7,500 files on it. Including over 550 WADs,
> ready to run from the disc. I think that's a reasonable price, eh?
>
[snip]
>
>We deleted every WAD that said not to place it on a CD, or sell in a
>retail environment. We deleted several borderline WADs too. It's of
>course only to be on the safe side. However, I highly doubt anyone
>would really mind too much. It does distribute their work widely, and
>that's the whole idea of releasing their work anyhow.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -Matthew Ayres, a.k.a. White Fang -Author WADED, a DOOM map editor
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hmmm... tell us Matt: is WADED on these CDs? ;-)
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: Donovan Young <donovan@america.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:07:53 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from YEU.
On Sun, 6 Nov 1994, S. McCrea wrote:
> > So, now that I've patiently sat through a plethora messages regarding this
> > egregious breach of freeware ethics, can I request that we start talking
> > about DOOM editing again?
> >
> Patiently waded in with your big oar, you mean. You enjoy it really. Etc.
>
> Anyway, I had this idea, but I don't have the time to make a snazzy WAD
> to show it off. What I did was to make an object in a ray-tracer and slice
> it into about 12 layers. Then I put each layer into a different transparent
> texture and put them together in a Doom level. Et voila, a solid object!
> Looks pretty good over about a 90 degree viewing angle. Could probably be
> improved with some careful addition of other lines. It's not even _that_
> slow.
>
> Hopefully this will steer the conversation away from shareware blah blah blah.
Cool! Can you send us some screen shots of your work, I'de like to see
what the look like!
<oh, and can I put them on a CDRom I'm making? <-- objoke!>
Donovan Young (donovan@america.net)
Associate Member of Access America
SysOp of Cyberdyne Systems (404) 518-0157
------------------------------
From: tom@vmark.com (Tom Rauschenbach)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:14:40 +22318116 (EST)
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
According to Dave Kirsch:
>
>> I was wondering if Walnut Creek is sharing its profits with the creators of
>> the varios PWADs and Doom tools. If not, it seems like Walnut Creek is
>> taking advantage of people and their work. Most people who post work to
>> the Net really don't want money. They do it for others' enjoyment and
>> maybe a little recognition. It's a shame that a company will use people
>> and their work in the pursuit of money, especially to charge people
>> for freeware.
>
>That's nonsense. I work for a large commerical BBS and we charge money
>for acccessing the system. We make a profit, too. Does that mean I'm
>charging money to allow people access to freeware?
>
>Walnut Creek is charging you money for the _transport_ of the data.
>You're being charged for the time it took them to get the stuff together,
>put it on a disc and ship it to you.
>
>> They do it for others' enjoyment and maybe a little recognition.
>
>Putting it on a CD just makes this more so as the distribution of their
>work is increased. My users are charged as they download megabytes of
>stuff. I'm not charging them for the data itself, but I'm charging them
>for the ability to access that data. My storage, equipment, staff and
>all other costs. It's the same thing with Walnut Creek, just that the
>medium is a disc instead of a modem.
>
Exactly. Well put. I get so tired of folks assuming that anyone with the
guts and energy it takes to do something must be evil if they get anything
out of it. I've put wads on floppies and given them to friends with no net
access. For this I get no money, but I get my friend's good will. Guess
what. Good will is an accepted balance sheet item recognized by any
accountant. Where are you going to draw the line?
- --
Tom Rauschenbach Hobbies include DXing garage door openers.
extension 3241
tom@vmark.com
------------------------------
From: Bill Bessette <dsquid@liii.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:37:06 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Announcing Nemodm.Wad Deathmatch Only
================================================================
Title : NEMODM.WAD (Deathmatch sequal to Nemo.wad
Author : Bill "Datasquid" Bessette (11/94)
Email Address : dsquid@liii.com
Description : Deathmatch level for Doom 1.666. This level
is fast and furious fun for 2-4 combatants.
Multiple kill lanes covering each major weapon
is a feature of NemoDM. *YES* there is a
ship with masts and a cargo hold (thanks DB!) ;)
Note: There is one area which is a great spot
for sniping, but not easy to find. Look for
a U turn hallway with metal textures on the
walls. Some of these walls are passable.
Note2: Red pad starts the crusher, Blue pad stops
it! Have fun! Then Feedback!
Additional Credits to : John White : Playtester,Deathmatch punching bag 1
Derek Brinkman : Playtester,Deathmatch punching bag ][
Diane Bessette : Spouse, Consultant
================================================================
* Play Information *
Episode and Level # : E1M1
Single Player : No - only 1 monster, he's a pet, so try to keep
him alive ;)
Cooperative 2-4 Player : No
Deathmatch 2-4 Player : Yes!!
Difficulty Settings : No
New Sounds : Yes (music transposed)
New Graphics : Nope
* Construction *
Base : Scratch
Build Time : About 20 hours.
Editor(s) used : DEU 5.21gcc, BSP 1.1x
Known Bugs : 1 pixel roof to ceiling error in water room.
Rarely visible.
Comments : Feedback strongly encouraged! If you use this
level, let me know what you and your buddies think!
Suggestions appreciated, bugs squashed!
* Copyright / Permissions *
Authors MAY use this level as a base to build additional
levels, provided you mention my name and give credit where credit is due.
You may post this file freely, *provided* this text file is included.
* Where to get this WAD *
FTP: Still attempting to upload it. Alt.binaries newsgroup
BBS: Modem Gamers BBS (516) 893-4120
The "Home for Head to Head Doomers"
The Big Boys: CompuServe, America On-Line
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
|-------------------. | Bill Bessette | dsquid@liii.com |
| /~~~~~<@> `---\__ | NY,NY +====+====================+
|=========< \ | / dsquid@seahawks.liii.com |
| \_______________ | +==========+======+====================+
|----------------------. \/ |"Everybody's got a game plan until |
| Go Seahawks!! \_/ | they get punched in the face." |
| | Mike Tyson |
|=================================| |
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
------------------------------
From: fenske@rocke.electro.swri.edu (Robert Fenske Jr)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 94 08:34:16 CST
Subject: Re: Node building
>Right said, Steve. There are two reasons why I am keeping a nodes builder
>in DEU:
>- as long as the nodes builder is OK (the one in 5.21 wasn't), it is far
> easier to do everything from within the editor.
>- historical reasons. DEU was the first program with a Nodes builder, and
> I don't want to remove it from my editor just because there are some
> external Nodes builders available. Especially since some of these programs
> were partially based on DEU's code (before Id released their IDBSP source
> code).
Well certainly any programmer can spend the time to code whatever
if he wants to. I guess my point about not embedding a node builder in an
editor would be more for anyone who is starting now to create an editor.
And I understand the historical reason you cited above as I have the tendency
to think that way myself.
I suggest then that DEU have the ability to run an external node
builder. If nothing else, my node builder is significantly faster than
any of the others (though I do think it creates a better set of nodes most
of the time).
Robert Fenske, Jr. rfenske@swri.edu Sw | The Taming the C*sm*s series:
Electromagnetics Division /R---\ |
Southwest Research Institute | I | | "The Martian canals were the
San Antonio, Texas USA \----/ | Martians' last ditch effort."
------------------------------
From: fenske@rocke.electro.swri.edu (Robert Fenske Jr)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 94 08:38:13 CST
Subject: Re: Consistency failures
>I wonder if anyone knows why when I try to run the wad files I have written
>I am getting consistency failures?
Are you running v1.2? Consistency failures happened to us quite
a bit when we were playing with v1.2. With v1.666 they very rarely show
up. You mentioned it happens someone uses the rocket launcher. This will
happen if one of the .EXE's has been hacked on and the other(s) haven't.
Are you sure that your .EXE's are identical?
Robert Fenske, Jr. rfenske@swri.edu Sw | The Taming the C*sm*s series:
Electromagnetics Division /R---\ |
Southwest Research Institute | I | | "The Martian canals were the
San Antonio, Texas USA \----/ | Martians' last ditch effort."
------------------------------
From: tom@vmark.com (Tom Rauschenbach)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:30:18 +22318116 (EST)
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
According to Gordon Mulcaster:
>
>Matthew Ayres <ayres@cdrom.com> writes:
>
>>However, I highly doubt anyone would really mind too much. It does
>>distribute their work widely, and that's the whole idea of releasing
>>their work anyhow.
>
>The idea is they want their work freely distributed, they don't want
>slimeballs making money off their work.
>
Freely distributed ?!?! Just because your internet access may be paid
for through some mechanism that does not look like a monthly bill to you
does not mean that reading this alias or downloading from infant2 is free.
For me, a couple hundred wads on a $20 CD is cheaper than pulling them from
infant2 or the mirrors. Are you going to accuse Barry of being being
a slimeball for not putting the stuff on infant on CD ? Is he just a
lackey for telcos ?
- --
Tom Rauschenbach Hobbies include DXing garage door openers.
extension 3241
tom@vmark.com
------------------------------
From: fenske@rocke.electro.swri.edu (Robert Fenske Jr)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 94 08:44:48 CST
Subject: Invunerability factoid
Being invunerable does not prevent you from getting blown apart
when someone teleports on top of you. But, invunerability does not wear
off while you are dead. So you can be dead as long as you want and not
get hurt.
Robert Fenske, Jr. rfenske@swri.edu Sw | The Taming the C*sm*s series:
Electromagnetics Division /R---\ |
Southwest Research Institute | I | | "The Martian canals were the
San Antonio, Texas USA \----/ | Martians' last ditch effort."
------------------------------
From: tom@vmark.com (Tom Rauschenbach)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:30:18 +22318116 (EST)
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
According to Gordon Mulcaster:
>
>Matthew Ayres <ayres@cdrom.com> writes:
>
>>However, I highly doubt anyone would really mind too much. It does
>>distribute their work widely, and that's the whole idea of releasing
>>their work anyhow.
>
>The idea is they want their work freely distributed, they don't want
>slimeballs making money off their work.
>
Freely distributed ?!?! Just because your internet access may be paid
for through some mechanism that does not look like a monthly bill to you
does not mean that reading this alias or downloading from infant2 is free.
For me, a couple hundred wads on a $20 CD is cheaper than pulling them from
infant2 or the mirrors. Are you going to accuse Barry of being being
a slimeball for not putting the stuff on infant on CD ? Is he just a
lackey for telcos ?
- --
Tom Rauschenbach Hobbies include DXing garage door openers.
extension 3241
tom@vmark.com
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 1994 09:45:41 EST
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
"D.J.S. Damerell" <djsd100@cus.cam.ac.uk> ,in message <Pine.SUN.3.91.9411060455
17.18465A-100000@bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk>, wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 1994, Robert Forsman wrote:
>
> > "D.J.S. Damerell" <djsd100@cus.cam.ac.uk> ,in message <Pine.SUN.3.91.941106
>> 0017
> > 56.8986B-100000@bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk>, wrote:
> > > If they make a profit, that's not all you're being charged for.
> > Profit is the payoff from an investment of time and other resources.
> > Without profit (monetary or otherwise), there is no investment.
^^^^^^^^^
>
> Tell _that_ to GNU.
I have written free software. Check ftp.cis.ufl.edu in pub/thoth/. I
measure the profit from those particular enterprises in terms of "fame"
(recognition by my peers). I'm sure a lot of GNU coders feel the same way.
It kinda helps when you're looking for a job and you can say "I ported GCC
to the Intel 486". The profit there is recognition, experience, and
increased salary.
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 94 15:09:28 GMT
Subject: Re: New Service
Steve Benner wrote:
>> As a service to all would-be wadsters, I'm please to announce the all-new
>
>> WANNABE A WADSTER WORLD WIDE WEB PAGES!!
>
>> All you've ever wanted to know about WADs and more!!
>
>> Available NOW from http://cres1.lancs.ac.uk/~esasb1/doom/index.html
>
[snip]
kapis-p@cs.buffalo.edu replied:
>
>Cool however you might want to take a look at DoomGate since there is a lot
>of the same info you have there and some of it is also in HTML format.
>
Thanks Kapi: I've linked Doom-Gate into my pages now.
Marco "Trouble" Rotelli also replied:
>Nice idea, actually the same I had during the summer.
>If you whant to get some more ideas for your web page take a look at mine.
>
>http://www.york.ac.uk/~mmar1
>
>And go to the doom page (you can't miss it).
>It is practically the same same stuff as yours, but with HiperTex facilty,
>after all that is what http was made for...
>
Well I wouldn't want to reopen the war of the roses, Marco... :-)
Thanks to the interest folks .... the difference between these other WWW
pages and my own is mainly that mine are growing fast with new material,
not just hot-links to the classics. Check out the new stuff now, folks....
(yes, I know there are loads of mistakes: mail me with 'em anyway)
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: tom@vmark.com (Tom Rauschenbach)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:30:18 +22318116 (EST)
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
According to Gordon Mulcaster:
>
>Matthew Ayres <ayres@cdrom.com> writes:
>
>>However, I highly doubt anyone would really mind too much. It does
>>distribute their work widely, and that's the whole idea of releasing
>>their work anyhow.
>
>The idea is they want their work freely distributed, they don't want
>slimeballs making money off their work.
>
Freely distributed ?!?! Just because your internet access may be paid
for through some mechanism that does not look like a monthly bill to you
does not mean that reading this alias or downloading from infant2 is free.
For me, a couple hundred wads on a $20 CD is cheaper than pulling them from
infant2 or the mirrors. Are you going to accuse Barry of being being
a slimeball for not putting the stuff on infant on CD ? Is he just a
lackey for telcos ?
- --
Tom Rauschenbach Hobbies include DXing garage door openers.
extension 3241
tom@vmark.com
------------------------------
From: tchquest@ix.netcom.com (Tom Boyles)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 07:50:39 -0800
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
You wrote:
>
>On Sat, 5 Nov 1994, Edward J Novitsky wrote:
>
>> I was wondering if Walnut Creek is sharing its profits with the creators of
>> the varios PWADs and Doom tools. If not, it seems like Walnut Creek is
>> taking advantage of people and their work. Most people who post work to
>> the Net really don't want money. They do it for others' enjoyment and
>> maybe a little recognition. It's a shame that a company will use people
>> and their work in the pursuit of money, especially to charge people
>> for freeware.
>
> Ahhh... the American Way.....
>
I agree with that... it's the American way, to make money from other peoples work.
I am not saying it is right, but it is going to happen. I am an author of some of the
utilities and several PWAD levels, I guess I don't really care if other people make a
few bucks from putting stuff I have done on a CD or whatever. There's a lot worse stuff
going on out there folks. There are people putting 600 megs of "commercial" software
on CDs and selling them. Now these are the people who should be prosecuted, including
those that buy these CDs. For the people that are putting "freeware" on CDs and selling
them, "let the buyer beware"... the buyer should be aware that they could find the same
software for "free" on BBSs or wherever. I think having someone else "collect" the
utilities and PWAD levels for me, placing them on CD, and making it available to me at
a "one stop shop" is worth the few extra bucks they make off the CD. Yes... the American
Way!
Tom Boyles
tchquest@ix.netcom.com
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 1994 09:45:41 EST
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from DEU.
"D.J.S. Damerell" <djsd100@cus.cam.ac.uk> ,in message <Pine.SUN.3.91.9411060455
17.18465A-100000@bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk>, wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Nov 1994, Robert Forsman wrote:
>
> > "D.J.S. Damerell" <djsd100@cus.cam.ac.uk> ,in message <Pine.SUN.3.91.941106
>> 0017
> > 56.8986B-100000@bootes.cus.cam.ac.uk>, wrote:
> > > If they make a profit, that's not all you're being charged for.
> > Profit is the payoff from an investment of time and other resources.
> > Without profit (monetary or otherwise), there is no investment.
^^^^^^^^^
>
> Tell _that_ to GNU.
I have written free software. Check ftp.cis.ufl.edu in pub/thoth/. I
measure the profit from those particular enterprises in terms of "fame"
(recognition by my peers). I'm sure a lot of GNU coders feel the same way.
It kinda helps when you're looking for a job and you can say "I ported GCC
to the Intel 486". The profit there is recognition, experience, and
increased salary.
------------------------------
From: sky@sixgun (Sky Golightly)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 09:49:51 -0800
Subject: Re: Shareware vendors profiting from YEU.
> On Nov 6, 22:35, cgasparo@cymbal.aix.calpoly.edu wrote:
> >Anyway, I had this idea, but I don't have the time to make a snazzy WAD
> >to show it off. What I did was to make an object in a ray-tracer and slice
> >it into about 12 layers. Then I put each layer into a different transparent
> >texture and put them together in a Doom level. Et voila, a solid object!
> >Looks pretty good over about a 90 degree viewing angle. Could probably be
> >improved with some careful addition of other lines. It's not even _that_
> >slow.
> >
> >Hopefully this will steer the conversation away from shareware blah blah blah.
> >
> >Steve.
>
> Hey! I did that but I did it like this:
> | | | | | |
> -+-+-+-+-+-+-
> | | | | | |
> -+-+-+-+-+-+-
> etc to 6 horizontal lines, I don't think I need to finish the drawing.
> I aligned the textures and it looked great! A tad (year right) bit
> slower when viewed but it worked. I just did a simple sphere to see how
> it would look and it looked pretty good, just aligned the textures and
> viola! Like you I don't yet have anything to show it off in and why
> waste bandwith for one trippy thing that isn't precisely small (500k).
> You can view this one from all 360 degrees and it looks pretty nice.
>
> And you heard it here first from Steve and Steve!
> Steve H.B.
>
> -
>-- End of excerpt from cgasparo@cymbal.aix.calpoly.edu
Alright you guys, let's *see it*. :) Sounds cool -- I wish I had the
time to spend on ray tracing stuff.
- -- sky
------------------------------
End of doom-editing-digest V1 #41
*********************************
