Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Doom Editing Digest Vol. 01 Nr. 218
From: owner-doom-editing-digest
To: doom-editing-digest@nvg.unit.no
Subject: doom-editing-digest V1 #218
Reply-To: doom-editing
Errors-To: owner-doom-editing-digest
Precedence: bulk
doom-editing-digest Monday, 27 March 1995 Volume 01 : Number 218
Re: Interesting thing I discovered...
Re: stair linedefs
Re. stair linedefs
Re: Re. stair linedefs
Re: Unknown_Player_Special
Quake
Re: stair linedefs
Re: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Re: Quake
Re: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Re: stair linedefs
Recommend an editor
Re: stair linedefs
Re: Recommend an editor
Re: Recommend an editor
re. re. transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Re: stair linedefs
Re: stair linedefs
Re: stair linedefs
Re: Quake
Re: Quake
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "GREED IS A HOBBY." <MEMKEN@ewu.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 03:11:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Interesting thing I discovered...
]Has anyone here discovered that you can actually outrun the rockets
]in DOOM (without turbo!). If you shoot a rocket while running
]diagonally, and continue to pursue it diagonally, you will actually run
]PASSED the rocket. This will only work in a long stretch of
]uninterruptible land (no "things" or other abruptions). This means
]running diagonally is considerably faster than running straight, because
]you can't outrun a rocket running straight. Just something I discovered
]lately. :) It was funny, because at one point I ran right passed the
]rocket and it actually hit me from behind! I don't know if owning a P90
]has anything to do with it.
]
]
]Jordan Feinman System Operator
]Global One, Inc. (518) 452-1465 v
]jordanf@globalone.net (518) 452-1234 d
Neat huh? I always thought it would be groovy to make a level something like
a slot car track just for kicks so one could do some high speed strafing.
You know, low walls and the like roughly in a series of connecting loops with
indepenent paths such that the players cannot physically touch... Maybe a
cyberdemon in the middle to inspire the players into a lot of movement...
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
memken@ewu.edu | SPRING BREAK AT LAST!!! And so God created booze...
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Mike Duggan <mduggan@ram.ramnet.net>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 06:45:03 -500 (EST)
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
You were asking for results from our stair linedefs.
My only experiences that I've had were these.
1. You must have all keyed sectors at the same height.
2. Irregular shapes don't agree. What I mean by that is that when I create
stairs, if I use the type that simply goes staright up with rectangles, it
works perfectly almost always. However, my attempts at creating irregular
steps have all failed.
------------------------------
From: a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 95 08:33:55 PST
Subject: Re. stair linedefs
Mike Duggan writes:
> when I create stairs, if I use the type that simply goes
>staright up with rectangles, it works perfectly almost always.
>However, my attempts at creating irregular steps have all failed.
Well, I don't know anything that doesn't come straight out of the UDS by
Matt Fell. The procedure in the UDS is a bit hard to follow if you go at
it linedef by linedef, sector by sector, finding the lowest-numbered
2-sided linedef whose right side faces each succeeding sector.
AAAUUUGGGHH. But you should be able to make rising steps of any shape if
you follow these rules:
1. Make sure all stair sectors have same floor texture.
2. Flip all perimeter linedefs so the 1st sidedef (right sidedef) faces
OUT (except when perimeter linedef is 1-sided, of course).
3. The remaining linedefs separate the rising stairs. Flip all these so
the 2nd sidedefs face in the direction you want the stairs to rise.
Simple as that.
If you follow these rules then you follow the rules of the UDS. Well, I
don't pretend to be exhaustive, I might have missed an item meantioned in
the UDS. But rules 2 & 3 cover the UDS on the 'lowest right-sided
linedef' issue by a simple process of eliminating other possibilities.
I made a huge spiral rising stair to be set off by W1 tags to a series of
linedefs (I wanted to make sure the player would cross at least one of
them). What happened was that, until the stairs had completed their
rise, the 1st stair rose 8 units each time the player crossed a new
tagged line.
I corrected the problem by tagging the stairs to only 1 very long linedef
with a W1 tag.
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 12:53:54 EST
Subject: Re: Re. stair linedefs
a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien) ,in message <m0rsYxy-00049aC@rsoft.rsoft.
bc.ca>, wrote:
> I made a huge spiral rising stair to be set off by W1 tags to a series of
> linedefs (I wanted to make sure the player would cross at least one of
> them). What happened was that, until the stairs had completed their
> rise, the 1st stair rose 8 units each time the player crossed a new
> tagged line.
> I corrected the problem by tagging the stairs to only 1 very long linedef
> with a W1 tag.
The "mistake" you made was put to use by id in MAP21 (Nirvana?) for
sector 51. You have to activate 4 different S1 stair linedefs all tagged
to sector 51 to get out of a room.
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 95 19:26:52 GMT
Subject: Re: Unknown_Player_Special
At 6:47 pm 23/3/95, Aragorn! wrote:
>I am halfway thru creating my first big doom level, but now when i run it
>in doom, i get dumped back to dos with the error :
>
>Uknown_Playet_InSpecial : 2282
>
>Or something similar. What does it mean and how can i rectify it.
More likely "Player_In_UnknownSpecial" or something similar ;)
Looks like you have a corrupted Sector Special value. Check the sector that
the player was in as the crash happens.
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: Greg_Garrison@f1111.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Greg Garrison)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 10:53:24 -0500
Subject: Quake
I know this is a little off subject, but I heard that "Quake" will
be a Pentium only game. Anyone know if there is truth to this???
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 95 19:26:48 GMT
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
At 4:10 pm 24/3/95, Robert Forsman wrote:
> It's been a while since anyone posted information about the stair linedefs.
>Can people who have experimental results post or repost their results? Don't
>be afraid to post partial results or results that disagree with someone else.
>If there is any ambiguity, we want to root it out and resolve it.
>
What you mean, Bob? Is this edges and visplanes you're worried about here?
I'm busy collating info on the latter at the moment--nothing definite to
report yet. Anyone with any new info please post.
Or is there something else about stair linedefs that I don't know? (Prolly
lots ;)
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 95 19:26:45 GMT
Subject: Re: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
At 3:47 pm 23/3/95, Robert Forsman wrote:
>a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien) ,in message <m0rrmrp-00042wC@rsoft.rsoft.
> bc.ca>, wrote:
>
>> My tests have shown that necessary & sufficient conditions for medusa &
>> doom-error free textures on a visible normal sidedef of a 2-sided linedef
>> are:
>> 1. no void columns
>> 2. no 2 patches can share a line segment on the x-axis.
>> I threw in condition 1 because it has to hold for any texture to be
>> doom-error free, because otherwise we get "generate lookup, column
>> without a patch" ugliness at startup. So I would call any texture for
>> which these conditions hold 'transparent'.
>
> Excellent piece of work. This belongs in the UDS. Especially the part about
>the patch's y offset.
>
Err.... am I missing something here? Didn't we know all this? [Genuine
question--not sarcastic. I'm really worried I am missing something new but
I really can't see it.]
> This information reveals something about how they draw transparent patches.
>
>> The tiling over the voids wasn't
>> perfect. There was a 1 pixel line of tutti-frutti between the tiles.
>
> That you got any recognizable filler material at all is probably a lucky
>consequence of some pointer math. Textures with void space should not be used
>on non-ST walls.
The exact effect depends upon the height of the texture you're using. It
doesn't need to be a transparent texture either, of course. Any short
texture (<128) produces the 1 pixel line of tutti-frutti between vertical
tilings and a wedge of the same where the horizontal tilings go askew: try
using one of the 24-pixel textures on a big wall--they can look quite
pretty!
It's interesting that even 128-high textures don't tile properly if they're
transparent. The up-coming SAMS book has a little on this but not much--I
didn't have enough time or space to cover it in much detail in my section,
though I did put in some pictures of it. Did anyone else touch on it?
- -Steve
------------------------------
From: john worsley <elise@teleport.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 13:07:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Quake
>
> I know this is a little off subject, but I heard that "Quake" will
> be a Pentium only game. Anyone know if there is truth to this???
>
From what i've heard from Romero, Quake will *run* on a 486\dx2-66
with 8 megs of ram, but almost baseline, it will *play* on a P-90.
- --
ÚÄÒ
ÉÍ» ÓÄÙ
º º ÚÂÄÚÄÄÒÄÒÄÄÒ¿ÚÒÄÄÄ
³ ÈÍ´³ ³ Ä´ º Ý º³ Ú¿ À
ÈÍÍÍÁÄÄ ÄÄÙÄÁÄÄÙÙÀÄÙÀÄÙ
úlucian eX antediluviaú
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 17:35:02 EST
Subject: Re: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner) ,in message <ab9a01b80002100454fb@[148.
88.15.101]>, wrote:
> Err.... am I missing something here? Didn't we know all this? [Genuine
> question--not sarcastic. I'm really worried I am missing something new but
> I really can't see it.]
No, I can guarantee you that there are many on the list who didn't know
this. I remember earlier discussions that had information backing his
results, but the mention of the Y offset was genuinely new to me.
It doesn't hurt to have a periodic reposting of accepted lore to clue in
the newbies, refresh the memories of the venerables, and maybe expose it to
criticism from later experiments (ala 128-plane linedef limit).
I'd rather see reposts of useful info than discussions of kbd-v-mouse.
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 17:40:41 EST
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
S.Benner@lancaster.ac.uk (Steve Benner) ,in message <ab9a04a50102100404ea@[148.
88.15.101]>, wrote:
> What you mean, Bob? Is this edges and visplanes you're worried about here?
> I'm busy collating info on the latter at the moment--nothing definite to
> report yet. Anyone with any new info please post.
>
> Or is there something else about stair linedefs that I don't know? (Prolly
> lots ;)
Well, so far, all I know is what is contained in the UDS. It seems
somewhat straightforward, but I'm primarily curious if anyone has noticed
anything that isn't mentioned in there, or if the UDS has inaccuracies.
I'll gain a level of confidence in the info after I've implemented a few
extra features for the PFME (secondary highlights for the Moat-filler and
Stair linedefs, as well as a hidden stair construction function).
------------------------------
From: student <xd0110@linux.cnu.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 21:20:21 -0500
Subject: Recommend an editor
I'm using two editors right now, and I'm not happy with either of them.
Doomcad and Doomed, they were simple engough at editing levels ( and doomcad
had an interesting prefab mode ), but both are giving me large amounts
of errors for no apparrent reason. What I want is one editor that will
let me do everything, and is stable.
Daniel LaBell xd0110@linux.cnu.edu
------------------------------
From: Dave Worth <mbworth@argo.unm.edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 20:40:28 -0700 (MST)
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
On Sat, 25 Mar 1995, Mike Duggan wrote:
> Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 06:45:03 -500 (EST)
> From: Mike Duggan <mduggan@ram.ramnet.net>
> To: doom-editing@nvg.unit.no
> Cc: doom-editing@nvg.unit.no
> Subject: Re: stair linedefs
>
> You were asking for results from our stair linedefs.
> My only experiences that I've had were these.
> 1. You must have all keyed sectors at the same height.
> 2. Irregular shapes don't agree. What I mean by that is that when I create
> stairs, if I use the type that simply goes staright up with rectangles, it
> works perfectly almost always. However, my attempts at creating irregular
> steps have all failed.
>
A better way if you want to create irregular steps is to use either
DOOMCAD or DOOMED, they both allow prmade steps and it is easy to move
the verticies to make irregular steps, thats how I do it. :)
------------------------------
From: hsimpson@unixg.ubc.ca (Enigma)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 20:05:51 -0800
Subject: Re: Recommend an editor
>What I want is one editor that will
>let me do everything, and is stable.
(Please kick me)
Raphael's been telling me wonderful things about DEU 5.3. He seems to think
it will rock the world when released. Unfortunately, that time may never come ;)
But seriously, 5.3 is supposed to address all of your editing woes in one
easy-to-digest package.
- ----
TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT TNT
enigma <hsimpson@unixg.ubc.ca> * Coming to you from Vancouver, Canada
Organizer of "Trials and Tribulations", _the_ Doom .WAD project.
I like: Techno, PBS, Jerry Mander, Fettuccini Alfredo, and SFU Engineering!
------------------------------
From: l-sieben@MEMPHIS.EDU (ulasieben)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 23:50:09 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Recommend an editor
>
>I'm using two editors right now, and I'm not happy with either of them.
>Doomcad and Doomed, they were simple engough at editing levels ( and doomcad
>had an interesting prefab mode ), but both are giving me large amounts
>of errors for no apparrent reason. What I want is one editor that will
>let me do everything, and is stable.
>
>Daniel LaBell xd0110@linux.cnu.edu
Get DEU 5.21 GCC or DCK 2.2.
-- Evil Genius (Jimmy Sieben)
------------------------------
From: a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien)
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 95 23:06:30 PST
Subject: re. re. transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Steve Benner wrote:
> Robert Forsman wrote:
>>>Drake O'Brien wrote:
>
>>> My tests have shown that necessary & sufficient conditions for medusa &
>>> doom-error free textures on a visible normal sidedef of a 2-sided
>>>linedef are:
>>> 1. no void columns
>>> 2. no 2 patches can share a line segment on the x-axis.
>>> I threw in condition 1 because it has to hold for any texture to be
>>> doom-error free, because otherwise we get "generate lookup, column
>>> without a patch" ugliness at startup. So I would call any texture for
>>> which these conditions hold 'transparent'.
>
>> Excellent piece of work. This belongs in the UDS. Especially the part
>>about the patch's y offset.
>
>Err.... am I missing something here? Didn't we know all this? [Genuine
>question--not sarcastic. I'm really worried I am missing something new but
>I really can't see it.]
In fact I do think you must be missing something, unless you knew something
you weren't telling us about. Sure I'm quite new to doom-editing & can't
hold a candle to some of the brightlights who read this list, but I have a
good memory & the topic has come up quite often since I came on the scene,
like this:
Person A, who has just carefully read the UDS: "transparent textures need
to be made from only one patch"
Person B, who has read the UDS & also has been reading groups like this:
"not quite correct, in fact transparent textures can be made of many patches
so long as there's no texture overlay & all patches are given a 0 y-offset."
My definition extends this sequence of minor corrections:
Person C: "not correct,in fact the y-offset of your patch is irrelevant and
transparent textures are error free so long as no two patches share a
segment of the x-axis (& no void columns)"
My tests showed that whatever y-offset we define the *patches* at in
texture1.txt, Doom simply ignored those values and played the patches as
tho' given y-offset of 0 in the texture definition.
>>> The tiling over the voids wasn't
>>> perfect. There was a 1 pixel line of tutti-frutti between the tiles.
>
>> That you got any recognizable filler material at all is probably a lucky
>>consequence of some pointer math. Textures with void space should not be
>>used on non-ST walls.
>The exact effect depends upon the height of the texture you're using. It
>doesn't need to be a transparent texture either, of course. Any short
>texture (<128) produces the 1 pixel line of tutti-frutti between vertical
>tilings and a wedge of the same where the horizontal tilings go askew: try
>using one of the 24-pixel textures on a big wall--they can look quite
>pretty!
>It's interesting that even 128-high textures don't tile properly if they're
>transparent. The up-coming SAMS book has a little on this but not much--I
>didn't have enough time or space to cover it in much detail in my section,
>though I did put in some pictures of it. Did anyone else touch on it?
Again, I think you might be missing something. Although I didn't think
it was as important as the def. of a transparent texture, I was talking here
about the *definition* of textures via their pointers to patches, each of
which is given an (x,y) co-ordinate, and about the tiling of the *patches*
within the texture. True, I also spoke about how the tiling of the textures
themselves was determined by whether or not the lower unpegged flag was set,
but I didn't think I was saying anything new about that! I required the
context, tho', for my info on the tiling of *patches* within the texture.
The info about the tiling of patches within the texture becomes important
when you actually want to use the new info provided by the slightly more
comprehensive def. of transparent textures. To repeat what I posted about
this: if you have a TEST texture (128x128) made of 2 patches TEST1.BMP
(64x128) & TEST2.BMP (64x32), for example, with pointers defined:
TEST 128 128
* TEST1 0 0
* TEST2 64 46
this is a transparent texture (according to the definition I posted) & won't
cause medusa on a normal wall of a 2-sided linedef. If you set the lower
unpegged flag & apply it to a normal wall of a 2-sided linedef doom will
ignore the y=46 value given to TEST2.BMP & will tile TEST2.BMP down once
from 128 above the floor. The same texture applied to a normal wall of a
1-sided linedef produces the result that TEST2.BMP is tiled down the entire
wall, with a 1 pixel void between tiles. In other words, altho' the
*texture* is defined with a huge 64x96 void space, and you can see just how
irregular the pattern of filled space is, doom fills this void space in by
tiling the TEST2.BMP *patch* exactly as if it were a distinct texture.
Actually, I thought there were a few things that still had to be tested out
about the tiling issue, but since this is already well known to you perhaps
you could post the source. It irritates me to find out I wasted my time on
all that tedious testing!! I could've been honing my skills at DM. And
believe me, just on this one tiny issue the testing was tedious & boring
boring boring... Gives me some insight into the kind of work the
programmers have to do, tho'...
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 10:57:01 EST
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
Dave Worth <mbworth@argo.unm.edu> ,in message <Pine.A32.3.91.950325203902.48064
A-100000@argo.unm.edu>, wrote:
> A better way if you want to create irregular steps is to use either
> DOOMCAD or DOOMED, they both allow prmade steps and it is easy to move
> the verticies to make irregular steps, thats how I do it. :)
Can you make a switchback staircase with it? I'm sure there are shapes
that you would have difficulty twisting it into. Besides, it doesn't run
under Linux.
I think I'll just hack my own MakeHiddenStaircase rather than boot DOS
every time I want to construct one.
------------------------------
From: l-sieben@MEMPHIS.EDU (ulasieben)
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 14:07:33 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
>Dave Worth <mbworth@argo.unm.edu> ,in message <Pine.A32.3.91.950325203902.48064
> A-100000@argo.unm.edu>, wrote:
>
>> A better way if you want to create irregular steps is to use either
>> DOOMCAD or DOOMED, they both allow prmade steps and it is easy to move
>> the verticies to make irregular steps, thats how I do it. :)
>
> Can you make a switchback staircase with it? I'm sure there are shapes
>that you would have difficulty twisting it into. Besides, it doesn't run
>under Linux.
>
> I think I'll just hack my own MakeHiddenStaircase rather than boot DOS
>every time I want to construct one.
What do you mean by Hidden Staircase and switchback stairs?
-- Evil Genius (Jimmy Sieben)
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 16:21:16 EST
Subject: Re: stair linedefs
l-sieben@MEMPHIS.EDU (ulasieben) ,in message <01HOLEU6R6EA9D7363@MSUVX2.MEMPHIS
.EDU>, wrote:
> >> A better way if you want to create irregular steps is to use either
> >> DOOMCAD or DOOMED, they both allow prmade steps and it is easy to move
> >> the verticies to make irregular steps, thats how I do it. :)
> >
> > Can you make a switchback staircase with it? I'm sure there are shapes
> >that you would have difficulty twisting it into. Besides, it doesn't run
> >under Linux.
> >
> > I think I'll just hack my own MakeHiddenStaircase rather than boot DOS
> >every time I want to construct one.
> What do you mean by Hidden Staircase and switchback stairs?
> -- Evil Genius (Jimmy Sieben)
(Forgive me, venerables)
When I say hidden staircase, I mean a set of sectors which will be turned
into a stairway by one of the Stairs linedefs. There are a couple of gnarley
rules to be followed when constructing one of these. It's much better to
spend a day encoding into the editor than spend an hour mucking about with
linedefs every time you want to construct one.
A switchback staircase is shaped like this:
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| | | | | | | |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| | | | | | | |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
| | | | | | | |
| 14| 13| 12| 11| 10| 9 | 8 |
| | | | | | | |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
------------------------------
From: TWM2029@AOL.COM
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 17:19:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Quake
>I know this is a little off subject, but I heard that "Quake" will
>be a Pentium only game. Anyone know if there is truth to this???
From What I understand (from John Romero) Quake will be 486 only game, and
thats the
only limit. Not Pent Only.
------------------------------
From: tedv@geom.umn.edu
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 95 17:23:59 CST
Subject: Re: Quake
> >I know this is a little off subject, but I heard that "Quake" will
> >be a Pentium only game. Anyone know if there is truth to this???
>
> From What I understand (from John Romero) Quake will be 486 only game, and
> thats the only limit. Not Pent Only.
Quake will run on a 486 the same way DOOM runs on a 386. Slow, but it works.
- -Ted
- --
Ted Vessenes | "The only force stronger than fate is dramatic irony."
tedv@geom.umn.edu | "[William] Shatner couldn't direct his way out of the
tedv@cs.umn.edu | bathroom with both hands and a map!"
tjvessen@midway.uchicago.edu -Ryan Ingram (1st), -Kibo's .sig (2nd)
------------------------------
End of doom-editing-digest V1 #218
**********************************
