Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Doom Editing Digest Vol. 01 Nr. 216
From: owner-doom-editing-digest
To: doom-editing-digest@nvg.unit.no
Subject: doom-editing-digest V1 #216
Reply-To: doom-editing
Errors-To: owner-doom-editing-digest
Precedence: bulk
doom-editing-digest Friday, 24 March 1995 Volume 01 : Number 216
Re: Using mouse
Re: Where's DEU 5.3?
Re: Misplaced Topics
transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Re: Misplaced Topics
Re: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
doom-editing
Node-builder.
Re: Node-builder.
Re: Node-builder.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cmacord@fedex.com (Charlie Acord)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 23:04:36 -0600
Subject: Re: Using mouse
> I know this isn't really doom-editing, but a lot of epople have
>been commenting on this. For mouse play in Doom, how do you set up your
>keys? Are there any good training exercises/wads to try? I'm just a bit
>confused.
Re-post this msg on the DOOML list and I will be glad to continue this thread.
Charlie
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Charlie Acord, "the Green Marine" | "Wow, I just found the BFG-9000!!!!"
Telecom Div/FedEx/Memphis/TN | "No kidding?"
(home of BBQ, the blues, and Elvis) | "Yeah"......<click> <whoooooosh>
Internet: cmacord@fedex.com |
CompuServe: 75143,621 | #include <std_disclaimer.h>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: tedv@geom.umn.edu
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 95 23:35:29 CST
Subject: Re: Where's DEU 5.3?
> Yes, DEU interface isn't the most friendly of all, but DEU is good and
> it's source is available. I'd like to convert it to OS/2 WPS (I need
> practice), but I want a more stable and good version (and difficult, it
> is...), so, I want DEU 5.3.
I Believe we already have someone working on an OS/2 port... Unless you are
that person. I know someone is working on the windoze port and the linux
ports (X and Svga). No idea how long after DEU 5.3 these will take. Who
knows. We might release those versions before the DOS version for testing
purposes (sort of like what iD did with DOOM 1.0: NeXT version was out before
DOS.)
> I would like to receive a *beta* version of it, so I can begin *trying*
> to to the conversion as soon as possible (I'm knew to OS/2 programming, but
> I'd like to do a native version)... If someone out there know how to program
> for OS/2 and would like to participate in it, I'm here to hear... ;-)
Ask Raphael for details on an OS/2 port. I don't know them myself.
- -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)
------------------------------
From: "Lachlan O'Dea" <lode2@silas.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 95 13:20:07 +1000
Subject: Re: Misplaced Topics
> Just a quick note to ask anyone out there if they know of an
> alternate mailing list that covers some of the current topics, such as mouse
> vs. keyboard, EXE hacking, "having no life after Doom". I've seen all of
> these topics here in the Doom Editing thread, but I'm curious if there is a
> place for these more general topics.
>
> If anyone can suggest some other mailing lists and how to
> subscribe... I'll give you a megasphere for your troubles! :)
I think the usenet hierachy of rec.games.computer.doom.* should cover all
the topics you're interested in, and news groups are alot more
convenient than mailing lists (IMHO). Actually, I think that most of
the recent discussion on this list would have been better suited to the
rec.games.computer.doom groups.
Just my 2 cents.
> BTW... I've converted many heathen keyboard users to the true mouse sect!!
Good to hear.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Lachlan O'Dea | OS/2 Warp. Make it so.
Internet: lode@ozemail.com.au | Member of Team OS/2
Compuserve ID: 100353,650 |
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: a13231@mindlink.bc.ca (drake o'brien)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 95 05:12:24 PST
Subject: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
Two months ago when I first started reading this mailing list the posts
were almost all on advanced doom-editing topics. Has that mailing list
changed hands? Lately the posts to this list haven't even been on the
topic doom-editing, to say nothing of 'advanced'. If this is no longer
the correct list to post with a doom-editing topic I apologize, but:
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'. Condition 2 must necessarily
hold, even when one of the patches in question is nothing but 100% pure
cyan.
I have found that in defining a transparent texture, whatever y-offset we
might set the pointer to a patch at in deutex's texture1.txt file, doom
will ignore that value and play the patch as if we had defined the
y-offset to be 0. (note: here I'm talking about the co-ordinates of the
patch in the texture definition, *not* about the y-offset given the
texture itself when applied using a level editor)
I have found that when playing a transparent texture on a 2-sided linedef
doom will tile the texture once and once only. When no flag is set doom
will tile each patch in the texture down once from the ceiling. When the
below unpegged flag is set doom will tile each *patch* in the texture
down once from the height given the texture in texture1.txt. For
example,
TRANSP 256 128
* PATCH1 0 0
* PATCH2 64 32
* PATCH3 196 64
where patch1.bmp is 64x42, patch2.bmp is 128x32, patch3.bmp is 64x8,
satisfies the conditions for a transparent texture. If applied with
y-offset for the texture set at default 0 and with the lower unpegged
flag set then all three patches will tile down once and once only from
128 pixels above the floor.
Now suppose there's no cyan in the bitmaps. Applied to the normal wall
of a 1-sided linedef something quite different occurs. I expected a lot
of tutti-frutti since there are huge void spaces in the texture
definition. But in fact I found that in this case doom tiled each patch
down from the top of the texture and kept tiling until it hit bottom, and
of course on a 1-sided linedef doom tiles from ceiling to floor however
large the space to be filled is. The tiling over the voids wasn't
perfect. There was a 1 pixel line of tutti-frutti between the tiles.
------------------------------
From: bennes@rpi.edu (Scott Benner)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 10:41:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Misplaced Topics
Gee, does the original title say it all!
o Just a quick note to ask anyone out there if they know of an
o alternate mailing list that covers some of the current topics, such as mouse
o vs. keyboard, EXE hacking, "having no life after Doom". I've seen all of
^^^^^^^^^^^
o these topics here in the Doom Editing thread, but I'm curious if there is a
o place for these more general topics.
Well, out of the three, only "EXE hacking" belongs here. The rest belong on a
more public forum, most definitely usenet's r.g.c.d.playing...
(in jest) Perhaps someone should create rec.games.computer.doom.playing.woes
and r.g.c.d.p.controllers, to get them out of r.g.c.d.playing entirely...
So, ahem, GET THEM OUT OF HERE.
^^^^
I'm almost considering cancelling this mailing list; there hasn't been any
real .WAD editing discussed here in ages. (sure, that DWANGO cheating crap is
"editing" but not what this group is designed to support) But that would mean
digging up the original letter.... Too much work.
Later, until someone says something that obviously need correcting... ;)
- -- Scott
------------------------------
From: Robert Forsman <thoth@cis.ufl.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 10:47:33 EST
Subject: Re: transparent textures, the tiling of textures
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.
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.
------------------------------
From: student <xd0110@linux.cnu.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 14:25:38 -0500
Subject: doom-editing
Ok this is an editing question, really.
Whats a good way to convert old doom1 pwads to doom2 pwads
and avoid texture not found messages?
I'd like to use a utility to do all of them at a time, instead
selecting each and every linedef in editors.
Would tr "doom1tex" "doom2text" < oldpwad > newpwad
work?
Daniel LaBell xd0110@linux.cnu.edu
------------------------------
From: <jdh15@po.cwru.edu>
Date: 23 Mar 1995 19:50:58 GMT
Subject: Node-builder.
While working on a level (for TNT) I have found that DEU messes up
the nodes slightly, to produce "see-through" walls and pseudo HOM
effects. I do not want to switch editors, since I am used to DEU,
but I would like to use an external node builder. I am aware of
IDBSP and BSP11. But I am wondering, which one is the best, not as
in speed, but as in best quality. DEU used to mess up lot, so I
used BSP11 (?) bur DEU 5.21 fixed the problem. This level is big
and intricate, though, so now the node-builder in DEU is breking
down. Any suggestions? (besides "trim the level.")
- -j
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy Holland <> jdh15@po.cwru.edu <> http://maniac.cwru.edu/~deth/
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you visit American city,
You will find it very pretty.
Just two things of which you must beware:
Don't drink the water and don't breathe the air. -Tom Lehrer
------------------------------
From: Matthew Miller <rmiller@infinet.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 17:57:21 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Node-builder.
On 23 Mar 1995 jdh15@po.cwru.edu wrote:
> While working on a level (for TNT) I have found that DEU messes up
> the nodes slightly, to produce "see-through" walls and pseudo HOM
> effects. I do not want to switch editors, since I am used to DEU,
> but I would like to use an external node builder. I am aware of
> IDBSP and BSP11. But I am wondering, which one is the best, not as
> in speed, but as in best quality. DEU used to mess up lot, so I
> used BSP11 (?) bur DEU 5.21 fixed the problem. This level is big
> and intricate, though, so now the node-builder in DEU is breking
> down. Any suggestions? (besides "trim the level.")
Yeah...heh...well, I think DEU's node builder is mostly so you can get an
adequate node set built while you're working on a level. Once the level
is finished (or even while you're working on it if DEU's builder is
*really* messing up) try BSP11.
Matthew Miller -- rmiller@infinet.com
------------------------------
From: Genesis Krzyzaniak <genesisk@eden.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 1995 18:05:48 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Node-builder.
On 23 Mar 1995 jdh15@po.cwru.edu wrote:
> While working on a level (for TNT) I have found that DEU messes up
> the nodes slightly, to produce "see-through" walls and pseudo HOM
> effects. I do not want to switch editors, since I am used to DEU,
> but I would like to use an external node builder. I am aware of
> IDBSP and BSP11. But I am wondering, which one is the best, not as
> in speed, but as in best quality. DEU used to mess up lot, so I
> used BSP11 (?) bur DEU 5.21 fixed the problem. This level is big
> and intricate, though, so now the node-builder in DEU is breking
> down. Any suggestions? (besides "trim the level.")
BSP is more accurate than idBSP (just -try- to build gkdm7.wad with idBSP),
not sure about speed tho... DeepBsp is BSP on steroids, super fast (if
run in 32 bit mode (but of course you have to wait 10 seconds before it
does anything...)) but about the same accuracy i think. Warm is the
most accurate and is about the same speed as BSP. Warm is available on
the most systems (i'm running it on linux myself... (had to patch it to
make it work tho...)) and has other cool features too (full reject,
randomize, etc...)
- --
Genesis Krzyzaniak - Genesisk@Eden.Com - http://www.eden.com/~genesisk
------------------------------
End of doom-editing-digest V1 #216
**********************************
