What are the reasons to play other ports except GZDOOM?

[WorldMachine]

3 hours ago, Wo0p said:

 

They be fightin' words, boi! *Prepares boxing gloves*

*Prepares the berserk pack* >;3

[DRON12261]

32 minutes ago, Graf Zahl said:

 

You are forgetting something very important here:

 

Most mods made for GZDoom are not independent games but gameplay mods that are supposed to be run with Doom.

Why would you cut off these people from what they need to do their work?

 

There's also the - little - problem that this would pretty much kill developer contributions for good. If GZDoom loses the few people that actually do contribute code there won't be much left - and these people all come from the gameplay mod scene. They want Doom AND they want features, if one gets stripped they'd be gone.

 

 

I'm not saying to remove with roots some UDMF or ZScript. Of course not. But at the very least you should simplify the settings menu and hide unnecessary things from the user's eyes, leaving it all in the hands of mappers or modders only. This is especially true for custom render settings. Looks like the same Sector light mode should be set exclusively mapper or modder and forced on the map, and if it's not in the map itself, it will automatically be set to "Software" mode. A huge number of settings can just break the game experience. And there's no need to hide behind the "it's up to the user to decide how he does things". No, he has no idea how the author intended it. And it often boils down to you regularly wondering "and how do I set this up now to make it look the way it should?" when you launch the next project. What? The map is built on dynlights, but you have them turned off? Go dig into the settings! The map had a special moment with finely tuned lighting, like a neatly illuminated path to a secret, but the player has Sector light mode on Bright in the settings? Pfft, of course the mapper is an asshole, how am I supposed to figure out such a secret. The map is built on the contrary on the dark locations where you have to grop your way to the goal, but suddenly the player has Sector light mode on Dark, and that halo around the player, which lights up everything in a small radius around him is not. We have a horror mode, in which everything should be dark and Sector light mode should be set to Dark, but the player of course put himself what Bright? Another player who has seen nothing but brutal doom and did not read any even README will spit and say that the modder is an idiot and did what the crap. The map uses a special texture with some small text, but texture filtering in conjunction with what processing pixel scaling turns it all into a mess.

 

GZDoom thus interferes where it should not. And it has nothing to do with comfortable gameplay. And it's trivial when an ordinary map runs on GZDoom, that just downloaded and untouched from the official site, and it does not look like it should look compared to the original, it's already a very, very big problem.

[RataUnderground]

6 minutes ago, DRON12261 said:

I'm not saying to remove with roots some UDMF or ZScript. Of course not. But at the very least you should simplify the settings menu and hide unnecessary things from the user's eyes, leaving it all in the hands of mappers or modders only. This is especially true for custom render settings. Looks like the same Sector light mode should be set exclusively mapper or modder and forced on the map, and if it's not in the map itself, it will automatically be set to "Software" mode. A huge number of settings can just break the game experience. And there's no need to hide behind the "it's up to the user to decide how he does things". No, he has no idea how the author intended it. And it often boils down to you regularly wondering "and how do I set this up now to make it look the way it should?" when you launch the next project. What? The map is built on dynlights, but you have them turned off? Go dig into the settings! The map had a special moment with finely tuned lighting, like a neatly illuminated path to a secret, but the player has Sector light mode on Bright in the settings? Pfft, of course the mapper is an asshole, how am I supposed to figure out such a secret. The map is built on the contrary on the dark locations where you have to grop your way to the goal, but suddenly the player has Sector light mode on Dark, and that halo around the player, which lights up everything in a small radius around him is not. We have a horror mode, in which everything should be dark and Sector light mode should be set to Dark, but the player of course put himself what Bright? Another player who has seen nothing but brutal doom and did not read any even README will spit and say that the modder is an idiot and did what the crap. The map uses a special texture with some small text, but texture filtering in conjunction with what processing pixel scaling turns it all into a mess.

 

GZDoom thus interferes where it should not. And it has nothing to do with comfortable gameplay. And it's trivial when an ordinary map runs on GZDoom, that just downloaded and untouched from the official site, and it does not look like it should look compared to the original, it's already a very, very big problem.

I used to think similar, but the reality is that people like to play with their favorite settings, they don't like to have the WAD author change them just on a whim.
Anyway, the vast majority of people will listen when the author specifies "recommended settings".

[DRON12261]

3 minutes ago, RataUnderground said:

I used to think similar, but the reality is that people like to play with their favorite settings, they don't like to have the WAD author change them just on a whim.
Anyway, the vast majority of people will listen when the author specifies "recommended settings".

Do not confuse necessary requirements with whimsy. These things can directly destroy the inherent game experience. And just as many people often miss the extra information, as practice has shown time and again.

[LuciferSam86]

And then you have power users who like to have their full menus to fiddle with the options for whatever reason.

The easiest solution could be to put everything in the readme and the end user should read that.

Otherwise ( I don't know if GZDoom already has something like that ) a lump (or a partial ini file) where the modder puts the suggested options to play the mod.

Don't know if that's possible to implement that, and the time to do that.

[RataUnderground]

5 minutes ago, DRON12261 said:

Do not confuse necessary requirements with whimsy. These things can directly destroy the inherent game experience. And just as many people often miss the extra information, as practice has shown time and again.

Honestly, I don't trust the makers of wads to guess how I like to play . In fact, it's funny that since there have to be default settings (could we say it's the "official" presentation suggestion?), most don't agree with them and have to change them. Texture filtering? High resolution? Dynamic lighting? Ugh. If I start a wad and it immediately forces me to play like this, I close the game.

[D4NUK1]

Just now, RataUnderground said:

Honestly, I don't trust the makers of wads to guess how I like to play . In fact, it's funny that since there have to be default settings (could we say it's the "official" presentation suggestion?), most don't agree with them and have to change them. Texture filtering? High resolution? Dynamic lighting? Ugh. If I start a wad and it immediately forces me to play like this, I close the game.

You can create a autoexec and use in almost all you GZDooms configurations, even if they get updated, so they got my resolutions, video and keyboards settings rigth. It's not the best solution, but it's a really good one in practice when the proyect still gets updated and updated.

[PhoxFyre007]

8 minutes ago, DRON12261 said:

Do not confuse necessary requirements with whimsy. These things can directly destroy the inherent game experience. And just as many people often miss the extra information, as practice has shown time and again.

The mapper is not the end controller of how the user plays Doom. They need not follow put out ideas of how to play the game and may play it as they want, limiting the options to just modders limits capabilities of play. You talk of the maps as of they are a game and seek more of a "Doom-like" game when the capability of that can be tweaked and allow the user to play it as wanted. What you deem as useless or incoherent has a use for some person. It can be daunting but the idea of stripping end users if capability is never the right answer. 

[DRON12261]

6 minutes ago, RataUnderground said:

Honestly, I don't trust the makers of wads to guess how I like to play . In fact, it's funny that since there have to be default settings (could we say it's the "official" presentation suggestion?), most don't agree with them and have to change them. Texture filtering? High resolution? Dynamic lighting? Ugh. If I start a wad and it immediately forces me to play like this, I close the game.

I'm talking about those things when a wad or mod just becomes unplayable in the wrong settings. And again, I think the default settings are unacceptable, as they are now, if only because they are already very far away from the original, in source-port. Need this texture filtering, let him turn it on himself, as it is already the feature from port's selves.

 

All this is a problem, and it needs to be solved.

[Ravendesk]

Since gzdoom changes game behaviour quite a bit, it breaks many maps that are relying on such behaviour (scroller speeds, player control on scrollers, wallruns, thingruns, ice physics etc etc). Since I play a lot of gimmicky maps (and occasionally make some), I stumble upon stuff that gets broken in gz quite often, so dsda is a port of choice. Demo recording is the other big reason obviously.

 

Also it was mentioned in the thread before, movement just feels very wrong in gz after you are used to vanilla movement, there are so many slight things that are off, it just doesn't feel good to me to play with gz physics (or "fixed maths", whatever you want to call those changes). This is especially noticeable in platforming/movement maps.

[RataUnderground]

1 minute ago, DRON12261 said:

I'm talking about those things when a wad or mod just becomes unplayable in the wrong settings. And again, I think the default settings are unacceptable, as they are now, if only because they are already very far away from the original, in source-port. Need this texture filtering, let him turn it on himself, as it is already the feature from port's selves.

 

All this is a problem, and it needs to be solved.

Although I don't like the default settings at all, I have to say that there is no reason why they are "unacceptable". From what I understand, the people who make GzDoom like the way it looks with them. It's a purely subjective matter. You can't be right about a preference like that. Or are we talking ideology at this point?

[DRON12261]

6 minutes ago, RataUnderground said:

Although I don't like the default settings at all, I have to say that there is no reason why they are "unacceptable". From what I understand, the people who make GzDoom like the way it looks with them. It's a purely subjective matter. You can't be right about a preference like that. Or are we talking ideology at this point?

We are talking about the source port, something that is based on another game, not your own game. The default settings should be close to the original, all other things are manually enabled solely by the player himself. People come first and foremost to see the original game (especially those who see the game for the first time). And in this case they are deceived and imposed a false vision.

[DRON12261]

To be honest, normal default settings and the ability to force Sector light mode would already be enough that I could calmly go back to mapping under GZDoom (and not only me).

[YeOldeFellerNoob]

GZDoom will fucking kill you PC when playing the best DOOM Wad ever Nuts.Wad.

 

PRBoom doesn't.

[D4NUK1]

5 minutes ago, DRON12261 said:

We are talking about the source port, something that is based on another game, not your own game. The default settings should be close to the original, all other things are manually enabled solely by the player himself. People come first and foremost to see the original game (especially those who see the game for the first time). And in this case they are deceived and imposed a false vision.

While you opinion it's a correct opinion (as many others have, even like the normals settings, or have multiple settings when playing), this kind of actitude it's kinda duche, as they respect Doom as equal as you, if not, why bother to make one of the most popular Source Ports. Dont try to use words in other peoples like imposed a false vision, when they are free to tweak and the devs are free to make the game in a point where it's good for the new players too.

[RataUnderground]

11 minutes ago, DRON12261 said:

We are talking about the source port, something that is based on another game, not your own game. The default settings should be close to the original, all other things are manually enabled solely by the player himself. People come first and foremost to see the original game (especially those who see the game for the first time). And in this case they are deceived and imposed a false vision.

See, this is ideology. You think a sourceport has an obligation to faithfully represent the look and feel of the original. And there's really no practical reason for it, it's just that you think it's the right thing to do. (It doesn't have to be a bad opinion, but it's as valid as any other, you can't scientifically prove who's right).
GzDoom is not a sourceport with a manifesto to maintain Doom's authenticity. It's a sourceport that wants to exponentially increase what's possible in Doom. And I would venture to say that we already have a dozen sourceports that do the job of preservation well, so it doesn't bother me whether GzDoom represents vanilla style well or poorly.
(But since I have my preferences too, of course I'd appreciate it if the default settings would turn off texture filtering by default. Those new kids are playing BAD and we can't allow that! )

Edited June 4, 2023 by RataUnderground

[indigotyrian]

1 hour ago, Graf Zahl said:

Here's the deal about it:

 

We have reached the point where it is impossible to run Vulkan and OpenGL off the same renderer. If we do there is no way optimizing Vulksn, if we declared OpenGL the primary API that's considered the gold standard we'd lose the main contributor to the Vulkan backend. The only way to go forward is to completely separate them and then put OpenGL in low maintenance mode and feature freeze it. Otherwise either the low end or the high end gets compromised because the techniques needed to serve both are too different. It was for the same reason that 4 years ago OpenGL 2 support was ended. It also was far too different from what more modern hardware needs and when being faced with having Vulkan support or continued GL 2 support, Vulkan won. We currently have the GLES renderer for the low end and it surely works better than LZDoom, but that's merely a stopgap measure to ride out the rest of OpenGL's life.

 

Honest question: Are there any actual GPUs or APUs today that support Vulkan but not OpenGL? It occurs to me that a tradeoff was made where actual, real living users under thrown under the bus in favor of a hypothetical user in the future that is "stuck" with high-end hardware and no compatibility layer.

 

Quote

Sigh, that stuff again. It's a simple case of being a lot more complex than all the other ports. I could get it back to the performance of simpler ports if I took out all the features again, but then nothing would be gained, wouldn't it?

 

What graphical features is GZDoom gaining by adopting Vulkan and leaving OpenGL 2 behind? It's not like GZDoom is capable of doing any sort of graphics technique that's been invented in the past 10 years. (To be clear, this in and of itself is not a strike against GZDoom.) The most graphically demanding GZDoom mods and TCs don't look anything different from what was possible in the late 2000s.

Edited June 4, 2023 by segfault

[RataUnderground]

3 minutes ago, segfault said:

 

Honest question: Are there any actual GPUs or APUs today that support Vulkan but not OpenGL? It occurs to me that a tradeoff was made where actual, real living users under thrown under the bus in favor of a hypothetical user in the future that is "stuck" with high-end hardware and no compatibility layer.

 

 

What graphical features is GZDoom gaining by adopting Vulkan and leaving OpenGL 2 behind? It's not like GZDoom is capable of doing any sort of graphics technique that's been invented in the past 10 years. (To be clear, this in and of itself is not a strike against GZDoom.) The most graphically demanding GZDoom mods and TCs don't look anything different from what was possible in the late 2000s.

Zahl will answer you better than me, but the performance is much better in Vulkan. And if leaving OpenGL behind takes a load off their shoulders, I'm all for the decision.

[LuciferSam86]

Especially with the newer drivers. Graf said he noticed with his new RTX 3060 worse performance with OpenGL than Vulkan.

https://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?p=1241509#p1241509

[Redneckerz]

I was hoping this would be a thread where people would discuss what other reasons they have found to play other ports besides GZDoom, but nope, it is the usual Here is how much i don't like GZDoom.

 

So, quoting OP:

6 hours ago, Croaker said:

Are there any other reasons, why one can decide to use a different port instead of GZdoom? Are there any reasons for an average casual player to look at other ports?

Personally my go-to port (It isn't really a port but soit) would be Helion. It removes the performance cap that is present on heavy wads by implementing its own custom render loop, removing the inherent pitfalls that the Doom renderer would have. The result is that once-heavy WADS like Planisphere 2 run at 60+ and beyond on very low end hardware. When you have dedicated GPU's coming in, performance goes into the silly ranges (1000+ FPS isn't uncommon on high end current GPU's) and that's still on heavy WAD sets.

 

The one thing it doesn't do is play GZDoom-only map sets that rely a lot on dynamic lights, but Helion does support the vast majority of what is released today with the performance to boot. If you are willing to loose some of the eye candy, you get in return some insane performance metrics.

 

Now that i have answered the OP, lets address the current situation.

 

3 hours ago, DRON12261 said:

A huge number of settings that are completely unnecessary to Doom and which, moreover, break it (why the hell does Doom need Build-like sector lighting, which is also broken). And also absolutely idiotic default settings that discourage me from using UDMF in mapping. And also the utterly horrible OpenGL rendering, where the authors put a huge dick in making it look like Doom.

It has been a long while ago that i have read such hyperbolic drivel on what is a source port. Play in DSDA-Doom which also has OpenGL and you have a blast of a time. Unless you find OpenGL in general a chore.

 

3 hours ago, DRON12261 said:

And yes, in a way it makes sense, but I just don't have Vulkan support on one PC. And since when did doom start requiring HIGH-END PC?

It doesn't, see the endless amount of non-GZ ports that can run fine without OpenGL 3.3. The rising API costs are there to support higher end features bolted into a renderer that isn't exactly clear cut out for doing them, such as post-processing.

 

2 hours ago, DRON12261 said:

No one had any problems with it on any other port, but in GZDoom it suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

If the bolded is remotely true then i am sure you can pinpoint in which exact release build or Git commit this percieved problem arose, right?

 

2 hours ago, DRON12261 said:

But we are talking primarily about source-port, not about a game engine for creating new games. And the fact that GZDoom is trying to sit on two chairs is a HUGE mistake. Good, a long time ago it was necessary to divide the development into 2 parts, the first is exclusively source-port of Doom, cut the hell out of there everything unnecessary, and be kind to give me Doom, but not its parody, and the second is a full-fledged engine for creating games, where you can implement and experiment as only your soul desires.

GZDoom is a Doom port first and formost that just so happens to be able to also run standalone games. There have been projects in the past that were targetted towards a more general engine, such as GLOOME. There are GZ offsprings currently in development that try to resurrect this idea so that the codebase becomes generic enough for more potential users to use, esckewing the Doom playing part atleast in philosophy.

 

20 minutes ago, DRON12261 said:

All this is a problem, and it needs to be solved.

No, this is a you problem and not a problem of the port. You are projecting your personal issues with the port to a general mirror and conclude that since you have this issue, it is a general issue that needs to be addressed or GZ isn't for the public.

 

The mere fact that many users both play and map for GZ without the issue you are describing suggests your problem is specific in nature and not generic.

[TasAcri]

5 minutes ago, LuciferSam86 said:

Especially with the newer drivers. Graf said he noticed with his new RTX 3060 worse performance with OpenGL than Vulkan.

https://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?p=1241509#p1241509

 

Getting worse performance with the same card, i can get.

 

But getting worse performance with a card that's twice as fast? I mean, how badly would those drivers run GZDoom if he used the same old card?'

[Croaker]

10 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

I was hoping this would be a thread where people would discuss what other reasons they have found to play other ports besides GZDoom, but nope, it is the usual Here is how much i don't like GZDoom.

 

Honestly, I also don't like what did it end. But to be fair, bad talks about gzdoom, were not what I expected, but kind of understandable. "I use crispy doom because I hate XYZ in GZdoom" can be an answer to my question.

What I can't understand, is why people, related to gzdoom development came here and turned it into a full grown argument.

But let's say, they just feel defensive about their work. It's something,I can relate to.

 

12 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

 

 

So, quoting OP:

Personally my go-to port (It isn't really a port but soit) would be Helion. It removes the performance cap that is present on heavy wads by implementing its own custom render loop, removing the inherent pitfalls that the Doom renderer would have. The result is that once-heavy WADS like Planisphere 2 run at 60+ and beyond on very low end hardware. When you have dedicated GPU's coming in, performance goes into the silly ranges (1000+ FPS isn't uncommon on high end current GPU's) and that's still on heavy WAD sets.

 

The one thing it doesn't do is play GZDoom-only map sets that rely a lot on dynamic lights, but Helion does support the vast majority of what is released today with the performance to boot. If you are willing to loose some of the eye candy, you get in return some insane performance metrics.

I don't know what is soit, but I'm seriously intrigued. Also, nobody in the thread mentioned Helion before, so thank you for this hidden gem. I'll go read about it.

[roadworx]

4 hours ago, Graf Zahl said:

That's simply caused by fixing some broken math, not by changing the physics.

i mean...i'm not gonna sit here and pretend to be an expert in doom code, but changing the math regarding collision would in fact be changing the physics, would it not? all the physics is determined by math, and a change in that math will change the physics, so...

 

anyways, to answer op's question: demo compatibility, performance, and the features offered by other ports, which range from qol features to ui changes, are the main reasons why. as an example, woof is my source port of choice, and here's my reasons as to why i prefer it to gzdoom:

- the ui is fairly simple, with the light weight nature of woof (compared to zdoom that is) making it easier to navigate

- i can watch demos from other people

- the improvements that it provides, like key doors flashing on the map or colored blood and corpse sprite randomization, are all pretty nice and add to the experience for me.

- there's no need to go in and change a bunch of settings when initially setting it up (like disabling the god-awful cataracts filter)

Edited June 5, 2023 by roadworx

[LexiMax]

54 minutes ago, Redneckerz said:

I was hoping this would be a thread where people would discuss what other reasons they have found to play other ports besides GZDoom, but nope, it is the usual Here is how much i don't like GZDoom.

 

When these sorts of discussions happen, it's a lot easier to frame justifications for using other ports in terms of GZ's few shortcomings.  Because honestly, why not use GZDoom but for those shortcomings?  After all, GZDoom is by most measures a very usable, capable, and moddable port.

[indigotyrian]

1 hour ago, Redneckerz said:

I was hoping this would be a thread where people would discuss what other reasons they have found to play other ports besides GZDoom, but nope, it is the usual Here is how much i don't like GZDoom.

 

Since you're asking: I prefer Doom Retro because it supports basically everything I'd like to play, adds a lot of really nice quality-of-life touches and improvements, and generally has an aesthetic that "improves" Doom's vanilla look without straying too far away from what would be plausible for a mid-90s FPS. When doing multiplayer I like Odamex for its robust handling of drop-in-drop-out matches, on-the-fly wad switching, and easy server management.

[Biodegradable]

While I can understand some people's gripes about the port's default settings, if you do otherwise wish to use GZ frequently, you only need to set your preferences once and then simply copy the ini file over to every new iteration of GZ as it comes out. The GZ team even renamed the ini file as "GZDoom-user" in the directory to make it easier to find and understand.

 

I don't like texture filtering either, but I also haven't had to touch my settings in GZ in over three years.

[banjiepixel]

5 minutes ago, Biodegradable said:

While I can understand some people's gripes about the port's default settings, if you do otherwise wish to use GZ frequently, you only need to set your preferences once and then simply copy the ini file over to every new iteration of GZ as it comes out.

 

I might be a special case but GZDoom settings menus do give me heavy anxiety and make me worry about changing something by accident without noticing so often it is just easier to reset everything and then remake every change I usually like to make. Also using source port that needs to be updated much less often and has better default settings does generally just make things much easier for the average Doom player.

[Trustanus]

I prefer Crispy Doom for SP, and Odamex for MP. Both of these give me just enough QOL features that I actually want and not a bunch of filler that I don’t need personally. I do have other ports installed for when I need to use them, though. 

[roadworx]

41 minutes ago, Biodegradable said:

While I can understand some people's gripes about the port's default settings, if you do otherwise wish to use GZ frequently, you only need to set your preferences once and then simply copy the ini file over to every new iteration of GZ as it comes out. The GZ team even renamed the ini file as "GZDoom-user" in the directory to make it easier to find and understand.

 

I don't like texture filtering either, but I also haven't had to touch my settings in GZ in over three years.

tbf, i've had to change computers several times over the years, so changing the many, many settings of gzdoom gets rather annoying. my experience is still an edge case, of course :p

[Jack9955]

6 minutes ago, Trustanus said:

I prefer Crispy Doom for SP, and Odamex for MP. Both of these give me just enough QOL features that I actually want and not a bunch of filler that I don’t need personally. I do have other ports installed for when I need to use them, though. 

 

Odamex very rarely has players when I check, which server do you join?