Announcing The Blue Box - EE 3.40.11 and Vaporware Demo!

[Quasar]

Please don't hold your breath for traditional "docs," as in things you download and that I have to sit here for months writing out word by word, like the old HTML documentation.

This is what the wiki is for, and it has quite a bit more material on it now than it used to, thanks almost entirely to printz. Virtually nobody else has worked on it, aside from myself.

If all of the people who used it would contribute even just a little bit it would grow steadily. Instead it mostly rots.

[printz]

Quasar said:

Please don't hold your breath for traditional "docs," as in things you download and that I have to sit here for months writing out word by word, like the old HTML documentation.

What about only writing documentation for each official release? This would safely mean linked portals are out of the question, but that's intended, because they're not complete and safe. The official releases only happen once several months. You can write over older versions of documentations in order to save time.

This is what the wiki is for, and it has quite a bit more material on it now than it used to, thanks almost entirely to printz. Virtually nobody else has worked on it, aside from myself.

If all of the people who used it would contribute even just a little bit it would grow steadily. Instead it mostly rots.

Do mind I'm just a user most of the time. I recently went on to program one of my ideas over the Eternity code, but it's something very specific that might not help me better understand the available and unavailable editing features. While I can go on and search for A_ "codepointer" (shouldn't they be called Action Functions?) names in the code to find their exact behavior, not everyone has proficiency in programming, so therefore they cannot edit the wiki on action function information and make those links blue.

Finally, it would probably help if anonymous users weren't allowed to post any more. That wiki is prone to spam.

[Gez]

The CheckSpambots mediawiki extension would help with that without removing IP-signed edits.

And yeah, the lack of documentation writers is a problem for such wikis.

[RjY]

esselfortium said:
As for the other secret, check the blue key room. :)

Very subtle!

(Also, the lift thing is mentioned under Known Bugs in the text file.)

Sorry I guess I didn't read that far down ;-)

The Green Herring said:
the remaining [secret] is a very tiny sector right on the southwest corner of the light around the earliest secret green armor (sector 6333.)

Thanks. I had this weird impression there were two in the same place. I was pushing at the back wall in that secret area, there's a spot where it doesn't go "oof" like usual and I noticed the secret count went up when I did. I thought there was some complicated script going on...

printz said:
While I can go on and search for A_ "codepointer" (shouldn't they be called Action Functions?)

Yes. That's what the engine source calls them. But Dehacked called them codepointers and that name caught on before the source came out.

[Quasar]

Gez said:

The CheckSpambots mediawiki extension would help with that without removing IP-signed edits.

And yeah, the lack of documentation writers is a problem for such wikis.

Bloodshedder is in charge of the setup on that wiki; I have no access to it AFAIK. Or I do and just never realized it? It does need better anti-spam; I am seeing constant attacks against the talk pages.

Though I am also seeing some malicious editing patterns. Someone keeps reverting the Frame page to an earlier and now-incorrect version. I handed them a two-week ban to see if they learn their lesson.

[Mordeth]

Quasar said:
Please don't hold your breath for traditional "docs," as in things you download and that I have to sit here for months writing out word by word, like the old HTML documentation.

I don't need "traditional docs", just ANY documentation will do. You mention new stuff in the readme.txt (transparant border between portals? blockall linedef flag? EDF stuff?, lift going thru portal boundary?) but not how to implement them because there's no technical info on it, anywhere.

Wiki? "This page was last modified on 15 August 2009".

I have NO IDEA how to implement any of the new features in my maps, because the basic information on them is just not given. I've been asking for basic information repeatedly now, and all I get is nothing.

Example:
Me: Info on 3DMidTex linedef flag? You: It's linedef flag 1024.
TA-DA! DONE. Now I know.

Claiming that writing down four letters ( "1-0-2-4" ) after mentioning eg a new linedef flag would take you months is just bullshit.

You try now... Me: Info on blockall linedef flag? You: it's linedef flag XXXX. [Fill in the X].

JUST WRITE IT THE FUCK DOWN ALREADY :/

[Graf Zahl]

Mordeth said:

Wiki? "This page was last modified on 15 August 2009".

The main page!

If you check the editing history you'd see that the last change was made today and that there have been changes on a constant basis.

Did you even bother to look deeper?

[Quasar]

Mordeth said:

I don't need "traditional docs", just ANY documentation will do. You mention new stuff in the readme.txt (transparant border between portals? blockall linedef flag? EDF stuff?, lift going thru portal boundary?) but not how to implement them because there's no technical info on it, anywhere.

Most of the time just asking will get you the information you need if it isn't documented somewhere already. For instance post a thread asking "What are all the valid ExtraData linedef flags?" and I post a list of them that takes all of 1 minute to get. Then somebody could even be a chum and copy that info to the Wiki if it's not on there already. It's not an ideal situation but it has worked for a number of people so far.

Mordeth said:

Wiki? "This page was last modified on 15 August 2009".

As others have already pointed out that's only a modification stamp for the main page which is not regularly changed. The latest version of EE it displays is controlled through a template which is regularly updated.

Mordeth said:

I have NO IDEA how to implement any of the new features in my maps, because the basic information on them is just not given. I've been asking for basic information repeatedly now, and all I get is nothing.

You need to be more specific. I can't describe the entire functionings of the whole game engine at one time and place. Tell me what you want list(s) of and I will make them or I will find them. Also, even though the old HTML documentation is very out-of-date, SOME parts of it are actually still 100% current and applicable.

Mordeth said:

Example:
Me: Info on 3DMidTex linedef flag? You: It's linedef flag 1024.
TA-DA! DONE. Now I know.

Pretty sure the 3DMidTex linedef flag is even documented in the old docs. But if not yes you could have asked that specific question and it would have been answered immediately. Again be specific and leave a thread requesting what you want documented. One thing you must avoid is popping into IRC and expecting me to be around as I work 8-5 and often very late into the evening as overtime so I'm barely on IRC any more at all and it's definitely not going to be during your primetime hours, given where you live - more like when it's 2 am there.

Mordeth said:

Claiming that writing down four letters ( "1-0-2-4" ) after mentioning eg a new linedef flag would take you months is just bullshit.

Never claimed anything of the sort. Again, specific details are available at any time. You want all the polyobject line types? Bam. You want all the portal-related lines? Bam. But saying "Please give me everything at once that has changed since 3.33.50" is going to be an insurmountable task. Know what you want to do and then we'll show you how to do it.

Mordeth said:

You try now... Me: Info on blockall linedef flag? You: it's linedef flag XXXX. [Fill in the X].

It's linedef flag <undefined> because it is not a member of the in-map linedef flags bitfield. It can only be defined on a line in a DOOM-format map by defining an ExtraData record for that linedef, and then setting its extflags field to include the mnemonic BLOCKALL.

linedef
{
  recordnum 1
  extflags  BLOCKALL
}

ExtraData records can either be applied via use of the ExtraData transfer special, which has been documented since about 2005, OR by using ANY parameterized line special number (line specials 300 and above, mostly) on a linedef directly. In either case, the tag of the linedef indicates the recordnum that matches that linedef in ExtraData. ExtraData is very well documented on the Wiki. If you do not understand how to use it I suggest looking there first.

[Gez]

Mordeth said:

Wiki? "This page was last modified on 15 August 2009".

Look here for the last modifications on any page of the wiki.

[Quasar]

Also:
http://eternity.youfailit.net/index.php?title=Special:AllPages

[printz]

What important things are missing now from the wiki, Mordeth? I know there are LOTS of gaps in the wiki for now, but it wouldn't hurt to know what's more important to add at the moment.

Which parts show misinformation or are outdated?

[Quasar]

Well now you're asking him to do what even I can't do, which is provide a full list of what's missing. It's unfair to expect anybody to be able to tell that easily.

The best thing to do is just come directly here with any questions and get them answered by the pros. Then hopefully somebody can transfer the information; maybe even I'll do it. I have worked on the wiki on and off but it's hard to make time for between my job and actually doing the coding work on EE.

[Mordeth]

Thanks for intentionally misreading my point.

Quasar said:
It's linedef flag because it is not a member of the in-map linedef flags bitfield. It can only be defined on a line in a DOOM-format map by defining an ExtraData record for that linedef, and then setting its extflags field to include the mnemonic BLOCKALL.

That's it. One paragraph, not hard to do right? Now I know it's ExtraData, how the mnemonic is called, and can look up how to apply it.

You're basically saying you want to people to ask you for editing information. Don't you get it that when you post that (eg) EE has now slopes, it might be needed to include a short list of those slope triggers right away, instead of waiting for the inevitable question on forum or irc what those triggers are?

It's aggravating having to drag this information out of people all the time, and I imagine it's aggravating for you guys too. JUST WRITE THIS BASIC INFO DOWN. It completely baffles me that you're erecting your own roadblocks for people that want to actually use your port.

[Quasar]

   // Slopes
   { 386, "Slope_FrontsectorFloor" },
   { 387, "Slope_FrontsectorCeiling" },
   { 388, "Slope_FrontsectorFloorAndCeiling" },
   { 389, "Slope_BacksectorFloor" },
   { 390, "Slope_BacksectorCeiling" },
   { 391, "Slope_BacksectorFloorAndCeiling" },
   { 392, "Slope_BackFloorAndFrontCeiling" },
   { 393, "Slope_BackCeilingAndFrontFloor" },
   
   { 394, "Slope_FrontFloorToTaggedSlope" },
   { 395, "Slope_FrontCeilingToTaggedSlope" },
   { 396, "Slope_FrontFloorAndCeilingToTaggedSlope" },

I'm afraid if you want to know how they work you'll either need to talk to SoM, essel, or look at essel's maps (learning by example) because I didn't program slopes and I don't edit maps and therefore I cannot tell you how to use them exactly.

[esselfortium]

The slope lines work the same way as Plane_Align in ZDoom; if you're familiar with that, these work the same way.

Slope Copy lines, if I remember right, are used by tagging the sector you want to copy from, then placing a Slope Copy special on a linedef(s) that faces the sector(s) you want to copy to. I haven't really used them much, because I tend to just use dummy sectors for this sort of thing most of the time. (See the sloped structures in Vapordemo for examples.)

[Gez]

There are examples of all slope types, including slope copies, on this test map in which I had toyed to see which non-Boom features could be used and work in both EE and ZDoom.

[Mordeth]

Again, EG = example. I've asked about those in forum before. Even without a test map to demonstrate, I think I'll manage :)

[Mr.Peanut]

I can't seem to find an option to resize the Boom style-HUD. The default size is a little large.

[Creaphis]

Well, you guys got me to download Eternity again. Congrats.

[Manc]

Mordeth said:

Again, EG = example. I've asked about those in forum before. Even without a test map to demonstrate, I think I'll manage :)

JUST FINISH IT ALREADY FFS

This is why we can't have anymore new versions of EE, mordeth will never stop!

[Porsche Monty]

This is the first Eternity-exclusive wad that I play to completion and I must say I'm liking it very much, though it is not without flaw. Here's some arsehole criticism.

The Good:

. The difficulty balance is just about perfect for me, at least when playing in "Hurt Me Plenty". After killing absolutely everything there was to be killed, I neared the exist with barely any ammo left. This means you have to play your cards right, you can't afford not to aim properly if you plan to visit every corner of the map, and I happen to appreciate that type of challenge.

. I like open but detailed areas with lots of action, and this map more than delivers in that department.

. Good, seamless use of fake 3D architecture. This is one of Eternity's most attractive features in my humble opinion, and I'm glad it got used as promised. I, however, read about some annoying limitations for linked portals in the official Wiki, and I wonder if they still hold true. I'm definitely expecting to see more of it.

. I like the choice for gore effects. Nicely done, very balanced and non-distracting.

. The promo screen. Kind of takes you back to Doom Shareware 1993 :)

The Bad:

. Too many places with boxes. I know this kind of map calls for it, but I think you could have alternated with a more varied set of decor.

. Music. Boring, repetitively sickening and doesn't go with the map whatsoever. I'm just not feeling it.

. The already documented elevator problem.


My two cents.