Post Your Doom Picture (Part 2)

[Linguica]

huh, neat



geez this thing is BIG



Also the CD sleeve had NEVER been opened as far as I could tell.

[stewboy]

New room: http://imgur.com/E64ApgA

[TwinBeast]

gemini09: The pink works surprisingly well there.

Linguica: You could make it into a weapon sprite...

stewboy: the floor texture closest to the camera reminds me of one techy-weavy texture I made some month ago. You could add some obstacles into the middle of the room, so it wouldn't look so empty.


Definitely worked better to render the sprites with 45 FOV and lower POV. Tried 100 of them here.

[Linguica]

this is undoubtedly what Carmack was referring to in the Doom source readme:

the implementation could be improved dramatically from the original code if it were revisited. The way the rendering proceded from walls to floors to sprites could be collapsed into a single front-to-back walk of the bsp tree to collect information, then draw all the contents of a subsector on the way back up the tree. It requires treating floors and ceilings as polygons, rather than just the gaps between walls, and it requires clipping sprite billboards into subsector fragments, but it would be The Right Thing.

I wonder if any software ports have done this sort of thing? It would probably break the special effects possible with self-referencing sectors and so forth, though.

[Gez]

Seems to me that the "Breakthrough!" paragraph describes something Carmack actually did, while the source readme describes something he actually did not, so I doubt they both are about the same thing.

[Linguica]

Gez said:

Seems to me that the "Breakthrough!" paragraph describes something Carmack actually did, while the source readme describes something he actually did not, so I doubt they both are about the same thing.

That paragraph is about the development of Quake, and Carmack never released an overhaul of the Doom renderer in that time, sooo

[Gez]

Does Doom have a "beam tree", whatever that is?

[LigH]

Trivially, a real 3D engine may need a "beam tree" (based on the theory of beam tracing) to calculate visible parts of the world, while a "less-than-3-D" engine can be simplified a lot easier. Carmack discovered that the interesting part of the beam tree could also be derived from the BSP tree (DOOM and Quake use binary space partitioning to order sectors and subsectors), therefore a Quake BSP builder is quite elaborate. But DOOM was already released during that time.

I believe that it was much more important for a real 3D engine to reduce the amount of auxilliary information for rendering speedups, because it will have required a lot more RAM than in a 2.5D engine where the architecture already limits the "potentially visible set".

Online transcript of the text in the photo: Inside Quake: Visible-Surface Determination by Michael Abrash

More interesting details about BSP: BSP Tree FAQ
__

P.S.:

And a project which displays the engine view and a BSP visibility / culling view side-by-side: https://github.com/proteal/DOOM-Vis

Video with some slow render examples

[Ed]

Control sector Hell.

[AD_79]

That doesn't even look like Doom, heh. Excellent work.

[Mithran Denizen]

Almost done this one.

[Avoozl]

I wonder how that would look if it used a different palette of blue.

[TwinBeast]

Mithran Denizen: Looking good. Texturing/colors fit together nice.


Here's some player sprites. Colored the weapon different, so it shouldn't get recolored with the player team coloring. Bottom left wave pose could also be used in some victory/intermission screens with a larger render. I wonder if I should do crouching?


And thought to include player's arm in the view and positioned the weapon to the side a bit.

[scifista42]

@Jimi: You're not using the Doom palette, do you? Anyway, the sprites look good.

[Linguica]

heh

[esselfortium]

Ed said:

http://i.imgur.com/wf8bqJ2.jpg

Control sector Hell.

Holy damn!

Your architectural work and texturing are always a sight to behold, and it seems like you're only getting more and more ambitious with both of them. Looks absolutely gorgeous.

Looking closer, the triangular vent up top looks a bit odd to me. I think it might appear to make more structural sense if there were a simple 32- or 64-tall raised sector immediately above it, matching its shape, so that the top edge doesn't come to a sharp point.

[40oz]

Jimi those sprites look really cool! Do you find making models to be faster or better than drawing them yourself? (I know you've done both!)

I was once looking at Heretic's monster sprites, and they were created from 3D models. If you look at the individual frames, you'll notice most of the frames are pretty fuzzy looking, and only the most commonly seen frames (the front facing, and the two angled front facing frames) are brushed up to look nice.

Your 3D models look great but they still look very 'raw' if you know what I mean. I think if you clean up just the front facing sprites a little bit, it will look much nicer. I'd be willing do it for you if you'd like :)

[Blastfrog]

Jimi, do you intend for the 640x400 area to be seen at a 4:3 ratio? If so, you should consider making the render outputs distorted to be 1.2 times wider so that it will look correct when seen with 5:6 ratio pixels. That, or have the engine scale undistorted sprites wider during runtime.

[The_MártonJános]

Ed said:

http://i.imgur.com/wf8bqJ2.jpg
Control sector Hell.

Seems like you really did have a hard time designing all that.

[Linguica]

[TwinBeast]

Making sprites from models is definitely better than drawing them. The model textures can be pretty lowres too. 256x128 character texture looked about the same as 64x64 when rendered to a sprite. Drawing is ok for some simple concept/placeholder stuff and for explosions.

The models/animations may change, so it might not be a good time to polish them yet. Also player sprites may appear with all (10?) weapons, so it could be over 2000 frames (26*8*10=2080). Maybe almost 3000 if there's also crouch/crawl.

Resolutions/aspect... should be something that gives 1:1 pixels. Other than that I haven't thought much about it yet. Maybe I try what happens if the base resolution is 640x480. None of my monitors could even display 640x400... I'm assuming most PC monitors have 640x480 as the minimum resolution?

[Linguica]

Jimi said:

Resolutions/aspect... should be something that gives 1:1 pixels. Other than that I haven't thought much about it yet.

Well the basic Doom engine essentially assumes that pixels are being drawn on the screen with a 5:6 ratio. So most source ports, when displaying on any modern machine with 1:1 pixels, will purposely vertically stretch stuff before displaying it so it appears "right". So if you make new graphics on a display with 1:1 pixels (read: basically every display now), they'll appear vertically stretched in the game, unless you're using a port that allows you to display the game with 1:1 pixels. But then everything will appear "squashed" unless you redo all the artwork with 1:1 in mind.

[purist]

Visions of Hell #9(b) : Sinkhole





I wasn't happy with my original MAP09, Vile Mire, so I made a new level to replace it.

[Blastfrog]

Linguica said:

Well the basic Doom engine essentially assumes that pixels are being drawn on the screen with a 5:6 ratio. So most source ports, when displaying on any modern machine with 1:1 pixels, will purposely vertically stretch stuff before displaying it so it appears "right". So if you make new graphics on a display with 1:1 pixels (read: basically every display now), they'll appear vertically stretched in the game, unless you're using a port that allows you to display the game with 1:1 pixels. But then everything will appear "squashed" unless you redo all the artwork with 1:1 in mind.

1. I think Jimi was talking about what he should do for his own TC's engine, not applicable to standard Doom content if that's what he meant.

2. Romero told me that the maps were meant to be 1:1 despite not correcting it.

[Impboy4]

Plutonia 64: Well of Souls is done!

http://i.imgur.com/s9PD0Lp.png
http://i.imgur.com/Dp0PNnE.png
http://i.imgur.com/wfYaxeM.png
http://i.imgur.com/PPKsLUw.png
http://i.imgur.com/SrRj7dQ.png
http://i.imgur.com/TLd0Qsv.png

The actual "well" looks more like one instead of just a sinking circular room in the original. Plus, the beam design for it was inspired by Even Simpler. The instant-rising floor at the exit is replaced by an elevator so you can get items you missed. :D

Once again sorry for the brightened screens.

[Blastfrog]

Looking good! It's always fun to see familiar maps remixed in 64's style.

[AD_79]

Looking great, Impboy, I'm curious to see what the rest of Plutonia 64 will look like.

In particular, I want to see Odyssey of Noises 64 :P

[EvilNed]

Or Hunted.

Or Ghost City.

Or a lot of maps...

[Avoozl]

Plutonia certainly does look good with Doom 64's texturing and lighting gradients.

[Blastfrog]

Hey, Jimi, while you're at it, have you considered implementing 16-angle sprites? Maybe hi-res? It'd arguably make the model output look better. The 16 angles would especially help in horizontally elongated sprites.