Level design seems quite promising.

[Edward850]

kuchitsu said:

?
How hard can it be to have an object lying on the ground?
There are tons of little details on walls and stuff.
It could become less detailed than an alive monster. But at least something would be nice.

Just because an object is "dead", it doesn't make it a different object. It stillis the same entity, which means it still has the same pointers, variables and scripts allocated, most of that data being static-per-object.
Take Doom's Aactor, for example, where the only difference between a live monster and dead one is the health. Now with classic Doom it can cheat because all actors that exist in a map already do and are active on map spawn, so removing them doesn't actually give you room you need later. Modern AI requires a buttload more RAM to control their states, and more importantly don't exist or run until you encounter them. So there's much more AI and state information that can run at once, but this also means the resources need to be destroyed for the next encounter to prevent the RAM from growing out of control.

[DoomzRules]

Edward850 said:

Just because an object is "dead", it doesn't make it a different object. It stillis the same entity, which means it still has the same pointers, variables and scripts allocated, most of that data being static-per-object.
Take Doom's Aactor, for example, where the only difference between a live monster and dead one is the health. Now with classic Doom it can cheat because all actors that exist in a map already do and are active on map spawn, so removing them doesn't actually give you room you need later. Modern AI requires a buttload more RAM to control their states, and more importantly don't exist or run until you encounter them. So there's much more AI and state information that can run at once, but this also means the resources need to be destroyed for the next encounter to prevent the RAM from growing out of control.

Can't one just make the textures very low-res on the gibs, gore, and demons? This way we at least have dead corpses laying about while maintaining the 1080p60fps goal?

[LittleBurger]

DoomzRules said:

Can't one just make the textures very low-res on the gibs, gore, and demons? This way we at least have dead corpses laying about while maintaining the 1080p60fps goal?

To low a res and they could like rather blurry pieces of red meat that don't fit in with the detail on the surrounding environment.

[Edward850]

DoomzRules said:

Can't one just make the textures very low-res on the gibs, gore, and demons? This way we at least have dead corpses laying about while maintaining the 1080p60fps goal?

Re read my post. You'll notice I wasn't talking about VRAM at all. I was talking entirely about system RAM and CPU resources.

[DoomzRules]

LittleBurger said:

To low a res and they could like rather blurry pieces of red meat that don't fit in with the detail on the surrounding environment.

I guess.... I mean maybe medium-res? Or textures that look extremely detailed but they are rendered in a low-to-medium res?

[RUSH]

I'm REALLY looking forward to the single player campaign. Multiplayer didn't interest me much but damn this is looking pretty great actually.

[VGamingJunkie]

Why not just give gore a low draw distance so that, when you walk away from it, it's no longer being rendered at all? Games typically do that with foliage since that would be a ton of polygons to be producing all at once.

Edward850 said:

Just because an object is "dead", it doesn't make it a different object. It stillis the same entity, which means it still has the same pointers, variables and scripts allocated, most of that data being static-per-object.
Take Doom's Aactor, for example, where the only difference between a live monster and dead one is the health. Now with classic Doom it can cheat because all actors that exist in a map already do and are active on map spawn, so removing them doesn't actually give you room you need later. Modern AI requires a buttload more RAM to control their states, and more importantly don't exist or run until you encounter them. So there's much more AI and state information that can run at once, but this also means the resources need to be destroyed for the next encounter to prevent the RAM from growing out of control.

Why not simply remove the living monster and replace it with a dead one that has no scripting associated with it? At the very least, they're replacing the model, I highly doubt they have all those guts rendered unnecessarily inside of its living model.

[Koko Ricky]

Part of me wants to say, "For fuck's sake, is the corpse being left behind really that important?" And then I remember how unsatisfying it was to see them instantly vaporize in Doom 3.

[DoomzRules]

GoatLord said:

Part of me wants to say, "For fuck's sake, is the corpse being left behind really that important?" And then I remember how unsatisfying it was to see them instantly vaporize in Doom 3.

Yup.... I hope the gore stays. But to be honest, it's probably not, because the game is already in gold; it's just a matter of release that's all.

[Almonds]

Tangentially related but I keep noticing an increasing amount of people genuinely happy about the way the single player looks.

[DoomzRules]

Almonds said:

Tangentially related but I keep noticing an increasing amount of people genuinely happy about the way the single player looks.

Hmm.. I guess they (Bethesda) saved the best for last eh?

Well-played Bethesda.... well-played....

And let's not lie to ourselves, that "leaked" trailer was probably intentionally leaked to build up hype for the game ala 1992 "Doom: Evil Unleashed".

"If you are playing this right now... you are naughty."

XD

[Edward850]

MetroidJunkie said:

Why not simply remove the living monster and replace it with a dead one that has no scripting associated with it? At the very least, they're replacing the model, I highly doubt they have all those guts rendered unnecessarily inside of its living model.

This actually hasn't gotten any less complicated. Originally, replacing objects with simpler versions would thrash memory allocation, which especially in a protected memory environment would slow things down substantially for each reallocation. See earlier versions of ZDoom as to why constant actor de/construction was a bad idea.
Nowadays, the problem switched completely. In theory you could keep two separate managed memory pools and copy the parameters across to the next one to solve the allocation problem, but with skeletal animation and states, this list starts becoming way too aggressive to copy. You'd actually waste a lot performance copying the necessary properties across.

Literally, this problem has been looked at to death. It's just not worth it nowadays with dynamic instancing and encounters as there's no way to predict how much resources you'll actually need (which in QA is super fucking vital, see Skyrim on the PS3), and compressing it just creates more problems then it could ever solve for the worlds most minor of gain.

[Tuaam]

DooM_RO said:

I meant prominent mappers from Doomworld like Skillsaw, Esselfortium, Tarnsman, 40oz etc.

I hope at least some of these will make a review, preferably something on the front page.

We could always ask Lord Linguica.

[Linguica]

There might be some sort of "official" DW review, but who cares really?

[VGamingJunkie]

Edward850 said:

This actually hasn't gotten any less complicated. Originally, replacing objects with simpler versions would thrash memory allocation, which especially in a protected memory environment would slow things down substantially for each reallocation. See earlier versions of ZDoom as to why constant actor de/construction was a bad idea.
Nowadays, the problem switched completely. In theory you could keep two separate managed memory pools and copy the parameters across to the next one to solve the allocation problem, but with skeletal animation and states, this list starts becoming way too aggressive to copy. You'd actually waste a lot performance copying the necessary properties across.

Literally, this problem has been looked at to death. It's just not worth it nowadays with dynamic instancing and encounters as there's no way to predict how much resources you'll actually need (which in QA is super fucking vital, see Skyrim on the PS3), and compressing it just creates more problems then it could ever solve for the worlds most minor of gain.

No, you wouldn't copy anything over. Just make a gored up enemy in the exact same spot the enemy's currently in and then immediately delete the enemy from the RAM completely. Don't retain any properties, just replace. You don't have to retain skeleton animations or states or any of that shit, you just replace the entire object. I've done this in Unity before, it's not hard. It's the exact same logic as spawning enemies into a room except it would be the codeless corpse you're spawning and you would do it in such a way that the player doesn't notice it because the switch won't occur until the enemy's death animation is over.

[Edward850]

I have struck this myself in other game engines. It's vastly more complicated then you make it sound and AAA development just doesn't care about it anymore (okay so that's proxy information, but it's information none-the-less). Keeping corpses around just isn't worth it anymore, and it's no way as easy as what you just said while keeping it sane. Remember, believe it or not, people don't actually like corpses suddenly reseating themselves. Jarring changes like that don't go unnoticed.

Perhaps what you need is to talk to some AAA devs yourself. I'm not sure if you are actually in game development circles or not (you certainly act like you are?) but there is a lot of information I'm likely leaving out on the issue (time likes to do this), but I've heard enough to know it's not worth doing nowadays. It just becomes an unmanageable mess.

Also, you absolutely cannot use unity as an example of actor processing in comparison to idtech. They aren't even in the same universe.

[DooM_RO]

Linguica said:

There might be some sort of "official" DW review, but who cares really?

I care!

[Tuaam]

Linguica said:

There might be some sort of "official" DW review, but who cares really?

So you're fine with the level design?

[id.dav]

GoatLord said:

Part of me wants to say, "For fuck's sake, is the corpse being left behind really that important?" And then I remember how unsatisfying it was to see them instantly vaporize in Doom 3.

Well Rage has corpses of bandits remain (even 1 type of mutant remains), doom 3 at least has zombie corpses remain, but in Doom 16 it seems everything dissolves((.

[TheMightyHeracross]

Strange enough, in Snapmap footage I onlt ever noticed Mancubi dissolving. In particular, the Pinkies on the tower defense map appeared permanent.

[Edward850]

TheMightyHeracross said:

Strange enough, in Snapmap footage I onlt ever noticed Mancubi dissolving. In particular, the Pinkies on the tower defense map appeared permanent.

That's not strange at all. That's just common sense.
Nothing is actually permanent, especially in the games id.dav listed. From the top:
RAGE: Lootable corpses remained until looted. They vanished soon after.
Doom 3: Zombie corpses could remain but had very low tolerances for being gibbed to allow for geometry to destroy them (in the event they obstructed geometry). Like with everything else this was a RAM demand, and it sure doesn't look like it now, but remember the average PC had ~512MB RAM.
Doom 2016: Everything vanishes presumably, however seems to run off a variable timer based on something. Resources presumably. Maybe if people stopped jumping to rabbid conclusion to cry foul on anything because that's apparently cool now, they would have notcied that.

[VGamingJunkie]

If you're going to make corpses disappear, at least make it look cool. I like how Resident Evil 4 sort of has the corpses either bubbling away or sinking into the ground. Imagine if the corpses set on fire and burned away into ash, a true hellish styled departure.

[LittleBurger]

MetroidJunkie said:

If you're going to make corpses disappear, at least make it look cool. I like how Resident Evil 4 sort of has the corpses either bubbling away or sinking into the ground. Imagine if the corpses set on fire and burned away into ash, a true hellish styled departure.

I'd likely go for something like that. The little burn away that they have to get rid of the corpses is sort of a little lacking in how it looks.