Lvangundy Posted January 8, 2017 Can you expand on this, like, without going too crazy with programming lingo? I'm an IT person by trade so I can likely follow along, but I'm curious about the mystery of why the MMX set is like, a long lost art or under-documented? sheridan said:QZDoom's lack of performance may have something to do with the fact that 32-bit blitting/blending has never been particularly well optimized by any C/C++ compiler. To unlock reasonable speed there you have to get back into inline assembly optimization with the MMX instruction set, which is obscure knowledge to say the least... Going forward, I've always felt that GZDoom had the right idea by embracing OpenGL for the backend... though even that is in danger of falling out of fashion as OpenGL gets left behind for Vulkan by all the hardware vendors. Somebody might want to start a Vulkan ZDoom port sometime, if they haven't already... 0 Share this post Link to post
MaxNostar Posted January 8, 2017 printz said:As of 7 January 2017, Randi has stepped down from development of the ZDoom source The Mengele of doom is gone... 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 8, 2017 Lvangundy said:Can you expand on this, like, without going too crazy with programming lingo? I'm an IT person by trade so I can likely follow along, but I'm curious about the mystery of why the MMX set is like, a long lost art or under-documented? MMX is obsolete. It has long been superseded by better means for parallel computations. The entire post you quoted shows a profound lack of knowledge. QZDoom actually uses LLVM to create special SSE2-based drawers for true color, it never uses the C compiler for that because it's indeed to slow. The first attempt was with SSE2 intrinsics but they were not optimal. 0 Share this post Link to post
LuciferSam86 Posted January 8, 2017 MaxNostar said:The Mengele of doom is gone... Well, actually, the "vision" of Carmack when he released the source code of Doom was:Some project ideas: Port it to your favorite operating system. Add some rendering features -- transparency, look up / down, slopes, etc. Add some game features -- weapons, jumping, ducking, flying, etc. Create a packet server based internet game. Create a client / server based internet game. Do a 3D accelerated version. On modern hardware (fast pentium + 3DFX) you probably wouldn't even need to be clever -- you could just draw the entire level and get reasonable speed. With a touch of effort, it should easily lock at 60 fps (well, there are some issues with DOOM's 35 hz timebase...). The biggest issues would probably be the non-power of two texture sizes and the walls composed of multiple textures. but the most interesting part isHave fun. So, where is the problem if someone have fun for expanding an old engine? I mean, if you are a purist, you have other source ports which are closer to original... Source: https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM 0 Share this post Link to post
VeeTHis Posted January 8, 2017 I actually never used ZDoom or GZDoom before, but, I'm assuming it was a big part of the community. It's sad to see it go. Well atleast I stil have Skulltag :D 0 Share this post Link to post
ENEMY!!! Posted January 8, 2017 It's sad, but it was an impressive feat keeping a source port under active development for almost 20 years. I won't be surprised if someone else eventually takes over ZDoom. GZDoom tends to be my port of choice these days, but of course if there had been no ZDoom there probably wouldn't have been GZDoom either. 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 8, 2017 ZDoom will live on in GZDoom and QZDoom. GZDoom does actually contain the entire software renderer. And actually, nobody can 'take over' ZDoom because they do not own the rights to that name. It's not that easy. You need the consent of the original developer to continue a project under the same name. 0 Share this post Link to post
Jaws In Space Posted January 8, 2017 Would there even be a point in continuing ZDoom. Does it actually have something that GZDoom or QZDoom doesn't? 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 8, 2017 No. GZDoom contains all of ZDoom, fully usable. The only 'issue' may be that it may require a bit more RAM because several data structures contain additional fields only useful for GL rendering so you maybe end up at 23 MB instead of 22MB, for example. 0 Share this post Link to post
Marcaek Posted January 8, 2017 VeeTHis said:I actually never used ZDoom or GZDoom before, but, I'm assuming it was a big part of the community. It's sad to see it go. Well atleast I stil have Skulltag :D Skulltag is dead, you should move over to Zandronum If you need any of the Skulltag Content, load This before your other wads 0 Share this post Link to post
dew Posted January 9, 2017 MaxNostar said:The Mengele of doom is gone... I hope you realize Zdaemon is also derived from Zdoom, genius. 0 Share this post Link to post
Reisal Posted January 9, 2017 This is rather unfortunate news to hear. 0 Share this post Link to post
Master O Posted January 9, 2017 Speaking of GZDoom, what happens if you run Doom 2 in hardware mode, but the weapons and enemies are invisible? Is that a graphics card issue? 0 Share this post Link to post
Lizardcommando Posted January 9, 2017 That sounds like a graphics card issue. I remember having that issue a couple months ago when I was playing MetaDoom with one of the more recent (at the time) test builds of GZDoom. 0 Share this post Link to post
Combinebobnt Posted January 9, 2017 Dunno why everybody thinks this is so negative. Sounds like with Randi never being around, Graf Zahl can now go full 100%. I'm thinking positive for the future. Also 32bit color is GOOD (cyan !!!). 0 Share this post Link to post
snapshot Posted January 9, 2017 Hey GZ, Put 3D Polyobjects for your next GZDoom version :v. 0 Share this post Link to post
MaxNostar Posted January 9, 2017 dew said:I hope you realize Zdaemon is also derived from Zdoom, genius. Ye pretty much everything is based on Zdoom. But you cant compare zdaemon based on old 1.23 with zdoom port version now. edit. And i dont mind zdoom being so modern how it is now. There will always players which like it and some doesnt. Good example is csgo. (who play it, they will knows). Though zdoom its kinda funny. Adding some feature feels like assembling racing spoiler at car which worth less than the whole spoiler. But ye every1 has choice... Though zandronum is ruining everything... :D 0 Share this post Link to post
printz Posted January 9, 2017 Combinebobnt said:Dunno why everybody thinks this is so negative. Sounds like with Randi never being around, Graf Zahl can now go full 100%. I'm thinking positive for the future. Also 32bit color is GOOD (cyan !!!). Yeah, this is my feeling. Sorry for making the thread title sound like a big loss (ZDOOM CEASES!), the original title also made reference that it's big time for GZDoom and QZDoom, in a more optimistic note, but was probably too long and was cut. A new era, dominated by Graf Zahl, is coming. I hope he doesn't burn out though. 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 9, 2017 Master O said:Speaking of GZDoom, what happens if you run Doom 2 in hardware mode, but the weapons and enemies are invisible? Is that a graphics card issue? Let me guess: You got an older ATI card, right? This is a known driver bug, but so far everybody affected by this was able to upgrade to a fixed version of the driver. 0 Share this post Link to post
printz Posted January 9, 2017 SINCE the 8-bit renderer is a subtopic here: how problematic is it? Can ZDoom (not GZDoom) render all anchored portals that Eternity can? Or is GZDoom needed? Can QZDoom do it? 0 Share this post Link to post
sheridan Posted January 9, 2017 Graf Zahl said:MMX is obsolete. It has long been superseded by better means for parallel computations. The entire post you quoted shows a profound lack of knowledge. QZDoom actually uses LLVM to create special SSE2-based drawers for true color, it never uses the C compiler for that because it's indeed to slow. The first attempt was with SSE2 intrinsics but they were not optimal. I apologize for being misleading. I had no idea my information was so out of date. The last time I made serious attempts optimizing 32-bit software drawing, MMX was still the word of the day. Having since moved away from software rendering, it makes sense that my "knowledge" was obsoleted. At any rate, your comment was enlightening. Thank you. 0 Share this post Link to post
Csonicgo Posted January 9, 2017 MaxNostar said:The Mengele of doom is gone... I used to think like this, then I turned twelve. Randi was one of the smartest source port coders we had, and the closest to Ken Silverman that we will ever have. I appreciate that. The fact that Randi cared enough to make this port work on ancient hardware under many configuration options such as video cards, Operating Systems, and sound setups, makes zdoom unlike any other port that will ever exist. It still blazes on a Pentium 2, which I can't say the same for any other port out there, other than Eternity Engine, but it still uses sloowww SDL to do anything. The sole reason you're even in the competitive scene today, and you trash the one who made it all possible? MaxNostar said:Ye pretty much everything is based on Zdoom. But you cant compare zdaemon based on old 1.23 with zdoom port version now. edit. And i dont mind zdoom being so modern how it is now. There will always players which like it and some doesnt. Good example is csgo. (who play it, they will knows). Though zdoom its kinda funny. Adding some feature feels like assembling racing spoiler at car which worth less than the whole spoiler. But ye every1 has choice... Though zandronum is ruining everything... :D Never mind. 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 9, 2017 printz said:SINCE the 8-bit renderer is a subtopic here: how problematic is it? Can ZDoom (not GZDoom) render all anchored portals that Eternity can? Or is GZDoom needed? Can QZDoom do it? The software renderer can handle wall portals fine, but it has serious issues with floor and ceiling portals because the seg clipping code was never properly finished. The game physics part is all there because I saw little point to do one half in ZDoom and the other half in GZDoom only. 0 Share this post Link to post
MaxNostar Posted January 9, 2017 Csonicgo said:I used to think like this, then I turned twelve. Ye and you are 13 now judging by your avatar... :p 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 9, 2017 Csonicgo said:It still blazes on a Pentium 2, I wonder how the more recent builds behave, since the assembly drawers have been removed in favor of using a multithreaded approach to drawing. We felt that 4K screen support was more important than such old systems. 0 Share this post Link to post
MaxNostar Posted January 9, 2017 Ye guy talking about new features blazing on P II :o. Alright. Maps with 3D floors are pretty much unplayble in opengl even with low 4:3 resolutions on highend PCs. Though gl_texture_filter "0" in opengl is nice. :p 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted January 9, 2017 MaxNostar said:Maps with 3D floors are pretty much unplayble in opengl even with low 4:3 resolutions on highend PCs. That must be a strange high end PC. Can it be that it came with a piece-of-crap graphics card? Such a thing can render the best CPU worthless for gaming. 0 Share this post Link to post
MaxNostar Posted January 9, 2017 I played zandronum, maybe zdoom is different. Also we can also different opinions on what is smooth and what doesnt... edit: i am just dumb the problem with low fps is probably only in software not opengl. What a great discussion... :( 0 Share this post Link to post
blod Posted January 9, 2017 Thanks Randy for fantastic years of prolonged orgasm. 0 Share this post Link to post
Recommended Posts