Nine Inch Heels

I blame nintendo...

A word of caution there, I've turned vegetarian at the age of around 20, so somewhere near 9 years ago, and I've thought about going vegan at times, but I always ended up shying away from it because I prefer to chose my own health over what I consider to be a potentially militant food ideology coupled with a (potentially) very substitute-heavy diet... That being said, meat-substitutes rank among the worst ways to "cheat vegetables" into your diet that you can possibly imagine, largely because they're processed to hell and back, which gets worse the further down you go in terms of prize segments. You are light years better off finding decent recipes that you like cooking and eating on the internet in the long run, and a change of diet is a matter of getting-used-to anyway, which is where meat-substitutes merely help to keep the meat-craves alive rather than offering you a "way out" or a way to alter your eating habits... It might come as a surprise to many, but having meat once or twice a week is entirely sufficient for all but the most fringe cases, and the fact that many people in the US or elsewhere need to cheat veggies into their diet should tell you something about how deep the meat lobby has its hairy dick in your asses... /rant

The important distinction to make is whether or not you have refined sugar or sugar gained from wholefoods, with refined sugar being the less favourable option... And that's going under the assumption that you really want to optimize your workout routine... For the average person, the time of the food intake is a lot less relevant, if relevant at all, because in the end it's about how much you consume versus how much you need, and that's still going to be the same if you look at the bottom line of a single day or week... There are reasons why it's recommended not to eat too much shortly before going to bed, for example, but those reasons have nothing to do with the food being translated into more or less weight in the end...

The answer to your problem is simple: -Don't eat motherfucking burgers each day or you're dead before you're 40 -Spend your money on a decent kitchen, cookbooks, and probably even a cookery-course, so you can have food that tastes good and doesn't kill you

I think if it's more a notion you get while playing plutonia... Yeah... I can see how it's a good deal more difficult than doom2... I suppose if you can beat doom2 on ultra violence, and you want roughly the same difficulty out of plutonia, then hurt me plenty or hey, not too rough might be the way to go... One thing to note is that plutonia in particular is meant to be a step up in difficulty by design, but history has shown time and again that, even though it is mean-spirited, it's still fair and very beatable with enough practice...

a) It's not my responsibility to find a way how this problem can be addressed because b) I don't run these forums, but despite that I have c) made the more than reasonable suggestion that using the search bar is an easy way to prevent "topic fatigue", because that's d) common sense... If you wanna argue, at least pay attention to what's been said before you do... Oh, and if you plan on having something akin to a discussion, it might be a good idea to stop exaggerating anything and everything you can get your hands on... Example this time: "people being mad" when they're clearly not, and me "pointing something out 20 times" when I've explained my POV on 2 different points you made to you once for each argument you presented... 2 and 20 are not the same thing, mmkay... Anyway, you've wasted enough of my time for today...

I have news for you: people here aren't mad, they're tired of seeing the same types of discussions time and time again... On top of all the "what is your most hated/least favourite/most annoying/ugliest/shittiest/mostest disappointingest" kinds of threads lately this is another one of those things people have become tired of.... nobody here is raging, the problem is that "doom general" has turned into an ever-repeating cycle of "bash threads" paired with groundhog day threads like this one and if you think that pointing that out is the same as being mad, you may just as well think that you and I are having a knife fight in a back-alley right now...

If you seriously want to sell us that someone who uses one of the most widely known mods out there thinks that this discussion has never happened on a forum dedicated to the very game that mod is for, you might as well be trying to argue that an entire tribe of nomads in the sahara has never seen a grain of sand anywhere... The possible absence of a search function is also a fair bit of a reach, like Dhalsim from Street Fighter kind of a reach... I don't think this requires an"etiquette guide", because checking if a thread like the one you're looking to make already exists is something that should be common sense, and other new users here did actually manage to do that, by the way... Yeah, the dog-piling does get annoying, because what's the point in echoing for the tenth time that threads like this one already exist, which is just about the only point you made that I would be inclined to agree with, but everything else you're holding against the rest of the members here is not a hill I'd want to die on, to be honest...

etc...

Well now, this is a thread I can get behind... A few things I have observed and/or learned while play-testing, even though I don't necessarily adhere to all of them myself at all times: With or without a demo - telling the mapper where you died - and most importantly in what way - is a key element to smoothen out fights that could just be too rough around the edges If you aim to provide a spliced demo that is more pleasurable to watch, you absolutely have to take notes of how many repeats a certain section took for you to figure it out reliably, because that's the only way for the mapper to address conveyance issues, if they so desire If you happen to be fortunate enough to work with a mapper who provides something akin to a changelog, focus on what has been changed primarily so you don't burn yourself out on seemingly "mundane" parts of the map that you already know are fine as is Don't hesitate to point out if something feels like a trivial time-sink, or if there's anything that can be cheesed somehow. You may not always spot all the possible cheese there is in a map, but whatever you find needs to be put on the table along with how you found the cheddar Sometimes, but not all the time, it might be a good idea to ask what manner of feedback the mapper is actually looking for. This might seem like it's going to narrow down how useful you can make yourself as a tester, but some mappers are very particular about certain ideas in their maps, and they might prefer for you to look for potential flaws elsewhere. It also helps to clarify what the mapper's design goals are, so that you are able to get into the map with the right mindset, when you're in the mood to play the thing you are supposed to be looking at In case you happen to get stuck somewhere in the map, ask the mapper what the solution to your problem might be, and see if you are able to pull that off, if that doesn't help you get past a section reliably, that's important for the mapper to know If you do have some gameplay preferences or biases that might be relevant for the mapper to know, so that they are able to put your feedback into perspective, it might be worth telling the mapper about that when you address parts of a map that go against your grain

More pretentious nonsense, just as expected... Save before that section, practice, and that's that... I'm not gonna put a tutorial for something that is a core skill into a map that isn't meant to be touched by gameplay illiterate dumbfucks... Platforming has been in the game since forever, so your point is moot...

If a player who sucks at platforming tries their hand at one of my platforming sections and tells me that something they don't like is BS because they lack the required finesse to make it past that section - that's on them 100% of the time... Don't gimme that crap...

I agree halfway here... Yet, there is an important distinction to be made between "brute forcing" a fight by way of save/load spam until somehow the stars align - aka savescumming - and saving before a fight, maybe dying once or twice, but then figuring out how the previously lethal fight is supposed to be beaten... The latter is something I can respect as a basis for feedback, the former is, like you said already, basically worthless feedback... EDIT: As for this topic, whichever method players employ is on them entirely, so we're still at "player's fault" in case of frustrating savescumming issues..

Let's ignore TerryWADs, and "trollmaps" for a moment, because those are obviously meant to be obnoxious in a very particular kind of way... In the vast majority of cases that I've witnessed people throw the word "bullshit" around - from your average "I can beat the original doom2, therefore I am a god-gamer" Dunning-Kruger-type on the forums (of which this forum has seen a great many new faces recently) up to cacoward panel members - it's a player centric issue... And we're talking about some value greater than 90% here... As far as I can tell, the word bullshit gets used most often when the map either demands that players play outside of their comfort zones, or need to learn what the map wants at which point, or when the map overall is beyond their skill level... That's the holy trinity of bruised egos and finger-wagging in most cases... When I want to make a slaughtermap or challenge map, I will go ahead and do that, and it's not on me when players who are unable to beat even the easiest of set-piece fights out there reliably are incapable of making progress... I'm not going out of my way to turn what I want to be a specific type of map into something that caters to people who do not like what I want that particular map to be in the first place... This idea that "difficulty settings exist", therefore it's on the mapper if they don't cover all the bases is perhaps fine for your standard "modern" map where it's easier to cover many bases because the top-end is reasonably low, but not everything can be engineered to be everybody's cup of tea.. And there never was (nor will there ever be) an obligation for mappers to make their work accessible for absolutely everybody who happens to own a copy of classic doom and doom2...

The revenant is easy to improve... Instead of the occasional homing missile, you make them use both their shoulder mounted launchers, so that they end up firing a guided and unguided missile at the same time, each time they attack you from a distance... To further make matters more interesting, you give them a damage range from 40 to 60 on their rockets... Et voilà...

There is some overlap between deathmatching skills and single player skills, most notably a generally good sense of movement and decent aiming... That being said, single player maps can put you in situations that would never occur in a deathmatch, which is especially true for PWADs that are geared towards a higher difficulty... The IWADs aren't going to put much of a dent in your armour with the exception of perhaps later plutonia maps... Aside of that, the original 2 IWADs made by id should be nothing but a snooze-fest for all but the greenest of doomers, so you can't really expect them to teach you much of anything gameplay-wise... If you want to make single player maps, I'd suggest playing something like Ancient Aliens, which is kind of in the "intermediate" skill segment for single player design, if you find that boring, try SunLust instead... EDIT: Perhaps "does that make you a better player" is the wrong question to ask to begin with, playing single player WADs so you get a sense of what you do or do not want to create is the more fruitful approach..

We're getting there... Sounds good so far... Ideally such a monster would not have the melee delay of a revenant or demon, when it shows the attack animation the players should get hit 100% of the time, even if they're running away from the monster... Also, I was thinking more like health around that of a former human... Certainly less than a chaingunner.... I know I'm being super "picky" and specific, but that's what I'd want to have in the game, and I've yet to even find a decent sprite for that purpose...

I actually want something that is even smaller than that... Preferably as fast as an arch vile... at least roughly...

I want Zerglings.. something small that's fast and lethal once it gets in close... Classic Doom's "melee niche" is kind of underpopulated in that the dedicated melees we have are not very interesting, and otherwise melee is just any given monster's secondary mode of attack... I like that eviternity tried to address that niche with the beefed up demons it has, but those have the very same flaws as the usual ones have, so they were just slightly "better" and otherwise not interesting enough to fill a gap in the roster in the end... Valiant's demon replacement sort of did the same thing, but without the added redundancy, I suppose... The classic demons work fine as "blockers", but they suck at applying damage.. Something fast and fragile, basically a "melee glass cannon" that can be used in larger quantities would be nice...

How "rare" you are is only half the story. It won't help you to work in a profession with 9 other people around the globe when your profession is in such low demand that only 3 people can hope to get paid for their work at any given time. Granted, you could be so good at what you're doing that you will get hired instead of someone else, in which case employers might actually compete in order to get you to work for them, but for most people that's a pipedream at the best of times...

Just a tip for when you want people to help: State which format you're mapping in... As for your "problem", regardless of format, there is no need to script this at all, since every format out there has linedef actions to make this happen... However, depending on the format you use or source port you target, you may need to consider where you place the linedef(s) which are meant to cause the lift to move up or down, because vanilla for example hates it when you place linedefs inside a sector, in which case it might refuse to raise or lower the floor... Another thing you may have to consider is the possibility that players leave the elevator right after setting it in motion, in which case you do need to provide an option for players to "call the lift", because otherwise your map might softlock... In other words, you may have to add at least one switch at the "bottom", to make sure players don't get stuck...

I don't like throwing a wrench in other people's guides, but there is a heck of a lot to unpack here, and there's also something missing that a "guide" such as this one should have... So, here we go... Which format should a new mapper pick? This one's been argued up and down in the past, but in general the choice regarding where you wanna start learning how to make maps depends greatly on what kinds of maps you prefer, and how much you're willing to deal with having to learn something new. The rule of thumb is that the older the format, the more "simplistic" it is. This means that older formats are easier to understand fully, but they also offer less features. This is not a qualitative statement, because you can do amazing stuff even in vanilla format, but you have to be pretty savvy to realize some of your ideas in the face of the format's mechanical limitations. If you want all the sector colours, true 3D geometry, ACS and ZScript, as well as DECORATE support, because you aim to learn how to create something like "shadows of the nightmare realm", then you have very little in the way of choice. You're gonna end up with UDMF anyway, so you might as well start working from there, and explore the many features it has at a measured pace, because feature-creep doesn't do much for you, unless you aim to make "tech-demos" instead of maps. If you want to create something like SunLust, or you want to create something close to vanilla, you can comfortably settle with boom format to get started. One of the bigger annoyances that comes with limit removing vanilla maps is the lack of actions to choose from, and once you've gotten used to the generalized actions boom has to offer, that problem is an issue of the past. The added flexibility is well worth a look, even if you're just getting started. It's enough to allow the aspiring mapper to create just about any function they could want as long as it's linedef-triggered, but it's not as likely that feature creep sneaks up on you... And that might be a bigger advantage than you may expect... Hexen format is the odd one out, but it has its uses even to this day, most notably deathmatch maps that run for example on odamex, or ZDaemon rocket jump maps. It is worth noting that true 3D floors are not exclusive to UDMF. ZDoom (Doom in Hexen) can employ true 3D as well, but only if the targeted source port permits that. I'm going to omit Eternity format here, because I don't know enough about it to have much of an informed opinion, let alone the ability to present well-reasoned arguments in its favour, or against it, for that matter. Regardless of your choice: It is important to differentiate between features of a particular format, and features of targetted source ports. Both ZDoom and ZDaemon can run "Doom in Hexen" format, but only one of the two, namely ZDoom, is able to make use of true 3D geometry. I wanna be able to script my maps, so what should I go for? Here's where it gets iffy... Boom format maps allow for scripting by way of voodoo conveyors, which is a very easy way to set up timers, looping scripts, or to add multiple actions to a single linedef or switch in a map. The benefit of using these conveyors is that they do not require anything in the way of coding expertise. If you know how to use linedef actions, and you know how to create a scrolling floor, you get conveyor scripting "for free". Any formats that target ZDoom allow for the very same conveyor based scripting as boom format does, but people usually default to ACS which is a machine language that tells the game what to do when and under which circumstances. Unlike with boom, you can also use monsters or even items you place to execute scripts anytime you want. This added flexibility comes at the expense of having to learn ACS, or sifting through the wiki in order to find what you are looking for, or knowing somebody who can help you out when you're stuck. This added hurdle is no biggie if you're already familiar with coding to some extent, but if you have no experience with coding at all, it might be daunting and/or frustrating to get into. It's for that reason that I like to recommend boom as a format to start with, because it is way more intuitive than having to learn how to "code". It is possible to script in a "boom-esque" manner in vanilla format, but it comes at the expense of GZDoom compatibility. So, before you go down that rabbit hole, consider trying a different format first. It should also be noted that regardless of whichever format you use, you could still use ZScript if you end up targetting GZDoom, again, at the expense of having to learn how to write that code. Okay, look... I have no idea how to code, and I just wanna try making a map or two, what should I pick..? The answer here, as far as I'm concerned, has got to be boom format. It is easy to navigate, regardless of the builder you use, it offers more flexibility than you could possibly need when you're just starting out, and you are the most likely to actually finish something instead of getting tangled up in features you don't know how or why to use. Second place goes to UDMF, because it is possible to keep it simple if you exercise a bit of self-restraint when it comes to using features. You could even omit ACS or ZScript entirely if you wanted, in which case you could treat it like boom, but with the potential for true 3D geometry. All things considered, boom is more intuitive to understand, especially if you open up boom maps in the builder to check how people create conveyor scripts, while UDMF offers even more stuff at the risk of spending way more time on a map than you might have planned. Guess what? People use those features from time to time, so it would be pretty swell if you avoided calling certain features "crap" in your "guide", mmmkay..? Okay, so... I have a question... What makes you think it's fine to deem a format you know nothing about obsolete, even though it's still being used nowadays..? Alright, here's the deal... I assume you mean well when writing a guide like this, which is why I hesitated making this post here, but there are too many inaccuracies, knowledge gaps, and biases involved to leave this standing as is... I'm far from an arbiter of mapping knowledge, but even I can see that your guide leaves a lot to be desired, even for the new mapper on the block....

So, one of your first courses of action in an unfamiliar environment is to create what's basically a "bash-thread" in which you make it a point to alienate both players and mappers of one of the most influential and thriving sub-genres..? Clever...

The assets or resources you use are not the deciding factor. What really matters is the linedef actions you use, and the actors you place... Without opening the map in a builder, I can at least say that Doom in Hexen has actors (like floor property actors and mapspots) which are not supported by PrBoom+, which might cause the crash...

a flock of cyberdemons = Beef Brigade