Zandronum

I've got a couple of questions here. I am relatively new, so I don't mean to be one-sided.

I can't help but notice that so many screenshots all over the many Doom modding communities, even in 2012, still depict vanilla software graphics. Is it a nostalgia-preserving preference? Because I don't understand why not many Doomers opt for the best quality available (or at least better).
Based on some threads in other forums I can understand that some users' computers can't support or handle GL rendering.

Another question is about texture scaling filters (eg, HQ4X) which apparently no one ever uses. Is it just set aside as an insignificant feature or is there actual reasoning against using it?
I feel like the only one who likes HQ4X, personally because it's gotten rid of the eye-strain caused by defocusing on zoomed in pixels.

bleson wrote: I can't help but notice that so many screenshots all over the many Doom modding communities, even in 2012, still depict vanilla software graphics. Is it a nostalgia-preserving preference? Because I don't understand why not many Doomers opt for the best quality available (or at least better).
Based on some threads in other forums I can understand that some users' computers can't support or handle GL rendering.

Some people just prefer software sometimes. It's really a preference. And it depends on the mod I'm playing at the time.

The "OMG, MUST MAX OUT EVERY GRAPHICAL SETTING" seems like a phase that most Doomers grow out of. Don't forget that you are playing Doom, after all. :p

And yes, it's true that some people's machines just can't handle all those high-end settings. Mine can't handle optimum settings on certain mods.

bleson wrote: Another question is about texture scaling filters (eg, HQ4X) which apparently no one ever uses. Is it just set aside as an insignificant feature or is there actual reasoning against using it?
I feel like the only one who likes HQ4X, personally because it's gotten rid of the eye-strain caused by defocusing on zoomed in pixels.

I used to use it (although I used HQ2 or HQ3 ... HQ4 lags me like crazy). It actually gave me more of a headache than leaving it off does. To be honest, it doesn't make anything look any more "realistic". It just removes some monotony by smoothing everything out.

Sometimes I prefer a crisp, gritty Dooming experience that only Software mode (or OpenGL without high-quality texture filters) can provide.

This is Doom... such pixely textures and sprites won't be looking good just because they'd be blurred as hell and sprinkled with realistic light. Just like how pixelart looks shitty when you put Photoshop filters on it.

I will admit, I am one of those "Maximum quality" people who play in opengl, but I usually don't bother with scaling filters. Mostly because they make the graphics look blurred or smeared.

OpenGL because:
> Can look all the way up and down. <
All the special stuff it provides (dynamic lights, 3d models, PNG graphics, no force to palette, sector lighting control, etc).

If those benefits ceased to exist, I would switch to software in a heartbeat for the better performance.

I'm an OpenGL player. I don't use texture filtering, I prefer the pixelated look. I also like looking up and down, a sky that isn't a repeating texture, and enjoying the mods that are made to be played in OpenGL. Play Threshold of Pain in OpenGL with Dynamic lights, it's amazing.

Thanks for your replies. :)
I guess it's largely a matter of preference.
Interesting to realize that Doom looks different on each person's screen.

Everything maxed out

- Texture Filter Mode: Trilinear
- Antistropic Filter: 16X
- Texture Format: RGBA8X
- High Quality Resize Mode: HQN4X
- And everything else maxed out to look as nice as possible
- No 3D models or HQ textures.

Been dooming since 1993

When it comes to mods like ZH, WDi, AOW - it's no doubt opengl. everything on default, no textures filtering - I find it much more beautiful.
Deathmatch or CTF - software render, windowed, 30 fps. blame zdaemon.

bleson wrote:I don't understand why not many Doomers opt for the best quality available (or at least better).

It lags.

bleson wrote:Another question is about texture scaling filters (eg, HQ4X) which apparently no one ever uses.

IT LAGS EVEN MORE (not much more though).

Funny fact: if I had a PC strong enough to run new games without lags back then when I was 10, I wouldn't have started to play Doom or learn programming at all. Anyone who's annoyed by me, give me a TARDIS please.

Would you mind providing some idea of your specs?

I have a computer I'd consider just on the borderline of nowadays' standard, and I have never had lag issues due to texture filters.
In fact I've found there's hardly any difference in performance.

[spoiler]

Funny fact: if I had a PC strong enough to run new games without lags back then when I was 10, I wouldn't have started to play Doom or learn programming at all. Anyone who's annoyed by me, give me a TARDIS please.

I thought I was alone. The reason I actually started getting into Doom was because I lived my entire early teens with a way outdated computer. Whilst under the peer pressure of my fellows' glorious modern gaming glory, I had to find some game that suited myself and my computer.
Discovered Skulltag. Discovered Doom. Absolutely grateful.[/spoiler]

bleson wrote:Would you mind providing some idea of your specs?

Video: NVidia GeForce 5500 FX
Proc: some unknown Celeron @2.8GHz
RAM: 1.5GB
OS: Win7

I honestly don't know which I'd prefer. The Mac version doesn't have OpenGL.

If I had access to it, though, I'd probably turn the blurry/smearing effects off and enjoy my full-color PNGs and lighting effects (if my computer doesn't explode first).


Bit off-topic, are player colors restricted to the palette in opengl? I always wonder if my color looks different to other people, when all I see is Doom's lousy selection of purple (pink).

OpenGL.

Trilinear, 8x aniso, 2xScale, DHTP, forced additive dynlights at -2 default size and intensity.
Y-axis billboard, doom standard lightfogmode, all shaders enabled, fake contrast off, vsync on, quality rendering.

Dark Assassin's modelpack.

QEffectsGL, muted bloom ini based on Mark IV's settings: Attack of the Arnolds
AotA: Part 2
AotA: Part 3
Attack of the Bloom: The Animation

Sorry but for me The opengl Hax sucks, even more if you´re going to play online.
Monsters/Weapons are not that good with it, some online maps are too white (doing alot of glow and resulting in almost only glow in your screen)

Here´s normal opengl settings, but with doom fog and not dark fog that came on initial settings, for the end trilinear settings

Off:tried 5.1 sound but i just don´t listen 5.1 sound and only =/ (5.1 sound works right with other programs, and the sound is passed by hdmi out)

-Jes- wrote: Attack of the Arnolds
AotA: Part 2
AotA: Part 3

Is that 9-13-19 FPS instead of 35 really worth it?

Circunei Z wrote:

-Jes- wrote: Attack of the Arnolds
AotA: Part 2
AotA: Part 3

Is that 9-13-19 FPS instead of 35 really worth it?

Are those 3D models really worth it?

I can run most games on max options or until it gets choppy. Doom is one of those games I can run on max and have perfect frames per second. I just recently discovered the HQ4X option re-doing everything after a Zandy update where I deleted everything besides wads, and lemmie tell ya, totally AWESOME. Makes tearing apart Mancubi one's dream.

---

bleson wrote:

THIS GUY'S SPOILER POST, READ IT -H

If it weren't for my memories, I would never have found Doom. I can't remember if it WAS Doom in the first place, but I'm so happy with it I'm just gonna say it was. Ah, good old dying and not figuring out what the heck happened because I was too young to figure out I was playing a game. Fun times.

I like the aesthetics of Software, but the true 3d mouselook in GL is a lifesaver in a lot of situations, unless freelook's disabled.

Generally, I just keep GL on.

• Resolution: Native 1440x900 fullscreen. Basic Soyo 16:10 19" LCD.
• Texture Filter Mode: Depends. Usually bilinear if just for the sake of reducing migraine-inducing visual grain at long distances.
• Framerate Cap: Capped at 59FPS though Dxtory, since Zandronum still can't define max FPS like other games can. For mouse responsiveness reasons.
• Vsync: Off. Causes mouse to be less responsive. No other game causes this with Vsync. It won't tear at 59FPS, anyway.
• Antistropic Filter: 2x or 4x. I dunno, most of the time textures don't cause those issues.
• Texture Format: RGBA8X
• High Quality Resize Mode: HQN2X for text, none for everything else
• Lighting Mode: Doom, gamma 1 for both SW and GL
• Shaders: On for all options, since I assume using shaders accelerates the rendering of them.
• 3D Models/HQ Textures: No. Shooting sprite monsters/players with modelled weapons feels wrong. Sticks out even worse when custom monsters/weapons come in.

bleson wrote:

Circunei Z wrote:

-Jes- wrote: Attack of the Arnolds
AotA: Part 2
AotA: Part 3

Is that 9-13-19 FPS instead of 35 really worth it?

Are those 3D models really worth it?

>doesn't notice 31 bots.
>assumes the low fps is because of models and qeffectsgl, not the 31 bots.
>hammering the screenshot key wasn't helping either.
>oh god the models hurt my performance so bad amirite.

I should note that I have three toggle binds for enabling/disabling anything.
The models for example aren't performance friendly in wads like CHILLAX and SLAUGHTERFEST2011, but in regular old doom2 they do nothing.

Model rockets are incredibly convenient.