Page 1 of 1

ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:46 pm
by Renegade
While reading the post about Graf Zhal's 'split' from ZDoom developpment, I learned a little about GZDoom. I went over and downloaded it to see what it was like, but on the surface the differences appear minimal. The main difference I noticed was that GZDoom's video was somewhat smoother, although a little blurry it seemed.

In light of this, could someone explain to me, in Layman's terms, the differences between ZDoom and GZDoom; specifically:
1. What features of ZDoom are not availabe in GZDoom (if any).
2. What additionaly features are available (besides 3D Floors, I know that one).
3. What are the pros and cons of using one over the other.

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 9:55 pm
by jallamann
You know, searching for an answer is regarded as far more intelligent than asking for one.

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:43 pm
by Xaser
And breaking out the flamethrower for an entirely harmless question isn't quite the smartest move in the book, either.


For most practical purposes, GZDoom supports all features that standard ZDoom does. The only oddities that really seem to occur are maps which use certain quirks in the software engine that the GL renderer has trouble with (sector-referencing tricks and whatnot). GZDoom is, however, better than most GL ports in handling these errors, and if you're mapping specifically for GZDoom then you'll never have to worry about it.

Having said that though, GZDoom has (for now) the normal software renderer included, though. I'd go as far as to say they're identical, but then again, who knows?

The biggest addition that GZDoom has is, naturally, the 3D floor. Other notable features include dynamic lighting and reflective floors, though due to their nature, none of these will work in the software renderer. Just be sure to put them to good use if you decide to go GL, to justify the needs. ;P

The only thing I'd worry about is perhaps compatibility between the two ports in the future. I'm certain that Graf Zahl will do his best to keep his port relatively up-to-date with ZDoom standards, but it's possible that a split may occur and one day standard ZDoom may support a feature or two that GZDoom doesn't, or vice-versa. Of course, this is the future I'm talking here. Nothing at all to worry about now.


And a final tip: The "blurriness" is probably texture filtering, which can be turned off in the OpenGL display settings menu. I like prefer my pixels, myself. ;P

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:22 am
by Enjay
Xaser wrote:The biggest addition that GZDoom has is, naturally, the 3D floor. Other notable features include dynamic lighting and reflective floors, though due to their nature, none of these will work in the software renderer. Just be sure to put them to good use if you decide to go GL, to justify the needs. ;P
Don't forget complete freedom from the game's built in palette which, IMO, is a very important feature.

Oh, and true all-round Unreal-like skyboxes and model support too.

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 11:17 am
by Renegade
So what is OpenGL? And what does it do besides add these features. I heard a few people saying they didn't want to, or couldn't use OpenGL rendering. What's the reasoning behind that?

@jallamann: Maybe I'm not intelligent enough to understand the answers I got. Probably why I said "in Layman's terms".

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 11:21 am
by Chris
Renegade wrote:So what is OpenGL? And what does it do besides add these features.
OpenGL is a rendering API for accelerated graphics. Like Direct3D, except not Microsoft-specific.

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 12:38 pm
by Gez
[wiki]GZDoom[/wiki] is basically [wiki]ZDoom[/wiki] but with an additional renderer which uses [wiki]OpenGL[/wiki]. Every feature that is in ZDoom is found in GZDoom (though you can have to wait a bit for the latest ZDoom [wiki]SVN[/wiki] novelty to be added in the GZDoom SVN; but not vice-versa. Independently of the renderer, the physics code is slightly different (to account for 3D floors; they're invisible in the software renderer but still present anyway, while in ZDoom they're completely ignored).

What does "hardware" and "software" mean? Simple. With the software renderer, Doom makes all the graphic work itself (so the computations are handled by the CPU). The hardware renderer, however, calls upon a graphic library (Open GL == Open Graphic Library) that delegates most of the work to your graphic chipset and its GPU, which has specialized components to do standard graphical operations faster than normal code does (hence, hardware). Unless you have a very powerful CPU coupled with a pathetic GPU, the hardware renderer is going to be much faster. The downside is that, since it's much faster, you can ask it to do much more (such as dynamic lights); and overdoing that can result in a slower render at the end.

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 12:53 pm
by Renegade
Okay. Thanks, everyone; I think I know what I need to know now.

Re: ZDoom vs. GZDoom

Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 5:05 pm
by Macil
GZDoom is ZDoom plus a 3d-renderer (which has support for 3d floors and 32 bit true color mode) and a few obscure features, such as some support for Legacy maps and FraggleScript. The only reason I have zdoom installed is because its where the core of development work happens - it gets updated quicker, and if I need to report a bug, usually I want to try to report it for zdoom.