Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

If it's not ZDoom, it goes here.
User avatar
drfrag
Vintage GZDoom Developer
Posts: 3141
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Spain
Contact:

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by drfrag »

I didn't mean they are useless and i don't know what you think my story is. What about people without internet connection like myself right now? They could have downloaded it at some public place and play at home on their computer. Besides according to it nearly half the users own modern dedicated graphic cards, i estimate (i was a computer technician remember) that here in Spain roughly over 90% or even more of new computers are mid or low end craptops. Desktop computers are getting old (same happens here with cars) and there are not many hardcore gamers. Gaming laptops are niche as well. It could be that only hardcore gamers play Doom tough but i'm not one of them. But then even Doom itself is niche. Like i said when people come to GZDoom mainly they're looking for the hardware renderer and it's the only port capable of running mods (LZDoom is the poor man's GZDoom).

But all that is not very relevant to me, back when both GZDoom and ZDoom co-existed ZDoom still had a good number of downloads and probably is still being downloaded even when it's very obsolete (at least it seems it's still popular). So all things considered i think there's still a demand for the software renderer.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Posts: 49056
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Graf Zahl »

drfrag wrote:I didn't mean they are useless and i don't know what you think my story is. What about people without internet connection like myself right now? They could have downloaded it at some public place and play at home on their computer.
In the greater scheme of things this is the exception, rather than the rule. Collect enough data and these become irrelevant for the statistics. The vast majority of users runs the game on their internet connected system
drfrag wrote: Besides according to it nearly half the users own modern dedicated graphic cards, i estimate (i was a computer technician remember) that here in Spain roughly over 90% or even more of new computers are mid or low end craptops. Desktop computers are getting old (same happens here with cars) and there are not many hardcore gamers.
You are correct but draw the wrong conclusion here. That group of 'casual' gamers you make out does not really exist, aside from smartphones. I know lots of people running cheap systems - but there's one unifying constant: They do not play computer games. Also, let's not forget that currently 13% of reporting users sit on what you just called a "craptop". I can see the graphics hardware being run at the low end and they all perfectly fit the bill - 8-13 year old systems with first generation GL3 hardware, and also lots of Intel-based laptops from 5-8 years ago with low end integrated chipsets.
The thing is, most people who play games tend to invest a bit of money into their system, they generally do not buy that cheap low end crap that's obsolete the moment yoi plug it in.
On the other hand, even old games tend to attract the gamer type more than the non-gamer type, which is shown by the large amount of high end hardware.

drfrag wrote: Gaming laptops are niche as well. It could be that only hardcore gamers play Doom tough but i'm not one of them. But then even Doom itself is niche. Like i said when people come to GZDoom mainly they're looking for the hardware renderer and it's the only port capable of running mods (LZDoom is the poor man's GZDoom).
Like I said in the previous post, the numbers do not support that theory. A few weeks ago I compiled download numbers for all the major ports I could get my hand at (that is, all except Doomsday) and the results were a bit surprising:

The unsurprising result is that GZDoom was leading the charge by a huge margin.
The second most popular port is - believe it or not - LZDoom, with 3-4 times as many downloads as Doom Retro.
Third place is shared by PrBoom+ and Doom Retro, but we are talking about far less than 10% of GZDoom's numbers already with these.
A distant last is the Eternity Engine, which amassed 10% of the number of downloads of what GZDoom 4.2 got in 2 weeks in 2.5 years! (Yes, that number is correct, it is not an error!)
Crispy Doom and EDGE rank somewhere in the middle between Doom Retro and Eternity.

What should be clear here is that the software renderer is basically restricted to a small niche of users - mainly by choice rather than necessity - and this group is overrepresented at the gaming forums. Hardware rendering compatible ports make up more than 90% of all downloads I could see, and is probably a lot higher because I got no numbers for Doomsday. Nowhere in the entire picture can I see a hint that the group of users you make out has any significant size, and in fact that a sizable chunk of it can run GZDoom properly. Let's not forget that you have to go 8 to 10 years back to find a system that cannot run GZDoom, the Intel HD3000 as the latest non-supporting hardware was phased out during 2011, and for unsupported dedicated graphics hardware you have to go back another 4 years.

drfrag wrote: But all that is not very relevant to me, back when both GZDoom and ZDoom co-existed ZDoom still had a good number of downloads and probably is still being downloaded even when it's very obsolete (at least it seems it's still popular). So all things considered i think there's still a demand for the software renderer.
The thing is, we do not know any numbers from that time. But I don't really believe that the popularity of hardware rendering took a sudden surge over the last 2 years. On the contrary - we should never forget that inside the community the retro tendencies are a lot stronger than around the general public. This tends to paint a distorted picture of reality where the dearly held beliefs of the community do not match up.
User avatar
camper
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 10:53 am
Location: Tatarstan

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by camper »

The engine gzdoom generally does not lag behind modern engines. This is a parallel engine, with its advantages from full 3D. Just like Sauerbraten Cube 2, this is a kind of experiment.
User avatar
drfrag
Vintage GZDoom Developer
Posts: 3141
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 3:51 am
Location: Spain
Contact:

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by drfrag »

On the Doom reboot i talked earlier:
https://twitter.com/doomreboot

It's in early stages, i wonder if it will suffer the same limitations as the original. Those zombies are really slow hope they bite harder. :P
User avatar
Apeirogon
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:57 am

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Apeirogon »

camper wrote:full 3D
Ehhhh.....try carefully look up and down in gzdoom. You notice a perspective distortion, for example if you stand near pillars in map01 of a doom 2 they would looks not like you expect they must looks in real life if you move you "head" up or down. I dont know how correctly describe it, check total chaos TC, video or mod itself, to see this.
It mostly noticeable with models and walls with HD textures.
User avatar
Darkcrafter
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:42 am
Operating System Version (Optional): Windows 10
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Darkcrafter »

Apeirogon wrote:
camper wrote:full 3D
Ehhhh.....try carefully look up and down in gzdoom. You notice a perspective distortion, for example if you stand near pillars in map01 of a doom 2 they would looks not like you expect they must looks in real life if you move you "head" up or down. I dont know how correctly describe it, check total chaos TC, video or mod itself, to see this.
It mostly noticeable with models and walls with HD textures.
There is nothing wrong with it, this is the way real 3d works, try to open console and type fov 75, you will decrease your field of view and that way you get less of what you call a perspective distortion. May I also open a little secret for you? In real life you may move not just your head, but also eyes, if you move eyes up down you get the same effect of mouselook in doom software renderer, as your "camera" position doesn't change and you're just "sliding" that image you see up and down, so the perspective doesn't actually change! In GZDoom and many modern games "eyes" are fixed in one position and the only thing that moves is camera, so as soon as you look up and down you pitch that camera up or down, so the perspective changes accordingly.
Attachments
Perspective.png
User avatar
Apeirogon
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:57 am

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Apeirogon »

Some games, i.e. engines, dont have this effect. I check several that I have in my pc.
And all games that have this effect, it wont look as "obvious" as in gzdoom. You must really carefully move you mouse leaning against the wall with you nose to notice it. And in gzdoom in noticeable right from the beginning...at least for me.
User avatar
Darkcrafter
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:42 am
Operating System Version (Optional): Windows 10
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Darkcrafter »

Well, maybe it's just a camera behaviour, but it works just fine with real 3d models placed on the scene, all these conspiracy ideas that GZDoom's renderer is not a full 3d are just bullshit. I post my stuff here again, look here is everything in real 3D: https://imgur.com/a/JVAEJla

Here is a video: https://youtu.be/BlvimDZDJO4
The only 2D now are maps, but only the map geometry, if you really wish you can make a map that would consist only of 3d models placed inside of a big open area, but you have to draw some supporting geometry or place invisible actors that would work like walls allowing player to walk on them, collide.

Or you can go with 3d floors which are indeed real 3d, but they're not as convenient to work with, but new GZDoom allows for stacked sectors, now you can do multistage buildings and their geometry doesn't intersect, it's very useful for mappers.

I'll try to explain it differently: GZDoom maps conist of 2d and 3d geometry peacefully coexisting. 2d geometry is for basic geometry, then you can draw real 3d geometry inside of this 2d "container", like 3d floors and 3d models. And then you also can stack up different 2d containers using line portals and stacked sectors. And this is some real fun.

But sadly this renderer has its own limitations like there is impossible to place additional lighting layer over the textures so more realistic lighting could be used (like in quake). It's also impossible to cull any geometry that you can't see behind double sided linedefs, imagine a not really tall wall that would still obstruct the view, but the engine renders everything behind it. There is no such a thing like a vertical culling, e.g. no matter where you look, at a floor, at center or in the sky, it renders the whole picture, that doesn't get onto your screen though. And if you decide to look extremely down below or up FPS drops dramatically, I assume that frustrum expands and it renders all the geometry around like if that was a 360 degree panorama, but I might be wrong.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Posts: 49056
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Graf Zahl »

Darkcrafter wrote:I assume that frustrum expands and it renders all the geometry around like if that was a 360 degree panorama, but I might be wrong.
That's precisely what happens. The clipper works in 2D.
User avatar
Apeirogon
Posts: 1605
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 12:57 am

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Apeirogon »

I dont say that gzdoom is not a 3d game, I just say that it 3d looks off in some cases. Which, cases, happens often during game. And Im aware about gzdoom limitations (but where did they dont exist in a first place?) so this is not a problem.
It just bother me in a way "I want straights drawn walls!!! WRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!111111111111"
User avatar
sirudoom
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by sirudoom »

the only none 3d thing is the hipster weapons. that's a good name for them actually.
User avatar
Darkcrafter
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:42 am
Operating System Version (Optional): Windows 10
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Darkcrafter »

Sprites aren't 3d, technically even they are projected onto 3d primitives called "plane", completely flat rectangles that are textured by sprites images, but it's not what you're talking about, can you please post some pics and videos of what you think is an issue, I still don't understand what kind of perspective distortion you're trying to describe. Maybe you just have a post processing lens distortion effect turned on?
User avatar
sirudoom
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2019 5:03 pm

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by sirudoom »

sometimes trees are 2d too, you could do a dink smallwood type thing with 2d trees where light colored trees you can burn the leaves off and nothing happens most the time. sometimes the tree disappears and theres a hole in the ground that goes to a underground area where you could get health or a new gun or there could be a portal. by getting the flame maybe you would have to kill 50 enemies or get 50 coins (if there are them).

i just think if there isn't a reason for there to be 2d things then why have them? enemies die so its not like they have to be 3d and its a fast paced game and you don't even look at them much. also items just disappear too. im not the only one that doesn't like the old guns and 2d trees heh
User avatar
Darkcrafter
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:42 am
Operating System Version (Optional): Windows 10
Graphics Processor: nVidia with Vulkan support

Re: Comparing gzdoom to nowadays game engine

Post by Darkcrafter »

Trees are 2d because some people design their mods for software renderer (which gzdoom includes for historical and other reasons) or there is no required assets or knowledge to get them in a mod. I experimented a lot by rendering 16 sided (8 sides are standard for doom) sprites or rocks and they looked horrible unlike 1-frame sprites, just because even 16-sided sprites cause a lot of flickering which eyes catch immediately, but you can do amazingly good foliage and rockery that is situated far away from the player, it's even done in modern games like battlefield 4 and 1, but only 1-sided because 8-sided or even 16-sided cause flickering.
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”