ZDoom

Gez wrote:I remember there was a very old feature suggestion thread for skewing textures, so there was demand for that specifically. And it definitely can look better than rotated. Allow me to illustrate:

Ah, okay. I stand corrected. Rotation and skewing both have their uses! After Vulkan, perhaps... :)

Skewing might actually be doable even in software

That's harder than it sounds, but certainly a lot easier than actual rotations.

I prefer the skewing but rotation mixed with scaling isn't so bad:

I prefer both rotation and skewing.

Strictly speaking skewing can sorta already be done by splitting the linedef in question up into tons of tinier linedefs and offsetting as needed. (Alternatively, not splitting up the linedef, but pre-baking the skew into a separate texture using an image editor.)

But that's a pain in the ass to do, so I'd totally be down for a quicker, more-convenient option were the time to ever come.

Hmmm... What if we could Peg said skewing to the slant of the floor or ceiling?

Shadow Hog wrote:Strictly speaking skewing can sorta already be done by splitting the linedef in question up into tons of tinier linedefs and offsetting as needed.

If you want to absolutely destroy your level's frame rate, you do you, boo!

Shadow Hog wrote: (Alternatively, not splitting up the linedef, but pre-baking the skew into a separate texture using an image editor.)

But that's a pain in the ass to do, so I'd totally be down for a quicker, more-convenient option were the time to ever come.

Which makes both of these much more viable options, preferably the last one.

Shadow Hog wrote:Strictly speaking skewing can sorta already be done by splitting the linedef in question up into tons of tinier linedefs

Yeah, here's an example (birds.wad/Heretic Upstarts Mapping Project E1M6) :

You know i have a better solution, mabye suggesting to the guy who still keeps gzdoombuilder to add in a inbuilder texture editor to do rotations and essencialy create rotations without having to go through all the effort of saving, placing it inside a wad, making sure its the right size and other stuff like that?
obviously that would mean it would create a new texture file that would be saved within the wad thats being worked on.

Gorman Frebmane wrote:You know i have a better solution

Oh?

Gorman Frebmane wrote:mabye suggesting to the guy who still keeps gzdoombuilder to add in a inbuilder texture editor to do rotations

So the better solution is asking someone else to do a lot of work for something completely out of scope of the editor they're maintaining?

Gez wrote:

Shadow Hog wrote:Strictly speaking skewing can sorta already be done by splitting the linedef in question up into tons of tinier linedefs

Yeah, here's an example (birds.wad/Heretic Upstarts Mapping Project E1M6) :

This is absolutely awful though. It's an example of things that you shouldn't be trying to do in the engine. That Wall went from being 2 linedefs to, like, a hundred: that's more walls than most rooms. It also means that, if anyone ever tries to use a high-res texture pack on it, it won't look right. People need to just pull the original texture, and make a separate version that is tilted. I absolutely could not afford to do something like this in a game with the graphical intensity of Membrane.

Gorman Frebmane wrote:You know i have a better solution, mabye suggesting to the guy who still keeps gzdoombuilder to add in a inbuilder texture editor to do rotations and essencialy create rotations without having to go through all the effort of saving, placing it inside a wad, making sure its the right size and other stuff like that?
obviously that would mean it would create a new texture file that would be saved within the wad thats being worked on.

That's actually a worse solution. Not only is he already overworked and low on help with that, but this system would have to be a large, very robust addition to what Doom Builder does. He would need to create some sort of texture editor, which Doom Builder does not currently have, and add the ability to smoothly do these rotations, because remember that it is not enough to simply pull it into gimp and rotate it, because you will quickly lose quality to the lack of space within pixels.

He would also need to add the ability to save images to wads and PK3s, and the user would have to be able to choose, because do you want to save this to the WAD you are working on, or the PK3 you got this texture from, or someplace else? In my own work flow, I have 3 files: the WAD with the map, membrane.pk3, and another PK3 that just contains things which I am adding so they can be properly merged back into membrane.pk3 later.


No, there are only two good ways to do this sort of thing. Either the mapper needs to make the rotated textures themself, which has obvious limitations, or the renderer needs to do it for them when it is drawing triangles.

RockstarRaccoon wrote:No, there are only two good ways to do this sort of thing. Either the mapper needs to make the rotated textures themself, which has obvious limitations, or the renderer needs to do it for them when it is drawing triangles.

This.

Now that this is out of the way, can we please stop having these "ideas"? (a.k.a. workarounds) They're not helping and they have literally nothing to do with the original suggestion, anyhow, from an implementation and usability standpoint.

The idea as stated (at least the skewing part) is ultimately still on the "to-do" list, and with the Vulkan refactoring you can be sure it won't be worked on for at least a month. If it wasn't viable and the developers had no interest in it, it'd have already been closed by now. So you can count on the fact that the developers think it's a good suggestion - just the logistics of it are still problematic right now, an issue itself which is presently being worked on.

So we could be getting skewing, but not rotating? I suppose I could live with something like that. It's just a bit difficult to have to do a bunch of stuff in GIMP every time I want to have a feature go diagonally...

Right now skewing is far more likely. Rotations are a possibility, though, but I am not making any promises.

As I've said - wait until the Vulkan refactoring is done.