GZdoom for dummies

[Guest]

Hello,

GZDoom currently looks like the only sensible go2 option when it comes to [b]Doom2[/b] mod usage. I am nonetheless put off by the terribly convoluted settings of the sourceport. Short ball: could you please release a streamlined version of the sourceport, including only the most vital options, with the rest standardized for an average mid-range contemporary machine, preferably with an integrated chipset? You can literally call it "GZDoom for dummies" if you wish.

[wildweasel]

What specifically are you having trouble with?

[Graf Zahl]

preferably with an integrated chipset?

Oh, and catering to the lowest common denominator is not going to happen. The majority of our users have better hardware. Not that it'd matter much, the real performance killers are off by default anyway.

[Guest]

@wildweasel, the case is rather about psychological effect of sheer amount assaulting the viewer, next to de facto majority of these settings being rather over the edge quirky for a common user. Perhaps you could do presets, then? Click and done. Plug and play. It would be good to separate the options likely to be changed or customized per preference someplace easier accessible, while hiding the details rather deeper.

@Graf Zahl, well, I can see the reason behind that, sure, but this is why I ask for a parallel version of GZDoom or perhaps, the presets.

[Rachael]

The biggest problem with a suggestion like this is there is no one-size-fits-all solution.

First, you have the techies and programmers that are used to everything being "convoluted" just the way it is. You shake things up - they are unhappy.

After that, you have people who are generally just interested in Brutal Doom and similar mods. The menu options that would be most suitable for them would be the ones affecting performance and appearance and the like.

Then, you have people who are generally just interested in other gameplay mods - like Doom 4 Doom, Russian Overkill, Hideous Destructor, and the like. Generally such people would be happier with nearly no menu options, since these mods tend to have a ton of menu options of their own.

Then you have your map runners - who are drawn in by complex maps or mapsets like KDiZD and TUTNT - again, most of their interests would lie in the realm of what is performance related.

Basically what it comes down to is, no matter what menu set you make standard, someone is always going to be unhappy. Honestly, redesigning the menu is a job for user-created mods, I think, at this point, especially given that it is possible, and in this community as diverse as it is in interests and people, what's good for the goose is almost never good for the gander.

If I am to be brutally honest - everyone has a brain. Don't be afraid to use it. You can figure things out, and then the only thing that will bother you about the menu is the clutter - not how complicated it is.

[Zhs2]

And for the sake of thread completeness, there's a mod for this.

[Guest]

Alright then, thanks for the answers.

[Enjay]

To be fair, for the novice user, I can understand how the options available in GZDoom can seem quite daunting. There's a lot in there, especially if someone strays into the gameplay options, quite a few of them require some arcane knowledge about Doom, its history or simply just a greater understanding of how a game might interact with your own hardware versus what you might find with a commercial game.

Of course, the above situation is also perfectly justifyable given the history of the underlying game, the abuses of the game by modders over the years, the efforts of the developers to try and allow compatibility with a far wider range of hardware than a commercial developer would bother targetting etc etc.

[wildweasel]

As far as remedying this, how about some kind of First Time Setup dialog, for choosing things like screen resolution/filtering/windowed setting, default renderer, basic control layout (between classic/vanilla, lefty mode, and Half-Life WASD)?

[Guest]

@wildweasel, it would have to take like half an hour to drive the player through all the advanced settings, but I guess you mean only the basic ones. But taking after this "vanilla" type of menu, what about a mod that would ask per launch whether to use simple or advanced settings? Maybe the advanced menu could be booted with some special switch or something. Launching it through a separate window, other to the game, has the flaw of lacking in possibility of dynamically previewing those changes that apply without restart.

[Guest]

To supplement the suggestion: you could perhaps make two different start files for the sourceport, one launching the game with simple menu, the other one with the advanced one. The advanced version may keep the original filename, as to avoid forcing change of habits for the consummate users.

You decide by own experience what settings should be included in the simplified version.

[Rachael]

Actually, that is not a bad idea. There is a new branch of code is presenting some challenges and there have already been plans in place to put in certain types of options to mitigate them.

Having a "developer" and an "end-user" experience for GZDoom to give developers their own special version of the game tailored to assist with mod development is an idea.

There is still a challenge of figuring out what an end-user really wants though. Like I said - there's really no one-size-fits-all solution. Some people are going to want the barest minimum in their menus, some people are going to want the eye candy stuff, which itself is arguably itself the biggest culprit for a lot of the clutter.

[Guest]

@Rachael, when it comes to my opinion, if modmakers want to provide some extra customizable settings for the eyecandy materials they aim to employ in their works, they should have all the access to what they need, but the barebones sourceport, ought to be available also in a user friendly mode. In the end, professionals are going to help themselves out, while it is easy to scare away the newcomers.

I believe there is a reasonable way out with the essential settings included only. Such as you said, the target audience needs to be divided between the modders - who would choose the full scope of options anyway - and the average casual players who just want to play the game, having spent at most five minutes altogether in the game options. Targeting for the ground between is going to satisfy nobody.

The barebones version should be compatible with the vanilla game, addressing solely active features.

[Graf Zahl]

I think most of the menus are well ordered. The big problem is the Display Options. This is where people may want to configure the look of the game but have difficulties because it's an unordered hodgepodge of things that got added over the years. Maybe it's enough to sort out this single menu to make navigation easier. Looking at the rest I don't really know what to change, except maybe renaming and splitting up the gameplay options. This entire menu is very misleading because so much of it is only useful in multiplayer.

[Rachael]

I'm not ready to rehaul the menu completely on a whim, but there are two points I want to address - and both of these are going to be biting criticisms, here.

In the end, professionals are going to help themselves out, while it is easy to scare away the newcomers.

In the context of a fan-created hobby project, this means literally nothing. What we do is in the spirit of cooperation - we're not a major institution looking to sell our product. I understand that you may not mean this in the way that the message comes across, but as it is received this reeks of entitlement. We don't play that game - if people don't want to use GZDoom, they won't, and this doesn't hurt us in any way that you might think.

I think most of the menus are well ordered.

To this point, however, I am sorry but I have long held this opinion but never thought it important enough to bring it out. I do disagree, here. As a programmer, developer, or what have you, myself, nevertheless an "advanced user" - I rarely use the menus. I can't imagine anyone who's ever used DOS in its heyday really does. The console offers a magnitude of customization that is much larger than any menu can present. Unfortunately, this anonymous that is here has a very valid point: Most of the stuff in the menu is useless. I am sorry, it is. That includes a few things I remember that you asked me to add way back when - options which never should have been available to the layman in the first place. Yeah, they're good for tweaking and tinkering, but that's really about it. This is part of why proper CVAR naming has always been important to me.

Overall, I do think that all the gameplay options could stay in the menu, if not split as you suggested, I think that there are definitely a few, if not more, display options that can go, and they won't be missed. Most of them are fine being configured from the console. Could probably drop a few sound options, too. The messages and automap menus could probably be split between a "basic" menu and an "advanced" menu that offers additional options for each. I am not sure what could be dropped from there, though, as I don't go to them often.

If the options really must be kept, then we really do need an "advanced" menu for some of these options. There really is, honestly, too much stuff here.