Page 2 of 2

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:17 pm
by NeuralStunner
It might be more descriptive to have a small preview "scene", so users can see how effects and options will look. Downside is you'd have to include an image for each option. (Or render a preview scene in real time...)

Most graphical options apply immediately, but between the menu dimming and possibly not being in a great spot to show the change, it doesn't always come across.

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:05 pm
by Enjay
Kappes Buur wrote:Aw, come on, sub-menus for more bikeshedding?

While I fully acknowledge that the menus need to be right - or as right as possible (they are a very important part of the user interface after all, and considerable work has gone into them in the last few months/year), I also agree that they seem to be an incredible target for bikeshedding too. Everyone seems to have their own idea about how the menus should be and there has been an awful lot of discussion about relatively trivial aspects of the menus.

Personally, at present, they work very well for me. There are quite a few options that I will never use (so be it - someone will use them) and I can find what I want pretty quickly. If most people are in that position, then we really don't need to be eternally debating the minutia of various entries.

I also agree that the most important thing about the lighting modes (to me anyway) is how they look versus each other. I don't care if they are called Doom, Legacy, Vanilla or just 1, 2, 3, 4... I find one that I like and I use it.

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:48 am
by Graf Zahl
Enjay wrote:I also agree that they seem to be an incredible target for bikeshedding too. Everyone seems to have their own idea about how the menus should be and there has been an awful lot of discussion about relatively trivial aspects of the menus.


The thing most of the people in those discussions forget is that not everybody has the same priorities. What's important for one person has no meaning for somebody else, but what's important to this person has no meaning for the first one. So it is nearly impossible to make a list of "superfluous" or "redundant" settings because you cannot possibly get any consensus.

Every single attempt at a simplified setup leads to a crippled menu where only the most basic things can be set and that's not going to help anybody.
But on the other hand: Are the menus really that bad? Just look at the clusterfuck of a menu PrBoom+ presents the user with. Everything is lumped together in two multipage menus where not even the subsections are separate pages. GZDoom's menu are well organized by comparison. But in the end there's a lot of things that can be set up so what should we do? Cater to the lowest common denominator or offer something comprehensive and detailed? I strongly favor the latter. The important thing is that all the content is properly organized. Long menus with an endless list of options are not a good solution, it's better to define hierarchies where each page remains focussed.

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:44 am
by leileilol
My ideas for some words to use

"Doom" = Accurate
Vanilla = Faithful
Standard = Toaster
Legacy = Denis

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:22 am
by Caligari87
note to self: say "menu" whenever I want to derail a thread.

Jeez. :?

Now that the lede has been properly buried by my faux pas: Is there any chance of the lighting modes being renamed and/or reorganized to be more accurate to their actual function? Or is that "bikeshedding" and they're just gonna stay this way forever?

8-)

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:54 am
by Graf Zahl
What about all those poor users who got used to the current names and won't have a clue what the new ones mean...? :mrgreen:

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 10:36 am
by Caligari87
Hence why I suggested some kind of helpful menu description to explain what each one does, but apparently that's "bikeshedding" and god forbid we do that :?

8-)

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:16 pm
by Kappes Buur
Quite frankly I do not understand what the problem is. GZDOOM is not vanilla DOOM.
The engine has undergone such extensive changes that variations in every aspect of the game, display and gameplay, are to be expected.

Having a consensus between player A and player B is mostly impossible. Not only do individual players perceive colours differently, is is also how various monitor settings affect the colours and light levels on the screen. Describing each display mode will be interpreted by different players in different ways, Graf Zahl explained that already above. Opening the ini file to tweak various variables to suit is an option which most players seem to ignore.

To satisfy everyone, the best way would be to use non descriptors, like numbers or letters. However, I fear that even then the same discussion will be had.

I have not yet seen any proof of what the discussion is about, in the form of comparative screenshots. Probably because the differences would turn out to be minuscule. However, that would also produce another torrent of differing opinions.

If someone is so dead set on playing the game looking exactly as original DOOM then let them break out the old 486 machine and have at it. But then the complaints would ......

:)

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:31 pm
by Enjay
Graf Zahl wrote:Are the menus really that bad?

No, they are not. I think they are fine. They are comprehensive and, given how complex they need to be after quarter of a century of specialist interest, tweaking, incorporation of new ideas and preservation of old stuff, I think they actually do a reasonably neat and efficient job of presenting all of that; recent improvements have certainly done their job. The constant discussion about them is, IMO, just bikeshedding - nothing more. A consensus will never be reached (as you said) but the menus are perfectly functional. Time to move on to things that actually need to occupy our time. :)

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:44 pm
by Caligari87
There are perfectly objective descriptions of each light mode based on what calculations it uses, when it was implemented, and what it attempts to emulate. The only subjective part is which the player prefers, and this whole discussion is about properly communicating these differences to the player so they can make an informed decision.

As I understand it, this is the information that should be communicated to the player: (corrections appreciated)

  • Standard: GZDoom's original light formula. Linear light levels with exponential fog.
  • Dark: GZDoom's first emulation of the Doom lighting curve, without distance diminishing or brightening effects.
  • Doom: An early inaccurate attempt at emulating Doom light diminishing on slow hardware.
  • Legacy: Emulates Doom Legacy's lighting mode.
  • Software: Emulates the lighting used in the ZDoom software renderer. Brighter illumination close to player than vanilla Doom.
  • Vanilla: Accurate hardware shader emulation of original Doom renderer lighting curve and diminishing.

There are important differences here if someone wants their lighting a certain way. Now maybe you don't care, Kappes, but other people certainly do and it's not helpful to dismiss the entire topic of conversation because you don't think it matters.

8-)

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:48 pm
by De-M-oN
In addition said - the modes are actually very different and not just "minuscule" @Kappes

Re: Light mode naming and defaults discussion

PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:13 pm
by Nash
I'm with Cali on this one. It confuses even me, and I've been using the software since 2005... so the average new user won't stand a chance. :P