Texture filtering default discussion

[bimshwel]

oh wow it is like the ZSNES eagle engine.
I think filtering on the three dimensional environments should be considered separately from menu graphics and the weapon sprites. higher resolution doesn't affect them the same way.

[edward850]

The original Doom had a 320x200 resolution. Yet all DSDA Doom, Woof, D+D2, Crispy start with higher resolutions by default. They also fix original Doom's texture rendering errors. So the argument to respect the default originals is a bit selective.

No it isn't they are two entirely different things. One is the resolution of pixels inside the game world, something that is already scaled because you can move the camera around the scene and make things bigger and smaller. The other (filtering) affects the look of the graphics entirely.

[Enjay]

From a technical stand point they are certainly different, but I'd say that around the principle of what this thread is about (which is not about technicalities, so much as why are people so upset about that one setting in particular) they are at least similar. Both are examples of something that wasn't available in 1993, but which are available now. And while filtering does indeed affect the look of the graphics entirely, Doom still looks very different in high resolutions than it does at 320x200.

The reasons why some people find one acceptable and not the other can, perhaps, be explained by the end result of what they do, but I think simc is right - it's selective. Some people are happy to have a high resolution by default, but not texture filtering. Maybe there is even someone out there who likes filtering but not high resolutions. Maybe. Probably not.

It's their taste, and that's fine, but both are different compared to playing Doom in it's original presentation and people do choose what they want from those options.

I'm sure that there will also be people who claim that running at anything other than 320x200 is wrong.

[edward850]

Nah I'm pretty sure it's because they are two entirely different things. I'm actually honestly baffled that you somehow don't see them as two objectively different things, given the very blatant results. It makes me think you aren't actually talking about the thing I'm talking about, but then I don't know what else you could be talking about.
Either that or this is some kind of elaborate troll attempt and you're trying to disguise any change as somehow the same thing. But I really wouldn't think you would stoop that low.

[Enjay]

I'm pretty sure I said they were different.

And it's not just about art.

For example, playing Doom at high resolution makes it far easier to see things properly at a distance. At 320x200, a zombieman on the other side of an open area is a pixel or two: probably a green one sitting on top of a beige-green one. At high resolutions, unless he is very far way, he's still clearly discernable as a zombieman. That affects the player's ability to see and identify their targets - which has a direct impact on gameplay. So, I suggest that high resolution changes the game.


but...

It makes me think you aren't actually talking about the thing I'm talking about, but then I don't know what else you could be talking about.

I think you're right. I've tried to explain it. I'm not interested in the technicalities or the end result of the options or who likes what. I was asking about why it was that some people have been so invested in change in the default setting of something in the game. It's a sociology question, not a technical one. Why has this one thing been what has got som many people emotionally charged and feeling the need to say "finally we'll have texture filtering off by default" at every opportunity.

[edward850]

But it is just about art, that's all we have been talking about is art, that was the whole thing the texture filtering is art. Trying to change the subject into something that isn't about art is, well, changing the subject and is not what is being discussed.
Maybe that's why you're confused about why anyone cared about the default at all. People care about the art and how the art is presented. That's what this has all and only ever been about. Graf didn't care about how the art was presented to a new user, and that's finally been fixed.

[Enjay]

Sorry, you probably missed my edit.

The question was not about art - the reasons may be because of art, but my question was about why people have been so fixated on this one change - especially as it's something that is optional. Whether it's on or off by default, we can all change it to our preference. But somehow it being off by default was very important to some people. It's the question of why some people are so invested in the default setting that was intriguing me, not about the setting itself, but why it was such an emotive subject.

[edward850]

I caught the edit and updated accordingly.

[Enjay]

Just for the record (and I may already have stated this) I know that filtering changes things and it's certainly not what the artists had in mind when they made Doom. I've never disputed that, and it would certainly be hard to counter even if I wanted to (which I don't), given that you heard it directly from one of the artists anyway (or at least about the other games they worked on around that time).

I was just very surprised and intrigued that so many people's first, or early, reaction was "at least filtering will be off by default." I already knew that a lot of people didn't like filtering, that wasn't a surprise, but the fact that so many people were so invested in a default setting - one particular default setting - to the point that it was one of the first things they spoke about when hearing about UZDoom was a surprise to me, and I was asking why it might be, particularly as nothing is forced on anyone, it's just how things are set up when you first run the game.

Graf didn't care about how the art was presented to a new user, and that's finally been fixed.

I think Graf probably did care how it was presented, simply because he stuck to his guns and kept filtering on by default despite a lot of people asking for it to be changed. If he didn't care, then he could have changed it and it would have been immaterial to him. Maybe he didn't care that it was presenting the art in a way that wasn't intended by the artist, or maybe he felt it was more important to show that the engine could do texture filtering, but I don't know for sure and I'm not going to speak for him.

I could be wrong here, but I also find it hard to believe that so many people were that passionate about how a new user first saw the game. I mean when people learned about what was usually presented as a massive fall out and split in the Doom community, of one leading ports being demoted to "unofficial" and a new port taking the the "official" title for itself but, for many people, the first reaction wasn't shock, surprise, jubilation or dismay but "at least texture filtering will be off by default". Were they really thinking about the new users there?

[edward850]

Do you remember when Game Theorists posted that incredibly absurd video about Doom "not being 3D" based off a bunch of stuff they made up that was easily contradicted with... like any amount of research? Do you then remember when even Digital Foundry started quoting that video as through it was fact despite the easily researched information? It's basically that problem in a nutshell, nobody can know from the outside that "GZDoom defaults" is even a concept, they just see "popular source port for Doom" and load it up thinking it's already set up, because why wouldn't it be?

This has 100 problems in other different ways with newcomers doing mapping, about once a month I have to explain to someone that you can't use GZDoom to test a wad made for Doom+DoomII, but that's a much larger problem. The texture filtering was just the most obvious target that has been complained about by, well everyone. It wasn't so much about personal preferences but rather that the port was not putting its best foot forward.

[Enjay]

It wasn't everyone. I never complained about it. j/k

To answer "why wouldn't it be", I guess part of the (my) problem is my approach to setting up a game (or pretty much any software really). I always go into the options very early on. It's one of the first, if not the first, thing I do. I go right through the choices, pick the ones that I know I will want/need and make a mental note of any that I either don't know what they do or which I think I might need to re-visit. So, for me, the question isn't "why wouldn't it be" but "why would it be" because programs are very rarely set up how I need them. So, I'm not in the mindset of just accepting defaults. However, as discussed earlier, many people clearly are.

Edit: I hadn't remembered until you mentioned it, but I do remember that "Doom not being 3D" thing.

[Chris]

Do you remember when Game Theorists posted that incredibly absurd video about Doom "not being 3D" based off a bunch of stuff they made up that was easily contradicted with... like any amount of research? Do you then remember when even Digital Foundry started quoting that video as through it was fact despite the easily researched information? It's basically that problem in a nutshell, nobody can know from the outside that "GZDoom defaults" is even a concept, they just see "popular source port for Doom" and load it up thinking it's already set up, because why wouldn't it be?

Not sure what relevance that has. Doom "not being 3D" is just factually wrong, which as you say can be corrected by researching. But it's not factually wrong to think the game looks better with texture filtering, nor is it factually wrong to think it looks better without it, it's personal preference.

The texture filtering was just the most obvious target that has been complained about by, well everyone. It wasn't so much about personal preferences but rather that the port was not putting its best foot forward.

Far from everyone. Certainly not me, as I'm with Graf in thinking it (generally speaking) produces cleaner looking output. As alluded to before, filtering has been a touted feature of hardware Doom renderers since they started being a thing, well before GZDoom itself was started. The hardware renderer isn't and has never been for people looking for the same visuals as the original game, but to have more modern visuals. As much as some people can be super-bugged by blurry textures, others can be super-bugged by pixelated textures, and especially when mods for/with hi-res textures aren't an uncommon thing, or mods with textures taken from other games that do expect filtering, having the engine pre-configured for that as the default is far from a terrible idea (especially when it only affects the hardware renderer, something that already deviates from the game's original look, and is a common feature to see/expect in hardware 3D rendering). Whether or not it is the best idea is of course up to individual opinion, but I find it a bit pretentious to say it's not "It wasn't so much about personal preferences but rather that the port was not putting its best foot forward," when it is personal preference whether it looks better on or not.

If I'm being honest, it really feels like the sheer amount of fervor over the default setting is born from an anti-Graf sentiment. Since it was Graf himself that didn't want to change the default, people rally around it as something to point at and say "Graf's fault" without giving fair consideration to the merits of his position (and to be clear, I can understand that the way he may have expressed his desire to keep it on by default could rub people the wrong way, to focus on "Graf wants it that way"; I agree that Graf could be too antagonistic in his responses to the detriment of his relationship with the community). Certainly, there are people that really do prefer filtering off and think its better that way by default, just as there are people that prefer and think the opposite, but it feels to me that more people would just silently accept that they need to tweak one more of an endless number of options on the rare occasion of creating a new ini to suit their personal preferences, if a small group didn't rile up a fervor over it being Graf's decision, which encouraged more people to be unnecessarily vocal about it, to the point that it basically became a meme. If this was about maintaining the original game's visuals that the art was made for, the discussion should be about the software renderer being the default, or if it was about how unintuitive it is to navigate the menus to be able to turn it off/on, the discussion would be about how convoluted the menus are (which to be fair there is a discussion about, and there has been attempts at improving it, which unfortunately hasn't worked out the best but it's still on the radar), but the fact that it's only the default texture filtering mode that continues getting this much attention rather than those other issues related to it, makes it feel more personal rather than simply disagreeing on which would be a better default setting.

[bimshwel]

I never had a thought for what graf or anyone else thought about it before I turned it off. I didn't even have a clear idea who graf was, in fact, since I only switched to gzdoom after zandronum started giving me problems, and i only ever tried zandronum because an irrelevant but pushy person insisted on me testing a project that required it, and I was largely absent from this forum amidst that period. In part due to people who might have been SIMILAR to graf but i can't say if he was one of them, unless he had a south park avatar and a different name at that time.

[edward850]

If I'm being honest, it really feels like the sheer amount of fervor over the default setting is born from an anti-Graf sentiment.

Nah it's because the setting is wrong for the art, this has been well explained. It became an obvious point of the problem with Graf, but if Graf had just changed the setting then there would have been nothing to discuss. Nobody hated the texture filtering default just because Graf existed, that would be absurd and frankly un-provable as a position because it requires everyone else to prove a negative which you cannot do as evidence.

In part due to people who might have been SIMILAR to graf but i can't say if he was one of them, unless he had a south park avatar and a different name at that time.

That's Hotwax.

[bimshwel]

yes the point was that i dislike the filter and have a lingering irrational grievance with someone on the forum and these issues aren't related. But i DID notice at one point that the account seemed to be deactivated and sometimes wonder if he might have gotten another one, like I often see happen with conflict-prone persons on the stupid art sites that I use, and this reminded me of that.