3d floor emulation using Bridge Things

[Enjay]

Is there anything ZDoom can do that GZDoom can't?

A couple of graphical techniques such as bleeding textures into the floor. I'm not aware of anything particularly critical.

[Snarboo]

It's already possible.

Joking aside, that's a poor indicator for performance given that some people choose to run Doom in a lower resolution, ie me. I don't see any benefit to running GZDoom above 1024x768 unless a project is using high resolution textures and models, but hardly any project does. There's really an upper limit to how much detail you can squeeze out of an old 2.5D game with sprites.

[Graf Zahl]

That may be - but on modern TFT monitors it's the monitor that dictates the optimal resolution. It makes no sense to run such screens on anything but the native resolution.

[Enjay]

I don't see any benefit to running GZDoom above 1024x768...

On my old machine on its CRT, I often used to run (G)Zdoom at less than that - through choice rather than being forced to by hardware or performance considerations. However, on my new machine I don't. I run at 1920x1200. This is not so much because I can speed-wise but because the native resolution of my monitor is 1920x1200 and running it at other resolutions doesn't look as good, not because of what (G)Zdoom is doing but because of what the monitor is doing. So, there are good reasons for running at high resolutions that aren't related directly to (G)Zdoom or the content of a particular mod.

[Snarboo]

That may be - but on modern TFT monitors it's the monitor that dictates the optimal resolution. It makes no sense to run such screens on anything but the native resolution.

I still run the game at 1024x768 even though I'm using a widescreen laptop right now. I simply set an option with my video card that maintains proper aspect ratio. I see are black bars on the side but I can easily ignore that. I can understand setting the resolution to the monitor's default though.

[Chris]

Some released maps are marked as "GZDoom-only", as the author has decided to make use of GL-specific features. If it is only about GL visuals, such maps can generally be run with the software renderer too—not a big deal if a torch is unlit or something—but unfortunately, 3d floors is something that do impact the gameplay. Not only are they not made visible, but they are not even there. This puts a bit of a dent when you try to run through, for example, T667's "Sapphire".

We all know that the sw render probably won't change anytime soon, but would it be feasible to have the sw engine put Bridge Things over the particular area? In conjunction with bridge sprites (such as the ones Hexen uses), players would be able to at least see, be able to walk on the designated areas, and perhaps complete the map.

Back at the original topic.. I seem to recall the 3d floor collision code being imported (though disabled) into ZDoom, so that 3d floors would at least be functional, if not visible. Has any more gone into that to make it work?

Since ZDoom can't render the extra floors properly, I wonder if it would work to render just the walls of the 3d floor (properly clipped to the 3d floor's top and bottom). Then, caring mappers could put stippled walls inside the 3d floor, and GZDoom would show the floor/ceiling textures and ZDoom will show the stippled wall textures.

[Gez]

Back at the original topic.. I seem to recall the 3d floor collision code being imported (though disabled) into ZDoom, so that 3d floors would at least be functional, if not visible. Has any more gone into that to make it work?

The 3D physics code could be activated without problems in ZDoom - but the problem is that I don't want to do it until one particular lighting issue is resolved.

[Hirogen2]

If I did it like that, GZDoom would always pass the ZDoom check.

Is there anything ZDoom can do that GZDoom can't?

The software renderer can place sprites on the screen without problems, while they may get clipped in GL.

[Hirogen2]

That may be - but on modern TFT monitors it's the monitor that dictates the optimal resolution. It makes no sense to run such screens on anything but the native resolution.

Of course it makes sense. If the monitor stretches the picture, my (yes, old, but happy) graphics card does not have to. Rendering 1024×768 is rendering 2.5 times more pixels than 640×480. Then there is also HUD/status message fonts which obviously become smaller due to higher resolution—there probably is a configuration slider for that, but I do not see a reason to require it when 640×480 has fit me fine for years.

[Gez]

The software renderer can place sprites on the screen without problems, while they may get clipped in GL.

I bolded the dubious part. Let's just say the software renderer has a different set of problems.

If the monitor stretches the picture, my (yes, old, but happy) graphics card does not have to. Rendering 1024×768 is rendering 2.5 times more pixels than 640×480.

What's wrong with windowed mode anyway?

[Graf Zahl]

What's wrong with spending a tiny amount of money on one's hardware?

Seriously, every time I hear someone with obsolete hardware complaining about such issues but still insisting that said hardware 'works fine' I can't help but laugh.

[phi108]

My LCD TVs native resolution is 1360x768, and that slows down pretty much every program when I plug my laptop into it, Hardware accelerated or Software rendered.
And upgrading to a better laptop is 500$+.
But I'm Content running 640x480 or 800x600 with 16x9 aspect ratio forced, I don't need super-sharp video.

But even more off-topic, how do modern HD videogame consoles work on the framerate aspect? Do they go at slow FPS with such high resolutions, or do they have the power to do 60 FPS?

And do these consoles perform better at 720p as opposed to 1080p? And fastest with old non-HD tvs?

[Xaser]

What's wrong with spending a tiny amount of money on one's hardware?

Seriously, every time I hear someone with obsolete hardware complaining about such issues but still insisting that said hardware 'works fine' I can't help but laugh.

As do I when somebody goes and assumes that everybody actually has money...

[TheDarkArchon]

Do they go at slow FPS with such high resolutions, or do they have the power to do 60 FPS?

And do these consoles perform better at 720p as opposed to 1080p? And fastest with old non-HD tvs?

Most console games run at 30FPS rather than 60 but some games do run at 60FPS. Consoles will run better at 720p rather than 1080p since there's less pixels to render.

[Graf Zahl]

What's wrong with spending a tiny amount of money on one's hardware?

Seriously, every time I hear someone with obsolete hardware complaining about such issues but still insisting that said hardware 'works fine' I can't help but laugh.

As do I when somebody goes and assumes that everybody actually has money...

Laptops aside for a moment, I consider anything below Geforce 6800 obsolete by now. That's more of 4 years that have passed. A low end graphics card costing $/€30 will give anyone with something lower than a GF6800 a >100% performance boost. And please don't tell me that it's impossible to save such a measly amount of money over a year - or more if necessary.