GZDoom Builder 2.3

[FoptionMapping]

This interface is horrible. Is there any way to return it back to it's original style, because I don't want to use an outdated version just for layouts.

[Sandro]

I must admit I'm kinda disappointed with this new textures browser as well.

1° - the grey square lines around each texture should be abandoned, like the previous browser did.
2° - the distinction between used textures and other textures should be increased.
For now there's too much contrast because of these two reasons to see textures correctly (in my opinion of course).

3° - In the textures menu, when you click on the wad, it should display all the textures of it instead of showing only the folders. It's just pointless not having so. (plus, the HD textures are not mixed with the others, but it should, as the sub-folders of the wad in the menu already allow you to choose to see them only)

After few days trying to be used to it, I've switched to the previous version, as it now takes too much time to distinguish the textures I want to use. I find it quite user-unfriendly, but again, that's just my opinion (although I see quite a lot of people complaining about it and -almost- no one praising it...).
However, I've to say it's a good improvement, except for those three reasons mentioned above. If you could fix them it would be awesome ! (Of course only if you agree it's a problem).

Finally, I'm kinda disappointed with the memory taken since the new browser came : now it uses twice the memory it used previously (up to 800Mo instead of 400Mo).

[jute]

I'm interested in playing with the new terrain import feature, but I have no idea how to work with the OBJ format. Is there any simple way to convert a grayscale heightmap image to an OBJ, or are there any plans to allow the importing of heightmap images?

[Xabis]

Removing post, as i was mistaken.

[Kappes Buur]

I like the new texture browser, except, as Sandro already mentioned, the outlines should be gone

---

Everything in one place, used textures displayed with a coloured name.

[MaxED]

The outlines should be gone

You guys keep mentioning it, yet nobody have provided a reason WHY they should be gone. Also removing them will require aligning texture names to the middle of the image, because otherwise they will look strange and HORRIBLE.

[kodi]

I'm interested in playing with the new terrain import feature, but I have no idea how to work with the OBJ format. Is there any simple way to convert a grayscale heightmap image to an OBJ, or are there any plans to allow the importing of heightmap images?

That's what I did!
guide for blender

[ZZYZX]

The outlines should be gone

You guys keep mentioning it, yet nobody have provided a reason WHY they should be gone.

Because they mix with the texture itself and distract you.
Side node, was that texture browser idea taken from Quake map editors? It's horrible. Don't take ideas from Radiants, ever, these have the worst GUI in id Tech mapping history.
Also, aligning texture names to the middle is ok, that's what it looked like before IIRC.

Also, on the GUI, I'm currently trying to implement a new settings window framework instead of the current stuff, that would look like Visual Studio settings for example (large category tree on the left, flags/fields on the right, instead of 5-6 tabs).
This would free you from the need to achieve GUI design miracles while trying to fit all the relevant settings in one tab, and should make it easier to add settings in the future, remembering that you told me that "adding a setting is hard".
Besides, plugins then could add their own settings to that tree by providing an embedding container object.
Do you think you'd accept that if it's done?

[Enjay]

I guess I'm weird, I quite like the new texture browser.

[Nash]

I'm also okay with the new texture browser, although granted, I'm not much of a "power mapper" and probably haven't mapped enough for this to affect me negatively...

[MaxED]

Side node, was that texture browser idea taken from Quake map editors?

From Sledge, actually, both idea and implementation

"adding a setting is hard".

Adding a setting is not hard. Keeping all existing settings in mind while adding new stuff, testing said new stuff with all possible combinations of settings and figuring out which settings need to be set to reproduce a bug reported by a user are exhausting.

plugins then could add their own settings to that tree by providing an embedding container object.

Plugins can already add additional tabs to the settings tab control. BuilderModes does this.

[ZZYZX]

This is how the texture selection window looks in a generic Quake-related editing tool:

"adding a setting is hard".

Adding a setting is not hard. Keeping all existing settings in mind while adding new stuff, testing said new stuff with all possible combinations of settings and figuring out which settings need to be set to reproduce a bug reported by a user are exhausting.

Well it's still hard to implement detailed settings given 6 tabs and a 800x600 window. Hence that idea I had, first I simply wanted to add an option for old (or at least similar) texture browser, but then I realized that settings are organized in a way that pretty much prevents adding anything. Except perhaps maybe few checkboxes on Interface tab, but then again, it should be in Appearance.

[MaxED]

This is how the texture selection window looks in a generic Quake-related editing tool

Yet somehow TrenchBroom threads are not brimming with people crying "TEH TEHTUERS BORSER IS HORRIBUL!!!" To be honest, I haven't seen anyone there complaining about it.

Well it's still hard to implement detailed settings given 6 tabs and a 800x600 window. Hence that idea I had, first I simply wanted to add an option for old (or at least similar) texture browser, but then I realized that settings are organized in a way that pretty much prevents adding anything. Except perhaps maybe few checkboxes on Interface tab, but then again, it should be in Appearance.

Don't forget to add a SETTING to use the old Preferences window, because, you know, there's always a guy or two who wouldn't like the new one and wouldn't stop complaining about it.

[Kappes Buur]

You guys keep mentioning it, yet nobody have provided a reason WHY they should be gone.

I find the outlines very confusing and unsettling, to the point that it strains my eyes trying to select a texture.

Similar to this

Other than that, I do like the new texture browser.

[Enjay]

And conversely, I like the outlines because, to my eye, they separate the textures nicely.

I hope the texture browser in that oone that ZZYZX posted is resizeable. I'd hate to have to work with a tiny texture browser like that.