Welcome to the ZDoom Forums!

Indecom wrote: If you want to experiment with this, have at it:
GIT Repo

You're not supposed to commit your locally-built files.

Only commit the modified source files.

See this for an example.

Oh this is far from ready for submission. I have a lot of work left to do. I've only committed it to my own git branch as a way of backing up my work. I'll take a look at that link and see how I'll need to do it when I'm actually ready for a pull request.

I would strongly suggest making the new lighting model a new type of dynamic light or light flag if you want this to have a possibility of getting accepted. Light adjustment cvars were dropped some time ago because they basically meant that map authors could never guarantee how their maps would look. Dark days indeed when mods needed "light calibration" intromaps and "make sure your light intensity cvar is set to 0.72 because that's what I used to design this". Lighting attenuation like this must be a modder-side option, not a user-side option.

That all said, the new attenuation model looks amazing. I've been wanting a more realistic light falloff for a while.

Caligari87 wrote:I would strongly suggest making the new lighting model a new type of dynamic light or light flag if you want this to have a possibility of getting accepted

I dont think this is a good idea.
I mean, most of gzdoom flaws can be easily fixed with something like this, but for some reason its still didnt fixed in this or another way. For example problem with the sign of pitch, which use left handed coordinate system to determine it sign (up negative, down positive) while all other gzdoom systems, and other programs and applications with space coordinate system, use right handed coordinate system which have reversed calculation of pitch (up positive, down negative).

That's not even remotely related to what I'm talking about.

I added them as CVars because I've been in communication with many of the GZDoom developers who suggested it. My goal is to make this so that the end user doesn't have to do any calibration whatsoever. It will all be author side settings that in the end will be set for the end user to not have to worry about. This is still very much work in progress code. If this is the wrong forum for that then I'll ask to have it moved. But I feel this is more than just a suggestion since I'm actively implementing these features.

My next steps for this are to incorporate the light attenuation settings into mapinfo.