ZDoom 2.8.0 and ACC 1.55 released

[Csonicgo]

I want to personally thank Blzut3, Graf, kcat/Chris, Eevee, Quasar, and the two Edwards for helping me and others on getting this running on ARM platforms. There are still a few things to iron out (as we all know by now) but it's pretty much "there". It's been quite a ride!

[Eevee]

Alrighty, I merged the extra things I found into both the wiki and my post earlier in the thread. Surely still not exhaustive, but touches on everything I'm aware of.

Also, the news post links to the "Next version" section on the wiki, rather than "2.8.0". Oops.

[Monsterovich]

Linux now uses SDL2 which can produce less frame jitter with high frame rates, has some vsync support, and fullscreen is now a "desktop fullscreen" mode.

So..
- SDL_FULLSCREEN_DESKTOP is a crap that works 3x times slower than normal fullscreen. Feel the difference between zdoom 2.8 (SDL2.0) and zandronum 2.* (SDL.1.2) I have cl_capfps false and vsync is off.
- You blocked SDL_FULLSCREEN_WINDOW that's better than SDL_FULLSCREEN_DESKTOP. It works a bit faster (I have ~55fps with it), but SDL1.2 fullscreen is faster than both. Plus, I tried to use it, but SDL_FULLSCREEN_WINDOW has this bug.
- In SDL 2.0 Alt+Tab works randomly or just doesn't work at all.
- So, SDL devs just removed true fullscreen from SDL 2.0, now it's just unusable.

Conclusion: SDL 1.2 > SDL 2.0

[Edward-san]

So..
- SDL_FULLSCREEN_DESKTOP is a crap that works 3x times slower than normal fullscreen. Feel the difference between zdoom 2.8 (SDL2.0) and zandronum 2.* (SDL.1.2) I have cl_capfps false and vsync is off.
- You blocked SDL_FULLSCREEN_WINDOW that's better than SDL_FULLSCREEN_DESKTOP. It works a bit faster (I have ~55fps with it), but SDL1.2 fullscreen is faster than both. Plus, I tried to use it, but SDL_FULLSCREEN_WINDOW has this bug.
- In SDL 2.0 Alt+Tab works randomly or just doesn't work at all.
- So, SDL devs just removed true fullscreen from SDL 2.0, now it's just unusable.

Conclusion: SDL 1.2 > SDL 2.0

Something like this should have been reported to the bugs forum, but it seems you knew this for a long time and never bothered to report. Why didn't you do that earlier? There could be a chance it would've been fixed before zdoom 2.8 release.

[Monsterovich]

Why didn't you do that earlier?

Because ZDoom has "great" quality control.

[Graf Zahl]

Conclusion: Intelligent > Monsterovich

So tell us, smartass, how are we supposed to do anything about such a problem if you keep it secret?

[Csonicgo]

Why didn't you do that earlier?

Because ZDoom has "great" quality control.

We can't fix what we don't know about.

[Monsterovich]

Conclusion: Intelligent > Monsterovich
So tell us, smartass, how are we supposed to do anything about such a problem if you keep it secret?

Oh, yes. This will probably fix this issue!!!

You should've tested it before release.

[wildweasel]

Why didn't you do that earlier?

Because ZDoom has "great" quality control.

And I could say the same about the quality of your posting. Remember that's the entire point of the bugs forum, because the devs don't necessarily know every in and out of what the program does for everyone.

And I don't care if you have some kind of grudge. You've been warned about that once before.

[GooberMan]

I've yet to see an OS handle fullscreen exclusive mode as well as Windows Vista and onwards does. Program crashes unexpectedly? Your desktop settings aren't stomped over.

I suppose this is a moot point though amirite???

[Csonicgo]

Conclusion: Intelligent > Monsterovich
So tell us, smartass, how are we supposed to do anything about such a problem if you keep it secret?

Oh, yes. This will probably fix this issue!!!

You should've tested it before release.

A lot of us. All the time. Tested this. Personally, I tested the SDL2 code for months!

I never noticed any "framerate dips" or loss of performance - I saw an increase in performance. That's why we went to SDL2 in the first place! Of course there are always configurations that may not play fair, we would love to know about those so we can figure out what's wrong.

[Major Cooke]

And now to re-rail this cargo train.

So... Anyone looking forward to Zandronum catching up?

[Captain Ventris]

Because the devs are being paid and just sit around poking at ZDoom all day, right? That's why they should definitely know everything.

Monsterovich is the same type of idiot who whines incessantly about politicians and refuses to vote or take any other sort of action.

Now, I don't want to hyperbolize, but you probably deserve every bad thing that happens to you.

[Monsterovich]

I never noticed any "framerate dips" or loss of performance - I saw an increase in performance.

I love these linux users who are saying: "all works for me!!!" But I don't believe in magic like this. Plus, not all of PCs have 4 core 3.2ghz processors.

[Zhs2]

And now to re-rail this cargo train.

So... Anyone looking forward to Zandronum catching up?

I personally am in the camp of desiring every single improvement that can be offered to ZDoom's current netplay schema. Sure, it seems really clunky to about 90% of end-users, but it was the system Doom was built in the mind of, and if you can get it to connect and run via port forwarding and all that advanced jazz, it just *works*. Little hassle actually playing, no losing all of your progress if you have a bad connection (ZDoom will actually try to keep reconnecting if possible and the only fault is the networking), the ability to save at any time and share those saves in the case something goes wrong, and sure it performs only as well as the connection between x amount of people but sometimes you just don't want that many people fragging up your multiplayer experience! For small groups of people, (G)ZDoom is my goto, and pretty much the only multiplayer Doom I've had since my college days where Skulltag HR2 survival servers were the shit (sure, you didn't win unless you were a super badass, especially once the server reached MAP15, but hey, good times.)

I love these linux users who are saying: "all works for me!!!" But I don't believe in magic like this. Plus, not all of PCs have 4 core 3.2ghz processors.

Hehe, I'd love to see ARM processors with those kinds of specs.