Page 1 of 1

ZDoom 2.0.99x

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 19:49
by grubber
I've decided to base this release on ZDoom 2.0.99 (whose source code is available in a svn repository) because it contains a lot of bugfixes and is overall better than 2.0.98.

You can download first build here.

EDIT: Updated to 2.0.99 revision 78.
EDIT: Updated to revision 79.
EDIT: Updated to revision 83.

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 20:01
by TheDarkArchon
\o/

Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 0:26
by Galaxy_Stranger
YAAAAY!

Now all we need is client/server.

Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 0:41
by BlazingPhoenix
NO! (not about .99x...)

This is great Grubber, now I can tinker with all sorts of stuff :D

Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 11:38
by MartinHowe
Where can we report bugs? The latest version just starts up, blanks the screen then exits again! No errors or problems, just nothing; I had to use a "+logfile" argument to get this:

Code: Select all

Log started: Fri May 05 11:35:16 2006

 adding D:/zdoom99x/zdoom.pk3
 adding ./doom.wad (2306 lumps)
CPU Speed: 2595.586914 MHz
CPU Vendor ID: GenuineIntel
  Name: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.60GHz 4 CPU 2.60GHz
  Family 15, Model 2, Stepping 7
  Features: MMX SSE SSE2
I_InitSound: Initializing FMOD
  Setting DirectSound output succeeded
  Setting driver 0 succeeded
  Initialization succeeded
Resolution: 640 x 480
Init DOOM refresh subsystem.
Warning: ZWallTorchUnlit and ShortBlueTorch both have doomednum 55.

Posted: Fri May 05, 2006 15:24
by grubber
Not my fault, report it at zdoom forum. It seems Graf forgot something when converting hard-coded actors to decorate.

EDIT: Fixed

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 16:58
by Graf Zahl
That's what you get when you work with code that isn't officially released. ;)

And please don't use 2.0.99 as the version number. When people start posting crash logs for this without realizing it's unofficial we are going to have a problem. The same happened with the early 2.0.96x versions.

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 9:00
by MartinHowe
Interesting... have to keep an eye on this as it develops. Any chance of a change log in each archive? Scrawling through a huge diff file is not the easiest of ways to understand new features.

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 9:10
by grubber
I'll document everything soon.

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 17:39
by CSonicGo
wow. If all this gets added to GZDoom I will flip.

Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 9:13
by Graf Zahl
Galaxy_Stranger wrote:YAAAAY!

Now all we need is client/server.



Some people seem tho have the need to trivialize the most complex of matters... :?

Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 11:02
by Galaxy_Stranger
I don't recall having stated that this should/could be done over the weekend...

You presuppose that I mean to trivialize the concept. I was thinking broadly. I've waited nearly 10 years for zdoom to get this far. In terms of how enhanced the engine has become, we have many wonderful features to work with as it is.

We have GL rendering, we have "3D" floors, we have stereo sound, we have dynamic lighting effects, we have a scripting language with the hint of more to be delivered, we have "friendly" AI, we have "3D" water, we have scalable textures and sprites and probably a dozen other things. In fact, I can't imagine anything that ZDoom lacks. Not one thing. After all, client/server isn't really anything anybody would be interested in. The whole point of ZDaemon and Skulltag isn't client/server. People hated Quake because of client/server. In the grand scheme of things, I'd say that client/server is pretty low on the list of things to add. With client/server - you almost don't have to know ANYTHING about networking to play multiplayer. And that would be terrible! I think you should have to have at least an associate's degree in computer science in order to know how to play this game.

But, I'm sorry - it's all my fault. I should know better than to be positive and supportive of something I enjoy. I SHOULD have posted asking for someone to wipe my ass. THAT wouldn't have caught any attention. But I'm tired and I forgot that SOME people like to talk about other people in the third person and seem to have the need to go out of their way to rebuke people to make themselves feel superior.

From here on out, I promise to troll the forums, ready to bitch at people for no reason and to support the community by feeling better about myself by treating people like garbage. There is NOT enough sarcasm, frustration and hate in this community, and I mean to bring it back so that more and more people will come and share in our common interest, which is being treated like mindless inferiors. I know that they want to be force-fed feces and smacked in the face by a white-slave trader.

And THAT is what this community is all about. And THAT is why half the zdoom community left the zdoom boards. They simply weren't being abused enough.

Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 13:00
by Cutmanmike
That's enough.

A client/server would require a rewrite of the network code, as in Skulltag and Zdeamon. And since both creaters of Zdoom and Gzdoom don't really play multiplayer (according to my knowledge of Randy and Graf) they'd put it in thier "Low priority" or "Never" list. They created the ports, so they get to decide what comes and goes first.

I want the same as much as you with the Client/Server/Ingame joining etc, but we're not the coders here. Plus there are much more important things to worry about right now.

Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 13:15
by Graf Zahl
Client/Server would require much more of jusr rewriting the network code. I have once seen an old version of the ZDaemon source (leaked of course! ;)) and it required significant changes in seemingly unrelated portions. I am no network expert so I can't say whether such extensive changes are really necessary.

But doing this is *NOT(!)* a trivial task. On the contrary, this could keep a person busy for several months, maybe even longer. And I'm sorry to say but since I never have done any network programming whatsoever I can't do it.

Posted: Mon May 08, 2006 15:16
by Paul
That's a long post there :shock: