Does it requires too beefy hardware?
“Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
71–80 of 125 posts
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's quite possible that the way you played Doom was not ideal. Chocolate Doom is a project focused on making vanilla Doom look and feel right on modern hardware. https://www.chocolate-doom.org/wiki/index.php/About
Crispy Doom is better. It's almost as purist as Choco but it allows you to play Boom compatible IWADs well. Also, Hexen and Strife. So FreeDoom + all of the Boom compatible PWADs will work. Today most Vanilla [AKA non-Zdoom] targetings PWAD's will require a Boom/limit removing compatible engine, that's the gold standard.
Crispy Doom is not Boom compatible. Chocolate also builds for Hexen, Heretic and Strife. "Vanilla" usually doesn't imply Boom (Boom isn't even backwards compatible with Doom) but perhaps limit removing.
It also seems like you are missing GP's point. "Better" is a loaded word because it implies a quality by which to measure, but Chocolate is better than Crispy for the exact purpose GP suggests it; it's more accurate in terms of the presentation and limitations of the original. Chocolate looks, sounds and plays like the original, with few compromises.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#73Is it okay if I occupy the following ideological niche: 1. I love original doom. 2. I am very excited about what ray-tracing can do for games. 3. I have a ton of respect for doom modders and the doubtless huge amount of effort that went into this project. 4. I hate how this looks and wouldn't play it except as a curiosity To me, the original doom was a piece of art, tuned by artists (I'll say it!) to look a certain w…
This is a bit of a meta-comment, but why do these downer comments fastidiously festooned in the language of plausibly-deniable faux-amicability end up at the top? The right answer to “harmless cool thing that others enjoy but I have zero interest in” is nothing. This is dope, a lot of people seem to think so. It’s not your cup of tea, fine. You’re allowed to say nothing.
[deleted]
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bit of a meta-comment, but why do these downer comments fastidiously festooned in the language of plausibly-deniable faux-amicability end up at the top? The right answer to “harmless cool thing that others enjoy but I have zero interest in” is nothing. This is dope, a lot of people seem to think so. It’s not your cup of tea, fine. You’re allowed to say nothing.
The right answer is whatever the heck they want to say. As someone who agrees strongly with them I appreciate having my point of view represented.
You feel appreciative that someone had the gumption and integrity to stand up to the lemming-like groundswell of mindless drones corrupting the legacy of Id by a DOOM mod?
You realize that while Romero was the one pushing for WAD in particular, Carmack backed him all the way. To the point of open-sourcing the engines. To the point of threatening to quit on multiple occasions if anyone tried to patent-encumber any of the Id intellectual property? Adrian Carmack (no relation) was also totally onboard.
The right answer is to know things about things before saying things about them. For Christ’s sake they made a book about this shit legible to people who don’t understand the 1/sqrt trick.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
The right answer is whatever the heck they want to say. As someone who agrees strongly with them I appreciate having my point of view represented.
You feel appreciative that someone had the gumption and integrity to stand up to the lemming-like groundswell of mindless drones corrupting the legacy of Id by a DOOM mod? You realize that while Romero was the one pushing for WAD in particular, Carmack backed him all the way. To the point of open-sourcing the engines. To the point of threatening to quit on multiple occasions if anyone tried to patent-encumber any of…
I feel like you misinterpreted the initial comment and you’re now using that as a reason to go on your own unrelated rant. Nobody said that Doom mods are bad or that they’re corrupting Id’s legacy or even that this specific Doom mod was a mistake. They just don’t like the way it looks, that’s it. It’s not that big of a deal.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#76Is it okay if I occupy the following ideological niche: 1. I love original doom. 2. I am very excited about what ray-tracing can do for games. 3. I have a ton of respect for doom modders and the doubtless huge amount of effort that went into this project. 4. I hate how this looks and wouldn't play it except as a curiosity To me, the original doom was a piece of art, tuned by artists (I'll say it!) to look a certain w…
This is a bit of a meta-comment, but why do these downer comments fastidiously festooned in the language of plausibly-deniable faux-amicability end up at the top? The right answer to “harmless cool thing that others enjoy but I have zero interest in” is nothing. This is dope, a lot of people seem to think so. It’s not your cup of tea, fine. You’re allowed to say nothing.
I don't mind the downer comments because they provide information. Even if I think this is impressive and awesome, I don't want to see the top comment "this is impressive and awesome!" That's a low information comment.
High information comments don't have to be critical but they often are. Because it's saying something in opposition to the original post. That's why you often see threads that go back and forth between criticism and response. If you agree, you don't need to say anything.
This guy doesn't have zero interest in it. He mentioned he loves doom, the technology and modders but thinks this takes away from the intended well crafted aesthetic value of the game.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#77Is it okay if I occupy the following ideological niche: 1. I love original doom. 2. I am very excited about what ray-tracing can do for games. 3. I have a ton of respect for doom modders and the doubtless huge amount of effort that went into this project. 4. I hate how this looks and wouldn't play it except as a curiosity To me, the original doom was a piece of art, tuned by artists (I'll say it!) to look a certain w…
A super cool mod, but agreed. They could have added more ambient light and make the raytracing effect more subtle and probably much prettier, with just a few lines of code. Some areas and shadows became way too dark.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
You feel appreciative that someone had the gumption and integrity to stand up to the lemming-like groundswell of mindless drones corrupting the legacy of Id by a DOOM mod? You realize that while Romero was the one pushing for WAD in particular, Carmack backed him all the way. To the point of open-sourcing the engines. To the point of threatening to quit on multiple occasions if anyone tried to patent-encumber any of…
I feel like you misinterpreted the initial comment and you’re now using that as a reason to go on your own unrelated rant. Nobody said that Doom mods are bad or that they’re corrupting Id’s legacy or even that this specific Doom mod was a mistake. They just don’t like the way it looks, that’s it. It’s not that big of a deal.
I didn’t misinterpret anything. OP saw an opportunity to take a shot at something and get some replies, fair play that’s what HNers do when we’re bored, myself included.
I saw someone talking nonsense about a topic I’m versed in and snapped them off at the stem over it, also what HNers do when they’re bored.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#79Is it okay if I occupy the following ideological niche: 1. I love original doom. 2. I am very excited about what ray-tracing can do for games. 3. I have a ton of respect for doom modders and the doubtless huge amount of effort that went into this project. 4. I hate how this looks and wouldn't play it except as a curiosity To me, the original doom was a piece of art, tuned by artists (I'll say it!) to look a certain w…
This is a bit of a meta-comment, but why do these downer comments fastidiously festooned in the language of plausibly-deniable faux-amicability end up at the top? The right answer to “harmless cool thing that others enjoy but I have zero interest in” is nothing. This is dope, a lot of people seem to think so. It’s not your cup of tea, fine. You’re allowed to say nothing.
Because people like me vote them up, because we prefer interesting, informed critique rather than uncritical positive support.
Re: “Can it run Doom” will never be the same, thanks to new ray-tracing mod
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
It reminded me a bit of the Star Wars Special Edition fiasco - puttng 90's CGI into a 70's movie looked bad at the time and terrible now. The footage I saw of this gave me a similar mismatched feeling though I agree it's technically impressive.
Thank God despecialised edition exists!
Very hard to get hold of though.