If you appreciate the work done within the wiki, please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support!

Talk:Doom (PC, 1993)

From The Cutting Room Floor
Jump to navigation Jump to search

SNES text

There's a string of text in the SNES version of Doom,

Rage/Reality Engine written by Randy Linden.�Special thanks to my loving wife, Jodi Harvey.

...but I don't know where to put it. --Syniphas 11:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)

Doom/Doom II split

I know Doom and Doom 2 essentially run on the same engine and all, but do they really need to be mushed together like this? I think some of the references to the German MAP31/32 secret should be in its own article, and Doom 2 probably has some unused content and various level revisions. (My two cents, anyway.) -TonicBH 07:38, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Bringing this back up because Inuyasha is talking about it on IRC. Which of the things here are Doom and which are Doom II anyway? The article doesn't note - Andlabs 18:16, 14 June 2012 (EDT)
The only part that's from Doom 2 is the Regional Differences section. --From: divingkataetheweirdo 18:37, 14 June 2012 (EDT)
This article should cover all of the Doom games that can be run on the same executable. You'd just have to duplicate all of the engine differences to three different articles otherwise. If differences between versions in individual games gets out of hand, they can always get subpages. Speaking of that, here's a wonderful series of videos that covers all of the map changes: Doom Historic --Dragonsbrethren 02:02, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
Whether they use the same code or not is irrelevant, they are fundamentally different games.
SMB1 and SMB2J shouldn't be lumped into the same page even though the latter is practically a romhack of the former and nothing more, why do these two games get treated like this? 犬夜叉(Inuyasha) 02:23, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
+1 to the split. They may use the same engine, but they were sold separately, years apart. We don't lump together the Source engine-based games despite them using the same basic executable - hl2.exe ;) // Foxhack 14:14, 10 October 2012 (EDT)

Go drop the hl2.exe for the latest version of HL2 into TF2's directory and tell me what happens. It ain't gonna run. Filenames mean nothing. Your comparison is more apt for Heretic and Doom; mostly the same code, but in no way compatible with each other. All three Doom games run on the exact same code by design; Doom and Doom 2 even ship with the same executable from 1.666 to 1.9. The later versions of the engine only came packed with Ultimate or Final, but are still backwards compatible with the older versions. Separating the article just means the bulk of the information for each game will be identical; the vast majority of changes were made engine-side and the game data was left untouched. --Dragonsbrethren 15:23, 10 October 2012 (EDT)

That's a question: Do the Doom II WADs contain any of the unused data from Doom I and they are still unused? Even if the engine code is identical... are they still not separate games? - Andlabs 15:28, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
Better way to state the question: are Doom and Doom II identical only because they use the same executable? Is any of the data mentioned here in the executable and not in the WADs? - Andlabs 15:30, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
Doom 2 contains all of the unused data from Doom except that which was removed from early version updates (the "removed graphics" subsection.) A Doom 2 article would be entirely redundant. --Devin 15:32, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
Devin replied while I was typing this and basically summed up the same thing, but here's what's identical between versions:
  • Debug mode.
  • The ouch face code.
  • A frame of the green and yellow sprite sphere is used in Doom 2
  • Medikit message.
  • Unused quit messages.
  • Automap asteroids.
  • Any revisional difference from 1.666 (and some as early as 1.4, despite Doom 2's release engine being 1.666) on applies to all games.
That's almost all of the article's content. Which is why I think subpages for each game's data changes (comparatively little, with the exception of early versions of Doom) would be better, and that is probably why the article was written to cover both games in the first place. If you give each game its own article, you're just duplicating all of this three times. --Dragonsbrethren 15:57, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
So I take it this discussion is over? I'm disappointed with that Doom 2 article; the links are worse than duplicating the content. I still don't understand why this had to be split, rather than just redirecting the Doom 2 title to the same article. --Dragonsbrethren 19:56, 10 October 2012 (EDT)
Wait, who made the decision? I was only asking what was the scope of the overlapping data - Andlabs 22:49, 10 October 2012 (EDT)

Ouch! face

Yes, i already got a message about this, but still, my Doom and Doom II show this "Ouch!" face without any bugs. Can someone explain. I'm not sure about the version of my Dooms, BTW.

  • Zdoom/Gzdoom and any other modern source ports reinstated the ouch face to be rendered, it is unused only in Vanilla Doom. Jiterdomer (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2013 (EST)

Unused GENMIDI FM Timbres

Can it count as unused content if there are songs in Doom or Doom II that never use certain instruments? Haven't figured out how to determine this yet though. FM timbres are typically explicitly defined by the GENMIDI lump included with the game data. -HsienKo 19:19, 27 February 2013 (EST)

Unused BFG9000 frames? and Mancubus/Revenant fireball

Huh. I noticed in the Doom 2 IWAD, BFGGC0 appears to be an unused sprite of the BFG recoiling. The firing sprites are supposed to display alongside this but it never happens and it just fires through the second animation (BFGGB0). Granted, I noticed this in ZDoom and can't be arsed to find my Doom 2 CD.

Also, is it notable that the Revenant fireball is listed as FATBAXXX (same as the other Mancubus sprites), while much earlier in the listing is the proper Mancubus fireball as MANFAXXX? This implies the Revenant fireball was the original Mancubus projectile. West (talk) 20:05, 10 April 2015 (EDT)

Version Backstory

Because I have no idea where this even goes, it will be on here for some time.

DooM was originally written as a UNIX program for the NeXT. The editor, which AFAIK was never released, 
was called 'DoomEd' and was a NeXTstep-specific program. The port to the IBM PC occurred later for the 
commercial release, as few people could afford a NeXT (or a UNIX machine in general, for that matter). 
This could occur because the game itself is a general UNIX program, as are some programs later released 
(idbsp, the original node builder, is one of them). UNIX is itself general enough to be a good base 
for porting.

Versions for other Unices were released, and a windows (as in, 16-bit) port was in the works ("WinDoom"). 
Ports to other platforms also happened.

The code that current source ports are based on is derived from the linuxdoom source code, as ported by ddt
and cleaned up by a guy who promised to write a book on the source code, but never quite did.

In all, to say that DooM's IBM PC version is 'original' is quite a stretch. It's a UNIX program. The port
to the IBM PC is not exactly incidental, but UNIX is what it was written for.

Besides, 'PC' can just as well refer to a Macintosh, or, with only a bit of a stretch, the Amiga. 
It's a category, not a platform.

        --zeurkous, 2016/05/22 12:18:14.

--From: divingkataetheweirdo (talk) 00:54, 23 May 2016 (EDT)

It doesn't line up:
  • Doom's dos version didn't "occur later for the commercial release" , as you can tell with many DOS-based prototype this site covers, especially when the commercial release happened in 1995 with The Ultimate Doom.
  • DoomEd DID get a release.
-HsienKo (talk) 19:12, 23 May 2016 (EDT)
@HsienKo:

It does add up, at least to me. To respond to your points:

 1a. Ports of earlier versions to the IBM PC were indeed done, probably
     on a routine basis. For each such version, it is still 'later'.
     I apologize for the confusion.

 1b. It depends on what you call the 'commercial release'. The UNIX
     world tends to be decidedly acommercial.

 2.  I said 'AFAIK'. Aren't you confusing it, though, with the third-
     party editor that IIRC was released under the same name (presumably
     the author was unaware of the name of the original editor)?

Furthermore, I did not expect Leo_TCK to post my misgivings in their
entirety. I suppose I'm fine with that, but I'd probably have written
them down with a little more care, had I realized he would.

Sorry for that.

        --zeurkous, 2016/05/23 23:25:39.
-Leo TCK (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2016 (EDT)
I have to refer to this and this. But I can't find any original links to this anymore that aren't dead, so this was released indeed as a sourcecode at least. -Leo TCK (talk) 09:03, 24 May 2016 (EDT)
Did archive.org at least archive these places? Because it would be nice to verify at least some of these. Also, you may want to work up on your formatting. --From: divingkataetheweirdo (talk) 05:53, 24 May 2016 (EDT)
I got this however: here I cannot post links without the spam protection thing which doesn't work entirely right on me, that's why.

-Leo TCK (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2016 (EDT)

On the DoomEd stuff: I stand corrected.

        --zeurkous, 2016/05/24 18:08:13.

-Leo_TCK (talk) 14:14, 24 May 2016 (EDT)

Unofficial Releases

What about John Romero's "SIGIL" and Christian Klie's "The Lost Episodes Of Doom"? They're mapsets that you could pay for (SIGIL had a special edition, and TLEOD was sold alongside a book), should we document them in another page? Fuck Milk -Maggie 19:00, 28 October 2021 (UTC)