Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
Did you miss your
activation email
?
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Home
About
Team
Rules
Stats
Status
Sitemap
Chat
Downloads
Forum
News
Our Projects
Major Community Projects
Recent Posts
Unread Posts
Replies
Tools
SourceCoder3
Other Things...
Omnimaga Radio
TI-83 Plus ASM File Unsquisher
Z80 Conversion Tools
IES TI File Editor
Free RAM areas
Comprehensive Getkeyr table
URL Shortener
Online Axe Tilemap Editor
Help
Contact Us
Change Request
Report Issue/Bug
Team
Articles
Members
View the memberlist
Search For Members
Buddies
Login
Register
Omnimaga
»
Forum
»
Calculator Community
»
Other Calc-Related Projects and Ideas
»
TI 68K
»
Doom89!
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
2
3
...
15
Go Down
Author
Topic: Doom89! (Read 42931 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
AaroneusTheGreat
Moderator
LV5
Advanced (Next: 300)
Posts: 287
Rating: +26/-1
Doom89!
«
on:
July 30, 2007, 07:17:00 pm »
Hello everyone, as you might (probably) already know, I am working on porting Doom95 to the 68k series. I started this topic to let the people who do not frequent the other boards where I've been talking about this know whats going on. Also this is the place to post your opinions, ideas and general discussion about this project.
Here's my
http://tifreakware.net/atg/index.htm
which will have the public release beta on it, it's a tad buggy and really only there to give you a feel for what the game will be like at this point. The current beta with all the bug fixes and nifty new features is only available to beta testers right now, so if you want to see it now, you kinda have to volunteer to beta test for me. It's not a labor intensive job, just tell me if anything goes wrong and any opinions you have or ideas for the game.
Hope you all enjoy Doom89 as much as I have enjoyed building it. I hope to have the whole game finished in a month or two. (probably counting from the time I get my good computer up and running again :ihatemypc:
)
Logged
DJ Omnimaga
Clacualters are teh gr33t
CoT Emeritus
LV15
Omnimagician (Next: --)
Posts: 55943
Rating: +3154/-232
CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
Doom89!
«
Reply #1 on:
July 31, 2007, 12:23:00 am »
I saw some screenies, it was awesome. It reminds me of Oblivion and Arena 3D, so i'm sure to download it when it's done ^^. Will you have variable wall height, aka, more Doom style than Wolfeinstein 3D?
Logged
AaroneusTheGreat
Moderator
LV5
Advanced (Next: 300)
Posts: 287
Rating: +26/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #2 on:
July 31, 2007, 03:07:00 am »
Unfortunately no, there's currently no 3D engine that supports that for the 68k series. Perhaps if I become more skilled (much more) I could attempt to build one. But as of now, there's only one good engine, the FAT engine, and FAT stands for Fixed Angle Texturing, meaning all walls and corners and such are 90 degrees and there's no variable Z axis.
But so far I think I've been making due pretty well.
When I have my good computer back I'll be advancing this project much faster.
Btw DJ, do you have the time/interest to do a little beta testing? If so just let me know in a PM or something.
Logged
MechaTech84
Guest
Doom89!
«
Reply #3 on:
July 31, 2007, 04:22:00 am »
It looks good from what i could see from the screenies. (I don't have an 89...) I haven't played the original but I've played the ipod linux version. it matches up quite nicely in terms of graphics. (as good as black and white can get...)
Logged
DJ Omnimaga
Clacualters are teh gr33t
CoT Emeritus
LV15
Omnimagician (Next: --)
Posts: 55943
Rating: +3154/-232
CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
Doom89!
«
Reply #4 on:
July 31, 2007, 12:11:00 pm »
The original doom was fun for its time. i think there's graphic enhancement mods now as well out there
Logged
AaroneusTheGreat
Moderator
LV5
Advanced (Next: 300)
Posts: 287
Rating: +26/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #5 on:
August 15, 2007, 07:58:00 am »
Yes there are, there's a bunch of them, in fact I have one that converts Doom2 to a raytracer version of goldeneye.
NEWS:
I will be releasing a 28 level public beta soon, It has entered testing today and I expect that it should be ready for release in a couple of weeks at the most.
Logged
DJ Omnimaga
Clacualters are teh gr33t
CoT Emeritus
LV15
Omnimagician (Next: --)
Posts: 55943
Rating: +3154/-232
CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
Doom89!
«
Reply #6 on:
August 15, 2007, 04:20:00 pm »
28 levels??? o.o
and your avatar is broken
Logged
Halifax
LV9
Veteran (Next: 1337)
Posts: 1334
Rating: +2/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #7 on:
August 15, 2007, 04:42:00 pm »
QuoteBegin-AaroneusTheGreat+31 Jul, 2007, 9:07-->
QUOTE
(AaroneusTheGreat @ 31 Jul, 2007, 9:07)
Unfortunately no, there's currently no 3D engine that supports that for the 68k series. Perhaps if I become more skilled (much more) I could attempt to build one. But as of now, there's only one good engine, the FAT engine, and FAT stands for Fixed Angle Texturing, meaning all walls and corners and such are 90 degrees and there's no variable Z axis.
But so far I think I've been making due pretty well.
When I have my good computer back I'll be advancing this project much faster.
Btw DJ, do you have the time/interest to do a little beta testing? If so just let me know in a PM or something.
Once you get to that more skilled place, which I personally think you are at now, then you should check out gamedev.net. They have an article that explains in great depth on how to improve raycasting. There improved version of raycasting eliminates the need for all walls to be the same height, 90 degree angles, and some other things.
http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article872.asp
Logged
There are 10 types of people in this world-- those that can read binary, and those that can't.
AaroneusTheGreat
Moderator
LV5
Advanced (Next: 300)
Posts: 287
Rating: +26/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #8 on:
August 15, 2007, 06:01:00 pm »
I'll check it out. One thing that would be a problem is screen size. The FAT engine only really has good fps rates with most games because it only draws to a 96*96 pixel drawing plane. If I were to create my own engine and have it not be limited to the 90* fixed angle, then I'd either have to cut down on the screen size, which would be unacceptable. It'd be too hard to see. Or I'd have to cut down on speed or functionality.
That said, if I really study up on the internals of raycasting I may learn a thing or two to make something like this possible.
I think what I should do first is finish Doom89
Then I'll study up on trig, raycasting, linear algebra and some advanced C, and then I'll get back to you on that.
I'll be starting a C++ course in four days so that should be some extra practice on top of this project. C++ and C are nearly the same, and most of the syntax carries over.
In fact I might just buy some books on C, I already have one on C++, that I never really read, and now that I'm no longer such a noob and understand a few things I think I'll pick it up and read a little.
I'm rambling now, sorry.
The engine idea, while a little premature at this point is still plausible so I'll look into it. %)
(you know what's kind of funny, this is by no means the first time someone suggested this to me. I don't get it really, I'm no programming guru by a long shot.
)
Logged
Halifax
LV9
Veteran (Next: 1337)
Posts: 1334
Rating: +2/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #9 on:
August 15, 2007, 06:33:00 pm »
I would sacrifice speed for an engine that is more advanced than FAT. It wouldn't really matter to me.
Also I do find that syntax carries over from C to C++, but I find it hard to port C programs to C++ in the way they *should* be ported. With classes and getters and setters and encapsulations and all that crap. I personally prefer C by far to C++ although it is much easier to make an engine in C++.
Maybe once I take trigonometry and learn some more OpenGL I will shift to C++ so I can develop a 3D engine.
Logged
There are 10 types of people in this world-- those that can read binary, and those that can't.
necro
LV9
Veteran (Next: 1337)
Posts: 1295
Rating: +17/-2
+3 vaporal mustache
Doom89!
«
Reply #10 on:
August 16, 2007, 01:13:00 am »
I didn't see any zombies in the screen shot, and why did the imps die to their explosion/overkill animation instead of thier normal death animation from just being shot. I alos never noticed any fire balls from them.
Logged
I'm like a woot burger with awesome fries
VB.Net, C#, C++, Java, Game Maker
AaroneusTheGreat
Moderator
LV5
Advanced (Next: 300)
Posts: 287
Rating: +26/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #11 on:
August 17, 2007, 10:11:00 am »
The Zombies show up a little later, around level 3. The exposion thing applies to all the characters because of the amount of space required to store all the death scenes for all the enemies. Four frames per death animation and 4 normal enemies, means 16 frames, at 64*64 pixels each times two planes.
That would equal around 32768 bytes, and then add on to that another 32768 bytes for the normal animations. Now we're up to 65536 bytes , plus two extra frames for the attacks times 4 would equal another 65536 bytes, so now we're up to 131072 bytes. Thats just for the enemies, now the tiles. There are about 72 or so of them. That equals 147456 bytes and add that to the 131072 bytes, which equals 278528 bytes, then add the fat engine which is ~55kb.
Now we're up to ~333528 bytes. Now add the 47982 bytes for the doom game engine. Now we're up to 381510 bytes, now add the 17kb map file, the 7kb text file, and the 8332 byte save file and we're up to 413842 bytes, plus the 1002 byte run game program.
414844 bytes all together.
that figure is without all the add ons and optimizations I have so far.
the actual figure of space is 452341 bytes.
So, if i were to add all the normal death animations, it'd be;
485109 bytes.
Also, the fireballs thing may be in the future, but right now I'm not sure really what I'm going to do about that. It'd require a good bit of RAM to keep up with the location and status of the fireballs. Plus the way the imps are set up right now, they come kind of close to you and start scratching, so it looks more normal.
I'll give it some thought, see what I can come up with and then get back to you on that one. It'd also require around 8 sprites or so, so that the fireballs are multidirectional like in the real game.
I am working around a lot of restrictions because of the small platform. While the 68k series is certainly a powerful platform, its still small.
Logged
DJ Omnimaga
Clacualters are teh gr33t
CoT Emeritus
LV15
Omnimagician (Next: --)
Posts: 55943
Rating: +3154/-232
CodeWalrus founder & retired Omnimaga founder
Doom89!
«
Reply #12 on:
August 17, 2007, 12:08:00 pm »
thats big o.o
, good thing my TI-89t have 2.7 MB of flash ROM
Logged
Halifax
LV9
Veteran (Next: 1337)
Posts: 1334
Rating: +2/-1
Doom89!
«
Reply #13 on:
August 17, 2007, 02:54:00 pm »
Woah at first I thought you, ATG, was JincS because of your avatar. Where does that picture come from?
Logged
There are 10 types of people in this world-- those that can read binary, and those that can't.
JincS
LV4
Regular (Next: 200)
Posts: 191
Rating: +0/-0
Doom89!
«
Reply #14 on:
August 17, 2007, 04:44:00 pm »
It comes with IPB
Just a stock pic.
Logged
Print
Pages: [
1
]
2
3
...
15
Go Up
« previous
next »
Omnimaga
»
Forum
»
Calculator Community
»
Other Calc-Related Projects and Ideas
»
TI 68K
»
Doom89!