I often saw the term “3D graphics” being associated with industry-standard technology. Try making your own 3d game from scratch without using OpenGL/Vulcan and see if anyone says it’s fake or pseudo 3d. I can understand this line of thinking but it is shortsighted.

@@borogk It's just like the title of your video: It's limited but it's still 3D. The limitations are real, but the number of dimensions (or half dimensions) are not among the limitations. I used to do my own 3D graphics on 8-bit and 16-bit systems before any of the industry standard stuff came out. Fake/pseudo 3D back then meant it didn't do perspective. The ignorant inaccurate terms started to appear after isometric 3D games started to appear.

It is designed for standard Powershell, the whole point behind choosing it was that it should come preinstalled on modern Windows. ISE should also work, though I didn’t try it and it is frankly an overkill. Alternatively, you can use bash scripts.

@@borogk Cool Thank you. Im still trying to figure out the install lol i'm not super savvy with powershell or cmd. Another ? in the cm-settings do i need to replace line 2 with my gzdoom.exe path?

@jmluna86jl correct, the line should read $GzdoomPath = 'C:\games\gzdoom\gzdoom.exe'

awesome thanks again!

Good luck, you’re going to need it

The wad is unofficially known as “Okuplok” (which is the author’s name, they didn’t give a proper map title). It’s huge and brutally difficult.

@@borogk i didn't ask how difficult it was

I did give you the name first, didn’t I

@@borogk okay?

Not even close to Skyrim scale. Doom map can't be larger than ~64k units across, which is approximately 1500 meters. In practice it's even less, because the precision errors would kick in before you reach the limit. It's not recommended to build anything larger than 32k units (750 meters).

​​@@zachjones4551 doom doesn't raycast for rendering. It doesn't need to. It uses the bsp tree to determine what is in the players view, which is faster and also can render more complex geometry then what Wolfenstein 3D's raycaster technique can do.

@@reasonable78 so it does lol I’ll delete my comment

There is opposite with 3D-objects in 2D-backgrounds. Used in original Alone In The Dark and PS1-era Resident Evil and Final Fantasy.

But a game is not about the engine. Because if that was the case then Shovel Knight would be a 3D game. Gosh. People need to redo their homework here.

@@niemand7811 Id be inclined to agree with you, but given that shovel knight just uses the “3D” for parallax and could totally work without, it makes me less eager to agree with you whereas dooms raycasting 2d engine is the basis for the whole thing and the sole reason it can run on almost anything. Also, I’m not knocking doom for being 2d, it’s downright the coolest thing about it! The way the engine works is fascinating.

I'm glad the videos were able to help you in such a way! Good luck on your Doom journey. I played a lot more Doom stuff since making this Sunlust video and some WADs are definitely even more impressive, but Sunlust will hold a special place in my heart as the one that sparked my interest.

How can you go above or below projectiles then?

It's elaborated in the "Fixed camera angle" section that starts at 03:52. In short, vertical aim looks bad with the rendering method they used. The picture becomes distorted the more you deviate from looking straight ahead. I demonstrated that on one of the modern ports, but a more authentic example would be Heretic - a game that runs on modified Doom engine. It allows vertical aim, but doesn't upgrade the rendering method. As a compromise, it only allows you to look a little bit up and not all the way. Still looks a little bad, but the devs decided they're fine with trading clear visuals for a little more player freedom. Original Doom devs decided differently, simple as that.

@@borogk I meant just aiming, not mouselook like in later games. Like, the camera stays still, but the player can still aim by moving a crosshair across the screen with the mouse ala Ultima Underworld.

Ah, I see what you mean. Well, there is no telling why. With modern hindsight I think we can all agree moving the crosshair independent of camera would be clunky for a fast-paced shooter where you move and shoot at the same time. That would be a good reason not to do it, but whether the devs thought the same - I don't know. What's clear is they *decided* not to implement any crosshair at all, even though they had it in earlier Hovertank 3D. They must've specifically dropped it in Wolfenstein and Doom because they didn't like it. There isn't even a simple crosshair in the middle of the screen, let alone a more advanced one that would auto-snap to targets or let the player freely control it.

„Illusion“ term is not really correct to use here. It implies the game visually appears three-dimensional while the gameplay is limited to a 2D plane. I do remember Carmack saying that, but I believe he made a mistake about a game he has moved on from long ago. In-game objects have 3 coordinates which are being tracked at all times. Doom mapping format (sectors with height) is primitive, but achieves nearly the same results as a more advanced one. The level architecture you create by defining sectors would still respect vertical positions of the players, mobs and projectiles. Windows, platforms, stuff hanging from ceilings - all that makes a 3D space for objects with 3 coordinates to inhabit. Sorry, but saying Doom doesn’t have a 3D space is incorrect. True, this space has flat horizontal and vertical faces with no slopes, but so does a cave in Minecraft. Not having floors in the middle is unfortunate but doesn’t subtract a full dimension all of the sudden. I also heard the Zelda example before (an old game theorists video used it), it’s not a fair comparison since Z in doom doesn’t work as a binary „above-below“ or a limited set of „layers“ that objects snap to. Z is a number allowing the same precision as X and Y do. I believe Doom gameplay respects 3 coordinates enough to at least deserve 3D elements not being brushed off as „illusions“. „Not a full 3D“ is a much more fair thing to say, we can’t ignore other games like Quake, that did 3D so much better. Compared to Quake many things are missing in Doom - hence its 3D capabilities are “not full”. Some even say it’s “2.5D”, which I also don’t have issues with. At this point these are merely different words to describe the same thing. I say “limited”, you say “not full”, tomayto, tomahto.

@@borogk Other examples would be E1M2 where you take the elevator to the room before the exit. If a monster is standing below they still block you. It's like infinite height. This is not common in 3d games. Yes there is a height for things. Which is why monsters cannot enter certain areas. But the only thing really "3d" is projectiles.. that could more-or-less pass for full 3d in a 3d environment. Also the entire way hitscan works is 2d. Projectiles are a different story. While I dislike thinking of it as 2.5d I think that may be a 'better' description for it. I think personally the real big difference is in real 3d you can have rooms over rooms. Or bridges. Where-as in doom you cannot. If you could do that in doom I would be 100% okay with calling it 3d. They could have done it but it would have ate thru the ram. You would have needed a 2nd map above your map.. for rooms above. But you would have been limited to how many times you could do that trick. However they didn't do that for some reason. Oh and that "zelda" example theres actually 2 of them. One being the bridges you walk over and under. And the second being the projectile thrown. aka boomerang. And it's used to hit switches. When comparing a fired projectile in 1 game, it's a pretty fair comparison to compare directly to firing a projectile in another game. It just has different definitions for what blocks it and what does not. Sorta like how projectiles in doom which are arguably the only 3d part of the game. It really is an illusion. It's a very good one at that. They did it so well they got people to actually believe it was 3d without making a 3d game. Thats what is so impressive. Since doomguy cannot look up, or down. Only left and right and move back and forth and side to side you technically can play the whole game in top down mode. When you use the map you essentially see it that way. And you can play the game 100% that way if you wanted and were good enough. Thats because you do not have a 3d environment to worry about more then 2 axis's. Aside for projectiles or floors and ceilings that crush.

Same terms have different meanings for us, so no point arguing about the "illusion" thing. I'll point out inaccuracy about hitscan being "entirely 2D". A common mistake is to look at the way your starting pistol doesn't seem to care if the enemy stands above - the bullet just connects instantly. Hitscan mechanic is a bit more nuanced. Each hitscan shot has an origin point, a horizontal angle and a vertical angle. A line is then traced from the origin and the closest obstacle is determined - a piece of level geometry or an enemy. That line travels in a 3D space, its direction is defined by 2 angles after all, same as in spherical coordinate system. When you press "fire", the auto-aim feature first determines a base line, then one or more bullets are generated, each with a random angle modifier relative to aim. This random spread is most visible for shotguns or when you continue holding fire with pistol/chaingun. Connection between the auto-aim target and the hit outcome is not direct - a line is simulated fully and honestly even when the random spread is 0. The first pistol shot is programmed to always have 0 spread and should always connect, that's what creates this confusion largely. If you keep holding pistol fire - next shots lose accuracy, but are fully simulated nonetheless. Even better is to try the shotgun - its bullets are always randomly spread. The game doesn't cheat by skipping the full simulation, drawing a ricochet puff near the target and calling it a day. The spread angle can make it so it hits another enemy or flies out of a window and hits some elevator way far back. Sorry, I know it's a lot, but this explains hitscan as fully as I can in a YT comment. One of those things I should've elaborated in a video, perhaps. And it serves as just one example of a mechanic, that may seem primitive at first or rely on cheap tricks. Realising that things are not as simple - was my experience exactly once I started digging into the engine source code and experimenting while playing. Evidently, I can talk about it for ages :)

@@borogk You do realize that the source code for how everything works and I have been programming in c/c++ for over 20 years... right? Nothing you explained is "complex" even a little. Perhaps it is you that needs to brush up on understanding. Anyways happy new year and keep learning eventually you will get somewhere.

Nobody's doubting your programming skills. I pointed out that hitscan is not entirely 2D, like you mentioned, and gave an explanation. Of course by itself it's not complex, that's not the point. The point is it's more complex than "entirely 2D".

Powershell script is meant to be used by typing in a command line, for example: ./editor.ps1 -iwad doom2 -file Scythe.wad It’s similar to how you would run gzdoom from command line. If you’re not familiar with command line, you can grab CameramanEditor.pk3 from the installation package and run it normally like any other pk3 mod, it would work, but you won’t be able to save and load camera profiles.

Thank you! sounds good. One more question - How do i erase all the camera lines in a map and start fresh?@@borogk Edit: hmm, just loaded Scythe again, and the old lines were gone!

Only one camera path can be placed at a time, so simply draw another one and the old one would be erased. If the green path markers are in the way of recording somehow, you can draw a small path somewhere to the side where you can’t see it, or temporarily reload GZDoom without cameraman mod.