>>> Request for a MUCH needed PWAD utility! <<<

9 views
Skip to first unread message

Raphael Quinet

unread,
Mar 30, 1994, 7:18:01 PM3/30/94
to
In article <NOSACKK.22...@BONES.ET.BYU.EDU>, nos...@bones.et.byu.edu writes:
>
> If you have ANY programming skill and have some time to make a MUCH needed
> utility for DOOM, please read this!
>

DON'T! Well... Read my reply first and you will understand...

>
> With the advent of PWAD editor/creator programs, the number of PWADs
> available to add variety to DOOM is growing rapidly. And although many
> editors allow you to save your PWAD as a specific level (i.e. you can save
> your modified or new map as Episode 1, Map 1 or any other level), it would
> be REALLY nice to have a utility program that would allow PWAD users to
> assign any PWAD to any Episode and Map number! It would also be nice if
> this utility supported the ability to read (no writing, please) the
> informational fields contained in the PWAD that some editors put in
> the PWAD (Renegade is the only one I know of that supports these fields
> and I would encourage people to use the Renegade fromat).
>
Why do you need so-called "informational fields"? These are dummy objects
put in the WAD file, and DOOM simply ignores them. Their only purpose is
to create some problems with the editors that don't support unrecognized
objects. I don't think we need such things. I had to change some parts
of the DEU code because of that (some users tried to load a WAD file created
with Renegade and the old version of DEU reported an error in the WAD
structure).

Note: with the latest version of DEU, you can load such files and even have
a look at the INFOPACK field with the "Dump" command. But I still think
this is stupid.

Why don't we all use the standard WAD format, with no additions or other
strange things in the files?


> I think you can easily see how useful such a utility would be! Say you
> have a collection of 9 great PWADS that you would like to put together to
> make your own "personalized" Episode 1. The problem is that the PWADs in
> this collection have widely varying Episode and Map (level) assignements -
> some of these PWADs are even assigned to the same Episode and Map "slot"!
> With a "PWADinfo" utility, you could go in and assign each PWAD to
> Episode 1 with a unique Map (level) number so they can be played one after
> another as a complete replacement for Episode 1! The PWADinfo program
> would also allow you to see the PWAD author's name and notes about the
> map(s).
>
[stuff deleted]

Here are two comments:

- If you have any file editor, you only need to change the "E1M1" in the WAD
file to "E1M2" or anything else. When you load the WAD file again in an
editor or in Doom, it will be taken as E1M2. That's the only thing you
need to change.

- The next release of DEU (5.1) will include a command to do this. DEU 5.0
already has a command that allows you to put several levels in a single
WAD file. This is an easy way to distribute the 9 levels of a complete
episode.

> NOTE: PLEASE, let's try and make this a standard! The last thing we need
> is TEN different "PWAD info" formats! If all interested parties
> (WAD and PWAD editor programmers, potential PWADinfo utility
> programmers, and anyone involved in utilities that read or write
> PWADs) would contact me, I'd be happy to act as a liason to help
> coordinate the format for the PWAD info data structures and any
> other issues related to this effort.
>
That's exactly what I'm trying to say: only use the standard PWAD format.
That also means: no INFOPACK or other weird objects in the file!

-Raphael

Tom Neff

unread,
Apr 3, 1994, 10:58:26 PM4/3/94
to
In article <1994Mar3...@georges.montefiore.ulg.ac.be>,

Raphael Quinet <qui...@georges.montefiore.ulg.ac.be> wrote:
>Note: with the latest version of DEU, you can load such files and even have
>a look at the INFOPACK field with the "Dump" command. But I still think
>this is stupid.

Well, for once (and I mean that), you're wrong. Standardizing a
"Comments" field for user written PWADs is an idea whose time has come.
Instead of putting it down, I suggest you either promulgate a simple one
of your own or get on board with somebody else's. All that's needed is
the ability to put in up to a kilobyte or so of plain text.
--
Tom Neff tn...@panix.com ...!panix!tneff

Kris Nosack

unread,
Apr 4, 1994, 3:42:36 PM4/4/94
to

>>
>> With the advent of PWAD editor/creator programs, the number of PWADs
>> available to add variety to DOOM is growing rapidly. And although many
>> editors allow you to save your PWAD as a specific level (i.e. you can save
>> your modified or new map as Episode 1, Map 1 or any other level), it would
>> be REALLY nice to have a utility program that would allow PWAD users to
>> assign any PWAD to any Episode and Map number! It would also be nice if
>> this utility supported the ability to read (no writing, please) the
>> informational fields contained in the PWAD that some editors put in
>> the PWAD (Renegade is the only one I know of that supports these fields
>> and I would encourage people to use the Renegade fromat).
>>
>Why do you need so-called "informational fields"? These are dummy objects
>put in the WAD file, and DOOM simply ignores them. Their only purpose is
>to create some problems with the editors that don't support unrecognized
>objects. I don't think we need such things. I had to change some parts
>of the DEU code because of that (some users tried to load a WAD file created
>with Renegade and the old version of DEU reported an error in the WAD
>structure).

I think the info fields are a great benefit to PWAD users! Plus, if DEU
and other editors ignore the extra data, what's the big deal? It would
also be easy for any program to strip these "comments" out of a PWAD if
they were problematic. So what's the resistance all about?

>Note: with the latest version of DEU, you can load such files and even have
>a look at the INFOPACK field with the "Dump" command. But I still think
>this is stupid.

Thanks for at least making DEU ignore stuff in the WAD files that it
doesn't understand or need. It just seems to be good programming practice
to do so. But as for info data in the PWAD being stupid, I think you
will find that most people won't agree with you. What's so sacred about
the PWAD format? Aren't people already putting their own sound resources
into PWADs using DMAUD? Would you consider this sacrilege as well?

>Why don't we all use the standard WAD format, with no additions or other
>strange things in the files?

Because adding the info data helps PWAD users know more about their
collection of PWADS easily and provides the PWAD creator with a way to
let people know who made the PWAD so the creator gets some credit (and
so others don't delete any docs that came with the PWAD and claim it as
their own) and so people can contact the PWAD creator with comments and
feedback. I'm sure there are more reasons to have info data in the PWAD,
but I think this will suffice for now.

[stuff deleted]

>Here are two comments:

>- If you have any file editor, you only need to change the "E1M1" in the WAD
> file to "E1M2" or anything else. When you load the WAD file again in an
> editor or in Doom, it will be taken as E1M2. That's the only thing you
> need to change.

True, but a nice little program to JUST change the Episode and Mission
numbers and allow you to see what the PWAD is currently assigned to would
still be useful.

>- The next release of DEU (5.1) will include a command to do this. DEU 5.0
> already has a command that allows you to put several levels in a single
> WAD file. This is an easy way to distribute the 9 levels of a complete
> episode.

Thanks! This will be a welcome addition to the already great DEU program!

>> NOTE: PLEASE, let's try and make this a standard! The last thing we need
>> is TEN different "PWAD info" formats! If all interested parties
>> (WAD and PWAD editor programmers, potential PWADinfo utility
>> programmers, and anyone involved in utilities that read or write
>> PWADs) would contact me, I'd be happy to act as a liason to help
>> coordinate the format for the PWAD info data structures and any
>> other issues related to this effort.
>>
>That's exactly what I'm trying to say: only use the standard PWAD format.
>That also means: no INFOPACK or other weird objects in the file!

I disagree. If DOOM ignores the extra objects/data, and the editors can
easily deal with them (shouldn't be a problem), why not do it? I guess I
don't see why you have a problem with info fields. They seem to make a
lot of sense to me!


Kris Nosack
Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, U.S.A.
kris_...@byu.edu

>>>---> Be strange, but not a stranger! <---<<<

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages