VOGONS


First post, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Hey, thanks for persevering, @Tiido.

I am curious if you are using testing build or the "nornal" build. Because as per the relese notes, with testing build Tartar is:

* No longer attempt to load original Sigil when loading SIGIL II

Before that it was trying to be smart about loading things and I had a feeling it would outsmart itself fairly fast, so made things more straightforward.

WRT the demos if those are Sigil II demos, I think they may be recorded in a recent PrBoom/DSDA port, and Tartar has very poor support for these (e.g. in Eviternity demos go out of sync as well). Thanks for reporting, as I did not realize this and it may be reasonable to alert the users to this limitation.

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)

Reply 1 of 12, by Tiido

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I'm not using a test build but what is from the archive (TARTAR.5.zip) in the link you gave. Before that I had files from TARTAR folder from TARTAR-FULL.6.zip.

Only 4th demo desync here with an early death (I thought 3rd did too but it actually doesn't). All the demos appear to work fine in Sakitoshi's mbf_sigil.

EDIT: I discovered another deficiency, IDCLEV only goes to 49, so it is not possible to choose level in the 2 new episodes.

T-04YBSC, a new YMF71x based sound card & Official VOGONS thread about it
Newly made 4MB 60ns 30pin SIMMs ~
mida sa loed ? nagunii aru ei saa 😜

Reply 2 of 12, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Hey, thanks for reporting that oversight - cheat codes handling was never updated to take extra defined episodes into account! Now the reason is that I almost never use IDCLEV and instead do, e.g. MAP E6M5 from the console (opens with the [~] key).

Also acknowledging additional demo information.

WRT the version, I would advise using the latest available as a separate download, even if it's not designated as "stable".

@moderators, please consider splitting this discussion out of the MBF thread if it starts to diverge too much in your opinion.

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)

Reply 3 of 12, by ReignerDeustcher

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2024-03-17, 11:15:

In general I think it's best to ask in the MBF forum post, so that answer could be found easily by others. However, I have a question: which resolution do they currently run at for you?

-LP

here we go then: both mbf and tartar are in 640x400, mbf doesn't have an option for changing resolution, it just have an option that says ''hires'' that goes to 640x400), tartar have but if i switch to 640x480 it crashes

Reply 4 of 12, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Apologies for crashes your are experiencing, but nah... Tartar follows the MBF path, and should prefer 640x400 to 640x480 when both are availabe; there's no override for this.

If you could stand compiling either - I trust instructions can be found in this thread, especially if you try following @SilverMiner 's exploits - simply suppressing detection of 640x400 in I_VGAVBE.C will do the trick.

What machine are you using to play Doom with MBF by the way, that 640x400 is undesirable? x480 does not give additional screen estate in MBF and is effectively a "compatibility" mode cards like Intel onboard video.

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)

Reply 5 of 12, by ReignerDeustcher

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2024-04-06, 18:15:

Apologies for crashes your are experiencing, but nah... Tartar follows the MBF path, and should prefer 640x400 to 640x480 when both are availabe; there's no override for this.

If you could stand compiling either - I trust instructions can be found in this thread, especially if you try following @SilverMiner 's exploits - simply suppressing detection of 640x400 in I_VGAVBE.C will do the trick.

What machine are you using to play Doom with MBF by the way, that 640x400 is undesirable? x480 does not give additional screen estate in MBF and is effectively a "compatibility" mode cards like Intel onboard video.

i'm on dosbox core with retroarch, i prefer 640x480 because i use a shader that smoothes a lot the image in that resolution

sorry but i don't have a clue how to do that compiling...

Reply 6 of 12, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

My experience with RetroArch is only quite recent, as I am using it with my handheld device and there I found DOSBox Pure core to be the most agreable one. The feature of *Pure is that is does not perform aspect ratio conversion or scaling on its own, relying on the frontend for this.
There I use the following settings to scale 320x200 to a 640x480 screen, and the same worked for scaling 640x400 to 640x480 for me (only tried Tartar, not MBF with the latter, sorry).

Shaders (from Quick Menu):
Video Shaders: On
Shader #0: smuberstep.glsl
Shader #0 Filter: Linear
Shader #0 Scale: Default

Scaling (from Main Menu > Video):
Integer Scale: Off
Aspect Ratio: Full
Crop Overscan: On

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)

Reply 7 of 12, by ReignerDeustcher

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2024-04-06, 19:56:
My experience with RetroArch is only quite recent, as I am using it with my handheld device and there I found DOSBox Pure core t […]
Show full quote

My experience with RetroArch is only quite recent, as I am using it with my handheld device and there I found DOSBox Pure core to be the most agreable one. The feature of *Pure is that is does not perform aspect ratio conversion or scaling on its own, relying on the frontend for this.
There I use the following settings to scale 320x200 to a 640x480 screen, and the same worked for scaling 640x400 to 640x480 for me (only tried Tartar, not MBF with the latter, sorry).

Shaders (from Quick Menu):
Video Shaders: On
Shader #0: smuberstep.glsl
Shader #0 Filter: Linear
Shader #0 Scale: Default

Scaling (from Main Menu > Video):
Integer Scale: Off
Aspect Ratio: Full
Crop Overscan: On

but if i load that shader i miss the one that i like wich is the point of all of this =(

Reply 8 of 12, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Can you let know which shader you are using? I am now curious why it would make the picture look better with the horizontal "pillars" of 640x480 resolution. I am also fiddling with RetroArch on my PC now, so could check that in action.

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)

Reply 9 of 12, by ReignerDeustcher

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2024-04-06, 22:43:

Can you let know which shader you are using? I am now curious why it would make the picture look better with the horizontal "pillars" of 640x480 resolution. I am also fiddling with RetroArch on my PC now, so could check that in action.

scalefx-aa-fast, smoothes all the image

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJXYA8Wmj4

Reply 10 of 12, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

So, I tried that preset on my PC (1024x768 monitor attached) with *Pure in windowed fullscreen and here's what I got with the following settings:

Shaders (from Quick Menu):
Video Shaders: On
Shader #0: stock.slang
Shader #0 Filter: Nearest
Shader #0 Scale: Default
Shader #1: scalefx-pass0.slang
Shader #1 Filter: Nearest
Shader #1 Scale: 1x
...
and so forth

Scaling (from Main Menu > Video):
Integer Scale: Off
Integer Scale Overscale: Off
Aspect Ratio: 4:3
Bilinear Filtering: Off
Crop Overscan: On

Apologies, I sound like I am trying to figure out what the problem is rather then explaining how to achieve the solution you are seeking, but it's really hard for me to follow at this stage...

Attachments

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)

Reply 11 of 12, by ReignerDeustcher

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
ludicrous_peridot wrote on 2024-04-06, 23:50:
So, I tried that preset on my PC (1024x768 monitor attached) with *Pure in windowed fullscreen and here's what I got with the fo […]
Show full quote

So, I tried that preset on my PC (1024x768 monitor attached) with *Pure in windowed fullscreen and here's what I got with the following settings:

Shaders (from Quick Menu):
Video Shaders: On
Shader #0: stock.slang
Shader #0 Filter: Nearest
Shader #0 Scale: Default
Shader #1: scalefx-pass0.slang
Shader #1 Filter: Nearest
Shader #1 Scale: 1x
...
and so forth

Scaling (from Main Menu > Video):
Integer Scale: Off
Integer Scale Overscale: Off
Aspect Ratio: 4:3
Bilinear Filtering: Off
Crop Overscan: On

Apologies, I sound like I am trying to figure out what the problem is rather then explaining how to achieve the solution you are seeking, but it's really hard for me to follow at this stage...

but i don't understand how putting a shader and some other options will add the lack of pixels

i need a bernewfie for doom hehe, that port works great and in 640x480 by default

Reply 12 of 12, by ludicrous_peridot

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Thanks to the mod for splitting this out.

Ok, so firstly - Hexen and Doom/BOOM are not equal in how the renderer works, so while one could draw similarities, I would say this is an apples/oranges situation, and one could as much compare, say, Duke 3D (why not?) and Doom. While Hexen adapts quite easily to changes in screen buffer, I am not sure the same can be achieved easily with Doom/BOOM. Well, maybe it is, but with MBF at least that would be coding effort and not a trifle.

E.g. all Bernewfie does is really just scale the player weapon sprites and locate the spot to draw HUD elements, the rest is handled by the original Hexen code (well, there's also column renderer code imported from MBF which has been slightly extended, and automap drawing code but that does not change the situation much). Now, what happens in hires mode in MBF (and by extension in Tartar) is that screen buffer is increased by x2 horizontally and x2 vertically, and then once the view of the level through the player's "eyes" has been rendered, every pixel in HUD, menus , tally screens, intermissions and automap is simply drawn 4 times (i.e. scaled x2x2). With 1280x900 renderer buffer which is output to 1280x1024 VESA resolution in Tartar every such pixel is drawn 16 times (i.e. scaled x4x4). Of course there are Doom engine ports for DOS out there that support resolutions like 800x600, etc (e.g. Doom Legacy) - but this is just not the case for MBF.

So if you would like to run MBF (or Tartar) in an emulator, I would first suggest determining if you are after original Doom/BOOM picture (320x200) - which makes a lot of sense for retro gaming in my opinion - or slightly more elaborate picture (640x400) (or in case with Tartar an even more elaborate picture of 1280x900 renderer). That will be the base picture for the emulator software to scale to your output window or display screen size.

Secondly, there's the aspect ratio question. While I am (ahem) neutral about that topic, knowledgeable people have proven that original artistic vision for Doom agrees with 4:3 screen aspect ratio much better than with 16:10 - DoomWiki has a dissertation quality article on this. Since you are running with the emulator, I would suggest letting your output device do the scaling from the original 16:10 picture Doom renderer produces (similarly to how a CRT display would do). This is where shaders and scaling in RetroArch step in. While scaling output of the game to you window or monitor size, RetroArch will apply the aspect ratio you select and the shader-based solution will do the scale up much-much better in my opinion than DOSBox core built-in scalers. I'd leave scaler at 1x in the core (or switch to a core that does not try any of that on its own - e.g. *Pure) and avoid using built in aspect ratio correction in favor of allowing the GPU do that!

Finally, you mention missing pixels, but there are no missing pixels in MBF! 😀 All the pixels of the 640x400 screen buffer are there and switching to 640x480 just adds 80 rows of black pixels (40 on top and 40 at the bottom). Otherwise the picture will be exactly the same. If you are after eliminating black areas on the screen switching MBF to 640x480 will make things even worse but you still have, well, a few options:

1 - scale to full output window size/full screen ignoring aspect ratio; this is achieved with selecting Full as Aspect Ratio
2 - scale proportionally to 4:3 aspect ratio but show _fewer_ pixels of the original picture on the screen; this can be done with Custom aspect ratio
for example in my case of 1280x1024 display, I can have X position of -42, Y position of 0, Width of 1365 and Height of 1024
this fills my screen completely with properly scaled image with no black pixels (attached), but not all of the original picture is visible
3 - let it go and let them black pixels be; after all they don't really get in the way of sawing the demons
4 - switch to a source port which supports natively the screen resolution or output window size you are after.
DoomWiki and Youtube (e.g. Dwars's channel) has a lot of information on this, I am not even going to name the few 😀

Attachments

GA-G41M-Combo G41/ICH7 - Core 2 Quad Q9550 - DDR3 1033 - Radeon RX570 - YMF744 (Cobra) - X3MB (Buran)