Difference between revisions of "Talk:Blind spots in Doom reject tables"
From DoomWiki.org
(→Known anomalies count: new section) |
(→Known anomalies count) |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
The Bugs section of the maps listed here mention the count of "known anomalies": is that supposed to have any relation to the number of entries in their corresponding table here? Just wondering as the [[E1M1]] page counts 7 and the table 11, [[E1M2]] 7 vs 13, [[E1M3]] 4 vs 6, and so on (no doubt, but I didn't check further yet). I was going to update the map pages to link directly to their corresponding table, and might as well correct the counts if appropriate. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:58, 14 May 2016 (CDT) | The Bugs section of the maps listed here mention the count of "known anomalies": is that supposed to have any relation to the number of entries in their corresponding table here? Just wondering as the [[E1M1]] page counts 7 and the table 11, [[E1M2]] 7 vs 13, [[E1M3]] 4 vs 6, and so on (no doubt, but I didn't check further yet). I was going to update the map pages to link directly to their corresponding table, and might as well correct the counts if appropriate. --[[User:Xymph|Xymph]] ([[User talk:Xymph|talk]]) 12:58, 14 May 2016 (CDT) | ||
+ | |||
+ | : Maybe (and hopefully) [[User:Ryan W]] knows for sure as he seems to be the article creator, but I'm guessing off hand that this data here was derived from an automated analysis of the reject tables, and the sparse data on map articles was just created from contributors' memories of bad reject spots? I honestly don't know for sure. This article does mention that many reject spots are of no consequence because enemies and players cannot view each other, so the map articles would probably exclude those as bugs due to our [[Talk:Engine_bug#Disputed.2C_Undisputed_are_essentially_POV|perceptually defined]] concept of what constitutes a bug. --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] ([[User talk:Quasar|talk]]) 14:01, 14 May 2016 (CDT) |
Revision as of 14:01, 14 May 2016
Awesome. Just... awesome. Illdo 09:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Awwwh, thanks. (Certainly the last thing I could have pictured myself doing when I discovered the wiki!) Ryan W 17:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Possible infelicity
Certain "negligible" entries may have to be changed to "no effect" if they involve parts of sectors so small that no actor's center can actually be in them. I can't tell from the code whether that's required of the target in order for a monster to attempt a shot, especially near a blockmap boundary. Ryan W 22:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Known anomalies count
The Bugs section of the maps listed here mention the count of "known anomalies": is that supposed to have any relation to the number of entries in their corresponding table here? Just wondering as the E1M1 page counts 7 and the table 11, E1M2 7 vs 13, E1M3 4 vs 6, and so on (no doubt, but I didn't check further yet). I was going to update the map pages to link directly to their corresponding table, and might as well correct the counts if appropriate. --Xymph (talk) 12:58, 14 May 2016 (CDT)
- Maybe (and hopefully) User:Ryan W knows for sure as he seems to be the article creator, but I'm guessing off hand that this data here was derived from an automated analysis of the reject tables, and the sparse data on map articles was just created from contributors' memories of bad reject spots? I honestly don't know for sure. This article does mention that many reject spots are of no consequence because enemies and players cannot view each other, so the map articles would probably exclude those as bugs due to our perceptually defined concept of what constitutes a bug. --Quasar (talk) 14:01, 14 May 2016 (CDT)