Talk:Monster

From DoomWiki.org

Revision as of 16:34, 20 April 2008 by Ryan W (talk | contribs) (Games)

Just finished a test version for a new layout to be used in the "Data" section of the monster articles. With this new layout it should be possible to neatly fit all the dehacked data into the articles. Anyways, here's what the layout looks like:


Baron of Hell:

Attributes
ID # 3003
Hit points 1000
Speed 8
Width 24
Height 64
Reaction time 8
Pain chance 50
Mass 1000
Bits 4194310
Bits list

1: Obstacle

2: Shootable

22: Affects Kill %

Sprites & sounds
Sprite name BOSS
Alert sound BRSSIT
Attack sound (none)
Pain sound DMPAIN
Death sound BRSDTH
Action sound DMACT
Melee attack
Damage 10-80
Ranged attack
Type Fireball
Speed 15
Damage 8-64
Width 6
Height 8
Sprite name BAL
Alert sound FIRSHT
Death sound FIRXPL

Sergeant:

Attributes
ID # 9
Hit points 30
Speed 8
Width 20
Height 56
Reaction time 8
Pain chance 170
Mass 100
Bits 4194310
Bits list

1: Obstacle

2: Shootable

22: Affects Kill %

Sprites & sounds
Sprite name SPOS
Alert sound (none)
Attack sound (none)
Pain sound POPAIN
Death sound PODTH2
Action sound POSACT
Ranged attack
Type Hitscan
Shots 3
Damage 3-45

Feel free to edit the layout if you have further improvement ideas - it's of course better to edit the layout now than after using it in the articles themselves. Janizdreg 21:35, 19 Mar 2005 (EST)

Why not create a template with parameters? - Fredrik 13:23, 20 Mar 2005 (EST)
Could be good, though I don't know enough of that stuff to do it myself. Janizdreg 15:43, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

vote for deletion

I think this page should be deleted. It offers nothing over the Monster categories; except more opportunities to be wrong and more maintenance :) Opinions? -- Jdowland 22:11, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I strongly disagree.  I like how the Weapons article provides a tight, simple overview without going into as much detail as the pages on individual armaments, and this article could be made to do that also (provided someone fleshed it out, of course).  Such articles are IMHO especially useful for neophyte players who are still trying to get a handle on the overall structure of the game.    Ryan W 08:44, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
I just made a first bash at this.  I don't remember the other games too well (having played them either many years ago or not at all), so I only did Doom and Doom II, but I suspect that certain of our other editors could fill in the Strife part (e.g.) almost effortlessly.   :>    Ryan W 00:39, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

today's revert

An anon user changed "at the end of each IWAD" to "at the end of Doom II and Final Doom", saying, Each IWAD -> Doom II and Final Doom as the old one implies Doom I as well.

To be honest, I thought the huge heading saying "Doom II/Final Doom" would take care of that problem.  But in any case, the changed version was incorrect, since the Icon appears twice in Final Doom, not just at the end.    Ryan W 22:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Section heading

This article would benefit from a description of the monster AI, particularly the way they mill about when activiated but not in sight of the player. The AI is more advanced than Gauntlet, whereby the monsters simply take the shortest route to the player and do not attempt to walk around obstructions, but it is still very simple. Ashley Pomeroy 20:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Z-Sec's meaning

Any sources that state that name to mean Zombie Security? -- TheDarkArchon 18:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Arousal: loose end

The article says: Monsters normally remain activated indefinitely (even after respawning or resurrection).   Is this true even when the monster was killed by friendly fire without ever seeing/hearing the player?  In other words, does resurrection/respawning "pin" the arousal bit to true, so to speak, or does the monster simply keep the arousal bit it already had?    Ryan W 10:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

It is not true. I just tested it on Doom2 1.9. The actual circumstances seem a bit convoluted, but testing on map 11 with -respawn, it seems to me like:
  • If a monster is aroused by seeing a player, and later changes their target to a monster, and their monster target dies, they go back to sleep.
  • If a monster is aroused by hearing a player fire or by being damaged by a player, and later changes their target, and their monster target dies, they 're-awaken' as soon as their target dies (making their arousal sound), and immediately target the player.
  • If a monster is aroused by seeing a player, and later is killed by another monster, and then they respawn, they start asleep.
  • If a monster is: killed by a player, or aroused by player fire and/or by being damaged by a player but killed by a monster, and then they respaw, they start aroused and targeting the player.
It is as if, if they ever target the player by hearing the player fire or by being damaged or killed by the player (even if they 'hear' the player fire while targeting another monster), they stay targeting the player even through respawn (didn't test with Arch-Vile revival). But if they only target the player by having seen them with a line-of-sight, or never target the player, they don't.
At least, that is what 10 minutes of testing seems to show me. --Splarka (talk) 12:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Wow, very interesting!  I don't think I would dare put this in the article without a code citation, after some of the (ahem) spirited discussions that have occurred here, but with this information as a lead, someone who thoroughly knows the code might know exactly where to look.  Many thanks!    Ryan W 12:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, a random observation spotted several weeks later: Lost souls target a player like any monster, but when attacking they sort of become a fireball (although shootable and with physical dimensions). When they hit a player, obstacle, or wall, they reset to an un-aroused monster. Now here's the thing: if they've been aroused by hearing a player or being injured by a player, they automatically target the player after such a re-awakening (not even the monster that last hurt them). However, if they only saw the player, and the player is currently not in their field of view, they remain asleep (unless the player has made noise or injured them after they awoke).
So someone who knows more than passing pseudocode should find out what exactly the difference is between visual and audio/pain arousals and targeting. Might be worth an article.
Also, I am not so sure if this statement is entirely appropriate: " However, there is a bug in vanilla Doom which returns all monsters to a dormant state if the player saves and then re-loads the game.". Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to remember an early version of doom preserving monster targets in saved games (1.2 possibly)? --Splarka (talk) 04:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I think I have discovered another wrinkle to this phenomenon: it seems that for the purposes of arousing deaf monsters, the engine treats "a sound has been heard" as a flag that can be set in a given sector and then not cleared.  Or tries to, and sometimes messes up.  My examples, from E2M1:
  • The deaf trooper in the shotgun room (Thing 22) cannot quite see into the blue key area (sector 24) at the angle he is facing, so he does not awaken when I stand at the east window.  But when I fire a bullet, he does!  Even weirder, if I move away from the window before shooting, he delays waking up until I move back to the window (did the noise improve his peripheral vision?).
  • In Splarka's list above, I can change the first situation into the second by making a sound in the room (whether or not any monsters have arrived yet).  For example, on UV there are a demon and 3 imps in the next-to-last room.  Suppose I let them see me, retreat behind the blue door, then encourage infighting by opening and closing the blue door rapidly.  This infighting sometimes drifts back into the next-to-last room before it is resolved.  Once the infighting stops, the surviving monster becomes dormant.  However, if I have taken the precaution of swinging my fist once on both sides of the teleporter (not hitting anything, mind you), the surviving monster targets me instead.  If I have only swung my fist in one of the two rooms, said arousal can occur in that room but not in the other.
BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUG!  BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUG!     Ryan W 12:16, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Addendum: no, I'm not hallucinating this [1] (still no code citations however).    Ryan W 00:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Move proposal

I propose to move this to monster. All links to monsters should still work, and it can be rewritten to a proper definition of monster first (since a monster is a type of technical entity in the game, a subclass of thing). The case of the final boss has been brought up since it isn't a monster in the technical sense. It can be briefly described at the top (main article/definition), noting it as one of the sources for monsters (the others being the usual placement in the level, and pain elementals).

And scripting.   ;>     Ryan W 00:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Games

The way monsters from different games are listed here seems rather awkward. I think each game could have its page (Doom monster, Heretic monster, &c), with a disambiguation at monster (with a brief and general description of the monster entity). Additionally, the article says Doom 64 uses the same monsters plus a few more... but the monsters aren't identical, as they all look different to a degree. The only ones that might not be worth moving out might be the Doom RPG monsters, but even they may have their own characteristics, since that game is somewhat different (I haven't played it, so I can't say much). The pages may all have some similar information (because Heretic and Doom monsters share many characteristics, for example), but each would include its own details and particularities. Any thoughts? Who is like God? 21:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Are there really enough details and particularities which differ between games, but not between monsters in a single game, to justify separate articles?  I don't see it.
As a side note, I wonder how much of the large introductory passage in this article would be more appropriate in Monster behavior.  That also affects how much game-specific material could reasonably be added to the split articles, and therefore (e.g.) whether or not Heretic monster would differ noticeably from the existing Template:Heretic monsters.    Ryan W 22:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Monster behavior could be expanded with information about pain states, fast mode, respawning, and the like... perhaps the info on using teleporters could be moved there. Anything pertianing to "behavior". This article, on the other hand, is giving an overview of the monsters as a group of game characters entities, their relations, and how they appear in the game, and from it a reader can go to the specific monster articles for more details about each.
Perhaps the stuff from other games could remain here, but (PC) DOOM should have full-fleshed articles about anything, in my opinion. Heretic and the other games are not half as notable, so maybe they are okay having "exceptions" sections where their differences with DOOM are examined. Generally, any article that isn't game specific should refer to DOOM in particular, and then, in following sections, to other games based on it. It also makes sense in that they are based on DOOM and DOOM isn't based on them. Who is like God? 01:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
should have full-fleshed articles about anything   I think I see your point, but "anything" is a lot of things.  I don't know what we could say about, like, ASHWALL2 without drifting into fanfic.   :>
IMHO the notability of Doom relative to other Doom-engine games eventually emerges by itself in our article content, simply because so much more information exists (especially the technical stuff).  Therefore, I would not support a policy that made Heretic and Hexen second-class, for example, because its biggest effect would be to drive away the few people who know everything about Heretic or Hexen.    Ryan W 21:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Baron projectile attack

It can hurl bolts of green hellfire      ummmmmmmmmm ... who calls it that?    Ryan W 19:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I support using names from the game materials because they are concrete, but any word that accurately describes something is a good term to use (fire from hell; unreal flames hurled by a hellish monster or used on torches the monsters place in the areas they control). Plasma is a distinctive term that describes the stuff the plasma gun and arachnotrons shoot; a burst of energy from a tech device, evidently based on the scientific term and possibly a reference to a joke in The Terminator (recall the scene where the terminator enters a gun shop, looks at the guns in the store, and asks whether they have some "plasma rifle" model). Who is like God? 21:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)