Getting stuck on what feels like tiny brushes. Ramps in general are pretty sticky to traverse in this engine. Maybe I'm missing something, same problem occurs no matter what the fps. Here's a screenshot. 

That can happen when three or more different planes intersect along the same line. In this case the floor, the ramp, and the near wall of the room. Is that a map you made or just one you're playing? 

That's good to know thanks. Nope, it's e1m1. [= 

Leave host_maxfps at 72, otherwise it'll mess with the physics. 

It happens even with host_maxfps 72 though. 

Quake has 2 colors for text --- gray and "bronze". With some QuakeC compilers like FrikQCC you can add do "/bThis is bronze text/b"

Of course, FTEQCC is the go to compiler these days and I can't remember if FTEQCC supports that (at one time it didn't), but it is still possible by pasting in text from a Quake text maker like:

http://www.quaketerminus.com/hosted/oqnm_4_20/oqnm_4_20.htm

This method does not need any compiler support, you should be able to put that text even in map titles and such. 

I did notice the funky physics when playing on 250. Knocking it down to 144 keeps it fluid and fixes the bobbing around on descending lifts. Will probably end up playing on 72 if I run into anything worse. 

My light.exe also processes "\bThis is bronze text\b" anywhere in the map file so you can easily use it in trigger messages, etc.

--
re: e1m1, I can get stuck walking towards the ramp from the e1m1 exit slipgate with winquake.exe (and in QS as well).
So at least it's not a new bug. :-/ 

@Qmaster. A 2nd option ...

Make your own conchars and distribute it with your map.

Then the "bronzed text" can be whatever color you edit the conchars to be. 

@ericw -- pretty cool (although I won't ask why the light.exe is what would do that instead of the bsp compiler, haha) 

"you can't upgrade your way out of it without disappointing a certain proportion of the player base"

Why the fuck should that certain proportion of the player base care about how I upgrade MY Quake? They're not playing on my setup, are they? I came to this thread with a simple engine-related question and got bullied for even daring to ask it. There's conservatism and then there's fanaticism. One I can understand, the other not so much. 

Why are you asking Preach for permission to upgrade your Quake?

Idea: Upgrade your Quake without Preach's permission? 

I came to this thread with a simple engine-related question and got bullied for even daring to ask it.

Please stop trying to rewrite the history. The only reason you got bullied is because you started accusing people of fanatism and backwards thinking out of the blue. People don't like such arrogance no matter how "delicately" you express it. 

Writing engines is a hobby, so it's about the author's vision for what the engine should do. If you want them to add a feature for you, then you're talking about something larger than yourself. 

Baker, I don't ask him permission, I'm replying to his last message to me.

Preach, I don't recall asking anyone to add that feature, I just asked if it existed.

Dwere, who's rewriting history here? Comments like "acceptably Quakey aesthetic", "your opinion is wrong" and other bullshit like that ARE fanaticism and THESE are the arrogant attitude, certainly not calling people out on it. People may not like having their shit shoved in their faces but the shit is theirs, not mine. 

is this discussion seriously ongoing? 

Continues to be is wrong. 

...a bit like post-mortem flatulence. 

 

"Acceptably Quakey" is a valid term when talking about an engine that's supposed to improve on the original aesthetic without replacing it with something else. If you got set off by such a vague (and most likely unintentional) hint at superiority, then perhaps you shouldn't be surprised that your own sermon about what's "better" led to unpleasantness. 

How surprising...

@Shamblernaut When people talk to me, I reply to them. That's how communication usually works. Preach talked to me (see post #2277), so I replied. A bit late, I admit, but I've been busy mapping and playing Quake.

@Kinn I bet you know all about flatulences with that potty mouth of yours... 

AFAIK, I've never stated my opinion of what's better as an undisputable fact. On the contrary, I've underlined that it was my personal preference. 

 

You argued that Quake's art is not pixel art, despite the fact that it obviously is. The result of 2+2 is not a matter of taste, it's always 4. 

It's not as obvious as you think.