[pizza234]

This project is not exactly what it promises.

The title is "portable suckless [...] 90s-style Doom clone", however, in the technical details, it's specified that "this is my custom engine (raycastlib) based on raycasting, a technique used in Wolf3D engine, but it's improved, e.g. supporting multiple levels of floor and ceiling, so that the visual result is something between Wolf3D and Doom".

I don't think a that an improved raycasting engine qualifies as Doom-clone (in fact, this is the reason why the project is considerably less resource-intensive than Doom). If the project qualified itself as "Improved Wolfenstein engine", it'd probably get no attention.

It's admirable though that they released the assets with a very permissive license.

> a different, better direction than which the mainstream technology is taking, though this involves taking some steps back to before the things started to go wrong

There's definitely a significant self-absorption in this project. Modern mainstream gaming experience is different - not wrong - compared to what it was in the 90s; gamers looking for the 90s experience can still find modern retro-styled games. Also, it's not like everything from the 90s was gold. I actually do enjoy both AAA and indie FPSs.

> ["modern" programming (C++17, Rust, OOP etc.) or "advanced" engines] is an extremely bad choice for building long-lasting, accessible programs. New languages are a product of capitalism, evolved by the markets to serve corporations to make quick profit, not fulfilling the values that are good for the people.

I didn't read long enough to understand if this is a satire or not.

[drummyfish]

> The title is "portable suckless [...] 90s-style Doom clone", however, in the technical details ...

This is subjective, I started creating it as a Doom clone and have seen it that way all the time. I think if you show someone the screenshots they will say it looks like Doom and the kind of engine doesn't matter that much (many modern "Doom clones" also use modern engines, not the original BSP one). But of course your points about the engine are correct, it is simpler than Doom, which I mention in the readme. I haven't chosen that subtitle as a means of getting more attention, I don't really think about this as I despise marketing, I simply tried to describe it in a simple way.

> I didn't read long enough to understand if this is a satire or not.

Not a satire.

[twic]

> There's definitely a significant self-absorption in this project. [...] I didn't read long enough to understand if this is a satire or not.

Definitely sounds like a suckless project to me!

[grawprog]

That seems a bit pedantic and a kinda negative, the whole thing read to me like a parody on the whole 'it's not a real machine unless someone's made doom run on it meme' and a homage to doom style games.

It didn't seem to me like it was taking a jab at modern games or anything too serious. Just someone having a bit of fun, bragging a bit and showing off their work.

Nothing to get so worked up about. It's a neat project, no need to let semantics get you worked up. It all just seems like it was made for fun and it's kind of impressive for what it is.

Not everything needs to be stern and serious.

[pizza234]

Point taken! (although it seems the author is very serious in their anti-capitalistic stance)

[ddingus]

No worries on their politics though. What I see is an pretty cool project with some potential.

Ports to oddball or custom devices are lean projects. This is fun too. I hope some happen and maybe some other games get made.

[CJefferson]

I don't think it is satire, but if the author reads this, one first reading it really seems like they want to get people to hate them, but I don't think they do.

ALso, they really shouldn't claim "Doom clone" when their game is, technically, much worse than doom in many ways, when one of their major arguments is other games are "made wrong".

[jszymborski]

I think this is unfair.

Sure, the writing style is a bit over-stated, but ultimately it demonstrates that the author asked "why should I build this? does it contribute to society?" which are questions that I think aren't always at the fore front of software devs' minds.

You don't have to agree with their conclusions, but I appreciate that this person is thinking about social impact when they write code, and that it appears to be a major motivation.

There are sections which sound like self-aggrandizing promotion, but honestly we tolerate that stuff (esp. on start-up focused sites like ProductHunt and HN) from commercial products all the time that promise to "change the world" if only you give them a small monthly fee or stare at their ads. At least this person is talking about free and public cultural works.

Finally, a bit of a nitpick, but there was a time when "Doom-clone" was the word people used to describe FPSs. If this person is truly trying to create a 90s game, that's actually the better terminology. Granted, it's likely not the most common interpretation of the word these days.

[CJefferson]

This person claims to be the only person making fully open non-trivial open source games.

They talk about how other open source games have a variety of insulting problems, while complaining they are going to get lots of insults. They claim, unlike other authors of open source games "they are offer the truth". I tend to get irritated when anyone claims to be the source of truth.

[schrijver]

> on first reading it really seems like they want to get people to hate them

Didn’t read it like that at all. I just read someone explaining their principles and how it relates to something they make.

[ddingus]

That was my take too. They are super committed and motivated. Not a thing wrong about that.

What I like is their "you do you" approach. The license makes things clear. The author expressed themselves, what they are about in a way that also empowers others to do the same thing, everyone with basically no worries.

That frankly, is a healthy political expression.

[Iv]

Shhhh, you are supposed to be libertarian or ancap if you are posting on Ycombinator...

[forgotmypw17]

>I didn't read long enough to understand if this is a satire or not.

I don't know much about the C++ world, but it holds true for me in the Web. Sure, there is progress and such, but there is also much bloat and unnecessary heavy features which I avoid using, and only use with feature checks if necessary.

[qayxc]

> I didn't read long enough to understand if this is a satire or not.

I'm afraid it might not be satire at all judging from the author's other writings:

https://gitlab.com/drummyfish/my_writings/-/blob/master/capi...

[ed25519FUUU]

Under properties of capitalism:

> Poverty, crime, violence.

Anybody want to tell him?

[phaemon]

Tell them what? Those certainly are properties of capitalism, which is fairly obvious when you look at any capitalist country.

[ungoog]

You see poverty, crime and violence in most countries.

There is no official ranking of capitalist countries, but the Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom probably comes close: https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

The top 3 countries are Singapore, Hong Kong and New Zealand. The bottom three are North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.

I think violence is perhaps a bit more balanced; you see violence in Hong Kong and Venezuela, for example. And perhaps the crime rate is the same in North Korea and Singapore. But when it comes to poverty, it's pretty clear that you're better off in the countries at the top rather than the ones at the bottom.

[jpab]

I don't think that follows.

To conclude that these are properties of capitalism you need to examine both capitalist and non-capitalist societies and observe that capitalist societies exhibit poverty, crime and violence (true), and that non-capitalist societies don't (false).

[phaemon]

Not really. If I state that humans are mammals and one of their properties is that they need to breathe air, I'm under no obligation to demonstrate that there are mammals that don't breathe air. And nor does the existence of non-mammals that do breathe air invalidate my point.

But I understand your point that perhaps these are not necessarily inherent to Capitalism. I believe they are, as Capitalism structurally enforces inequality which inevitably leads to these things.

[qayxc]

> Capitalism structurally enforces inequality which inevitably leads to these things

That's of course nonsense. It's human nature that enforces inequality, which doesn't necessarily lead to crime and violence either because again - human nature does.

Every social animal displays hierarchical structures, that's just biology. I don't know why so many people hold the belief that humans are special somehow and above biology.

Every economical, political, and social system will result in some form of inequality, if only because education, training, and skill need to be rewarded unless of course, you are willing to trade fairness for equality.

Finally, crime and violence aren't the result of (economical) inequality. They are correlated, sure, but crime isn't limited to property crimes and most of the other crimes don't need inequality.

A crime after all is nothing more than an action, which is defined as being against the law. You can in principle get rid of all crime by abolishing the law...

A similar story applies to violence.

[phkahler]

I stopped reading at this:

"In today's world of capitalism and fascism no one thinks anymore about doing something without personal benefit, without expecting something in return. Complete selflessness and aim for the pure indiscriminatory long-term benefit of everyone is no longer even considered and if it appears by chance, it is laughed at and portrayed as stupidity. Technology that we are using every day is infected by this poison more than anything else."

Clearly this person has a huge self interest in the form of an axe to grind and inflation of their own ego. That's OK, but it's not good to lie to oneself about motivations.

[phaemon]

You think the only reason to point out problems in society is because a person has "an axe to grind and inflation of their own ego"? Do you think society is perfect then?

[phkahler]

No, I just don't think altruism comes from people who present the world as bad so they can point out the great thing they are doing in contrast to that. There is definitely an underlying something to it and it's quite plainly obvious. Remember I was responding to someone else who noticed it too.