I bought Doom on Steam and it's cool and all but I have a really hard time with the controls. I'm using the default with WASD is U/D/L/R and the left and right arrow keys to turn. Shift is run and Ctrl is shoot, and that's a real problem for me because with WASD I can't shoot with my left hand, and it's hard to touch right Ctrl and maintain accuracy while turning with the arrow keys.
So how can I remap shoot to another button? Preferrably the Up arrow. With Steam I don't see how to do this since you click play and it launches right into the game and once it's going you can't change the controls. You can choose between Ultimate Doom controls and classic controls, but neither fix this problem since they both use Ctrl to shoot.
Play it with a source port, like GZDOOM, or Zandronum
zandronum.com
http://devbuilds.drdteam.org/gzdoom/
Just put the DOOM.WAD file from your steam version folder and put it in the same folder as the source port you're using
>>2806385
Alternatively, if you want to enjoy Doom as close to the original as possible, you can try Chocolate Doom.
https://github.com/chocolate-doom/chocolate-doom
This source port has an easy to use setup tool right out of the box. Just pop in your DOOM,WAD and play.
>>2806385
I have no idea what that means. I'm fine with running the Steam version, I just watch to change how to shoot. As you can tell I'm not very computer literate.
>>2806397
You should learn how to use a source port like that anon said. It's not hard, and it is much more user-friendly than DOSbox or whatever Steam uses.
But, if you INSIST on using the default Steam setup, look in the Doom file folder (on your hard drive) for a SETUP.EXE and see if you can run that. Usually you can rebind keys there even if the game requires DOSbox to run.
>>2806431
I didn't see a setup.exe file but I did find a readme buried pretty deep in there that gave instructions for a built-in mapper. Ctrl+F1 lets you remap the keys, so I got it anyway now.
I still don't understand what all a sourceport is but maybe later I'll come back and look into it.
>>2806367
>I bought Doom on Steam
Big mistake.
>default with WASD is U/D/L/R and the left and right arrow keys to turn.
What the cunt? Those are bizarre controls and not the defaults, I assure you. Run SETUP.EXE and rebind if you need to, and use the mouse for crying out loud. Keyboard is not 'more authentic', Doom always had mouse support. Edit default.cfg to increase mouse sensitivity to a decent value.
It's because you only think to use Steam to launch the game that you never thought to run the incredibly obvious SETUP.EXE. Use your head & don't let Steam control your access to the game files.
>>2806510
>I bought Doom on Steam
>Big mistake.
why tho
>>2806526
>supporting Bethesda
>paying for a lazy 'slap it in Dosbox and change the defaut keykinds' release.
>sending the message 'I don't need or want quality ports'.
>censorship
>just fuck my shit up, demons
>>2806545
What's censored?
>>2806572
Doom, on Steam.
>>2806545
Well, considering no one is selling a better port, you have to balance this with the message of "I care about and value this classic ip."
How do we know that none of the original devs get money, by the way? Are you always required to give up all your stake in a product when you leave the company? I really have no idea about such things.
Okay, I beat the first chapter, I guess. Two demon guys appeared and shot green things at me then I entered a teleporter and got killed by demons in the dark. Is that really it? It took me to the credits and said play the next chapter. Does my stuff carry over?
>>2806572
In at least one of the versions (packaged with Doom 3 BFG edition) the Wolf3D levels are missing and I think the medkit symbol is censored in both the D3 and standalone releases. The medkit thing is small but fuck, it's an extra thing to complain about in a shit release. Might as well stick it on the list.
>>2806649
>Is that really it?
Yes. That's the shareware episode done. I think 9 maps for free is a pretty good deal.
>Does my stuff carry over?
No. You'll get it all back pretty fast and won't miss it.
Left hand
Pinky on spacebar
ring on ,
middle on .
index on shift
thumb on right ctrl
Right hand
ring finger on ->
middle finger on ^
index finger on <-
thumb on v
No need to change the controls, id has it well planned out for you.
>>2806726
>pinky
I don't have demon fingers.
I hope that OP is baiting, I refuse to believe that morons like this actually visit /vr/
>>2806614
Because company gets the money and distributes them between its employees as a salary. None of the people behind original Doom are employees of ID anymore, so any money that go to ID go to people completely unrelated to the old Doom.
>>2806367
Spidermind has arms?
Can't you use mouselook with the Steam version?
>>2806397
You don't have to be computer literate, find the DOOM.WAD file in your Steam folder, copy it and paste it in the GZDoom folder, then double click on GZDOOM.exe and select "The Ultimate Doom" from the menu
>>2806490
>I still don't understand what all a sourceport is but maybe later I'll come back and look into it.
Long ago id Software made the source code of Doom public. Over time people took that source code and added new features, or made it work on different platforms. So you got versions of Doom that support 3D acceleration, polygonal models, different lighting, high resolution, controller bindings and that run on modern Windows, without the need of an emulator like DOSBox.
The game itself always consists of two parts. One is the game data. That's all the monsters, levels, sounds, etc., usually in a so called WAD file. The other is the game logic, the executable. That's where the source ports step in, allowing you to basically swap out this executable, so you to play the original Doom game data in new ways.
The attached pic is an example screenshot of one of the many many source ports. You can see that the game uses the original pixelated bitmaps, but it runs natively at high resolution, filters the bitmaps, introduces advanced lighting (the green glow around the barrel) and so on.
>>2806385
>http://devbuilds.drdteam.org/gzdoom/
How are you supposed to know which one to download? Why are there so many?
>>2809325
These are development builds. The program's in development, and some changes might have introduced regressions (things that broke, that used to work). Usually the best way is to download the latest build, and if it acts up, get something older. Or if you don't like gambling, grab the latest actual release at http://forum.drdteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=6482
>>2806973
>Because company gets the money and distributes them between its employees as a salary
This is extremely misleading because it makes it sound like the salaries are based on the money coming in from game sales. Most developers have historically been work-for-hire so "your money" never "goes to the devs" AT ALL, even if you buy day 1 and they are all still employed. But, it is possible for devs to get royalties, and the arrangement depends on what is negotiated and in the contract (duh). There's no law that says you can't do work for a company and keep getting royalties for the game as it sells through the years.
The situation with id is weird because they started very independent and probably made up all the profit-sharing rules themselves. Maybe it WAS a simple % of the money coming in for all we know, and probably all that changed drastically over the years as they got bigger, and certainly when they got subsumed by Bethesda. I guess Carmack could tell us if he was still seeing anything from Doom sales years later or if it was a flat salary at that point.
But in general I think people care way too much about this weird "are the devs getting my money?" question because you never really know, even in the very beginning, and you can't find out in any effective way. It's also not something people ask about other products, which I think is strange. Also, what is the value of showing that an old ip like Doom can still make money, period? Would that ever make a company hire NEW devs to make a new game in that classic style? The cause/effect here is just too complicated.
>>2809409
>I think people care way too much about this weird "are the devs getting my money?" question
The primary reason is, that most of the time the publisher does not contribute to the game itself in a meaningful way, and there are plenty of cases where publishers actively damaged the product (DRM is but one of the many many ways). So buyers have a strong interest in their money contributing to the good guys, not the cancerous growth.
>It's also not something people ask about other products, which I think is strange
Many other products lack this parasite entity. Groceries, for example. They have an infrastructure, but it usually doesn't interfere with the products. On the other hand, music is another well known example of an industry where the middle man gets in the way of the creator, and again you will see people that want to make sure their money goes "to the artist"
>>2809409
>>2809424
Another reason that makes the arts, including gaming, unique, and makes people insist on the creator getting the money, is the huge amount of upfront costs. We buy our games finished, and that's fine. But the developer has the costs to produce it. One mechanism that (independent) developers use is paying for a project with the profits from a previous project. As a result, some people consider the payment for a game a sign of trust and goodwill towards the developer, their skills and idea, to enable them to produce a new game. A side effect for that is that people are not as interested in paying for games of defunct devs, or devs that changed fundamentally. In these cases, the product already exists, and the chances are slim that the devs will be able to produce another product of comparable quality. So there is little incentive to pay.
>>2809332
Yeah, but to play the good latest mods you need the devbuilds.
>>2809449
The person asking didn't sound like a bleeding edge modder, but instead someone trying to get it to work. You're right though, pre release builds contain the latest features and options. They also contain the latest bugs. That's why I suggested the release for someone new to it.
>>2809424
Well, I should have said that I do understand WHY people have this concern, but I think they are very lazy and not systematic about applying it. Most people don't actually know anything about how something got funded or how the money changes hands, they don't put any serious effort into finding out, but they still have very strong opinions about whether they should pay for something and who "deserves" it if they do.
Kinda makes me long for the days of guys selling floppies out of their cars so at least you can grasp the entire process.
>>2809462
small indie devs still sell on their own page, with at most a payment system between you and them. They're the modern floppy guys.
Sadly, dumb small indie devs sell through Steam or Humble Store or other "publishers" like that.
