"To this, I only ask what other game lets you go in and change things like skyboxes and fog that are integral to the look of the game."

Yeah, I agree. We don't allow anything else to be customized ... what's so special about fog? 

Is there anybody who seriously goes and changes the density and color of fog, just for the sake of extra eyecandy? 

Absolutely, checkout the stuff at quakeone.com and the various HD packs. 

Yes, but should that override the mappers intentions? I mean, fog isn't chosen for a map at random. 

 

They do stop you seeing the level if you apply enough. 

Fog is one of the settings that HD packs like to set (afaik, I am not into that kind of stuff). 

We should add settings for tweaking color ranges. Like, if I don't like red lighting I should be able to tint it more towards orange.

Also, lava kind of sucks ... being able to switch that to slime would be great. 

Is anyone here colorblind? Not that this matters a lot, but perhaps there's an argument for a colorblind mode or somesuch. 

Dark Places let you change the colour balance with RGB sliders? 

 

oh, i thought you guys were actually interested in some kind of meaningful discussion. my mistake.

zwiffle: there is at least one ex-mapper. statistically about 5% of men are more or less, they rarely speak about it though. I know of 4-5 players but that's a fraction. 

RGB sliders for fog would be awesome... 

Yes, but should that override the mappers intentions? I mean, fog isn't chosen for a map at random.

That's not actually the point being made.

Of course if a map specifies a certain fog setting, the engine should honour it and the player should accept it. That's not in dispute.

The point being made is that where a map doesn't specify it's fog (or water alpha, or skybox, or whatever), right now there are two possible interpretations and both are valid:

(1) The mapper doesn't specify fog because the mapper doesn't particularly care, never thought to do so, or else the map predates engine support for fog.

(2) The mapper is explicitly specifying no fog.

Interpretation (1) is the only case where the player can go nuts with user-specified fog. This is the case that, if you look at the world through mapper-coloured glasses you, may miss becoming aware of.

Interpretation (2) is unambiguous: again, the mapper doesn't want fog and the engine should honour that. Again, that's not in dispute.

The problem is: how does the engine tell which of interpretation (1) or interpretation (2) is the case? 

#2 is the safe assumption. 

Set it to whatever the map is set to on load. Players can change it after load if they want to, but assuming the map is authoritative is the best way of respecting the mappers intentions.

If players change it after load, so be it.

That should really be the end of the debate. :) 

Reminder that the original point of debate was:

fog should reset after each map

And it's bloody blatantly obvious it should. 

if you look at the world through mapper-coloured glasses

Shame for us all, looking at Quake maps through mapper glasses on a Quake mapper forum. 

You are ignoring mh's insights on how people out there actually play Quake. Try looking outside the box some day. 

What if there was an additional fog-related cvar to toogle persistent fog that carries over across level changes and reloads. Could even be 1 = persists until loading a map that has a fog field of its own, and 2 = overrides maps' fog settings. Disabled by default, so only to be used by people who know what they're doing, who are aware of the possible unwanted effects. 

 

"You are ignoring mh's insights on how people out there actually play Quake."

Nobody here does that. And we all play Quake. 

 

I'm gonna say to make the fog command a mapper/mod setting that gets reset on map changes. With mods stuffcmding from triggers etc, doing otherwise is too unsafe.
If users want to override it, they can either do it on each map change or the engine can implmement something per-map like:
http://ezquake.sourceforge.net/docs/?commands#skygroup
maybe. 

I'm dismissing.