![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 22 November 2019. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
![]() | It is requested that a video clip or video clips of gameplay be included in this article to improve its quality. |
It is an attempt to alter all sprites/sounds in a DOOM2 IWAD with free ones. It is an IWAD, not a separate game/remake.
I just made a couple of edits to rework this article, as it contained some pretty egregious factual errors. I feel I ought to declare that I am one of the main developers of the project and I hope this doesn't give any perception of impropriety: I have made my changes as good faith attempts to improve the article.
There were a few things in particular that I wanted to correct:
Fragglet (talk) 03:38, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
@Shaddim: Freedoom is not a source port distribution of Doom. It doesn't really care what source port it runs under, as long as it's compatible (currently, limit removing). Sure, all(?) of the Doom source ports are based on the GPL release from id Software. But in the end, Freedoom doesn't distribute any source code under the GPL. Any source code (not just the works of art that make the game), including the GENMIDI tools, are under BSD 3-clause license. It is inaccurate to state the "source code" to be under GPL.
In addition, "BSD license" is ambiguous and can mean any of the following:
These vary greatly. Freedoom is under a 3-clause BSD, and should be explicitly stated to avoid ambiguity. 2001:2003:54FA:2F79:0:0:0:1 (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. 2001:2003:54FA:2F79:0:0:0:1 (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Can Freedoom be considered notable only on the basis that it's based on Doom a free replacement for Doom's works of art, a notable project? (That'd be self-referencing.) I'm doubting not, but also couldn't find significant coverage outside of fan-sites. 2001:2003:54FA:2F79:0:0:0:1 (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2017 (UTC); edited 19:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
((Third-party))
is more appropriate, feel free to replace the ((Notability))
tag. 2001:2003:54FA:2F79:0:0:0:1 (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Wired may be OK, though it's on the edge of trivial mention. I don't read the language of publication at GameStar, but it seems to focus on Brutal Doom with a trivial mention of Freedoom. The VG247 article also has a trivial mention. No significant coverage to satisfy WP:GNG clearly, but then again it may not need to be the main topic to satisfy if widely mentioned.
I'd like to wait longer and see, maybe up until Freedoom 1.0 release or something. 2001:2003:54FA:2F79:0:0:0:1 (talk) 11:13, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
OFF-TOPIC: @2001:2003:54FA:2F79:0:0:0:1: Why you don't create a account in Wikipedia? you have more than 100 good edits on Wikipedia and seems you are familiar with rules. Editor-1 (talk) 07:52, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
It's exactly this sort of deletionist nonsense that drove me away from participation with Wikipedia years ago. This is a significant component of the Doom user community, and pretending than only pre Information Age 20th Century sources are notable is even more alarmingly atavistic an attitude today than it was when I gave up on dealing with this nearly a decade ago. -- 97.94.196.110 (talk) 02:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Freedoom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Should there be a platform section, seeing as Freedoom only has game assets and no executable code? 2604:6000:1509:C143:7100:EF22:8FE4:C8C1 (talk) 01:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
For Chocolate Doom (and its derivative Crispy Doom - which tries to make graphics crisper), FreeDoom is partly compatible - but can be used as grafting stock for any Vanilla-compliant PWAD files. FreeDM is recommended for running Doom 1 content. For Doom 2 content, including Eternal Doom, Phase 2 IWAD is required. 46.173.5.68 (talk) 08:08, 10 March 2019 (UTC)