Sotha
-
Posts
5664 -
Joined
-
Days Won
134
Posts posted by Sotha
-
-
Hello, I'm planning an FM and I think given the nature of it's size it'd really benefit from a dialogue interface to add a a bit of immersion to an otherwise short mission. The dialogue will be used locate an item with the help of a shady character on the street, then to trick someone into thinking that you are someone else while giving them instructions to make some guards move away from that item.
I wonder If anyone would be willing to lend a hand? I need it to be something like the book interface but not obstructing your view, where the turn page button gives you more chat options but you can use the arrow keys to select a topic. And if possible activate actual speech coming from the NPC (with lip sink and audio from their direction)
The aim of the fan mission is to try and make the dark mod look especially good, so if you want to help and can script, that'd be great.
I don't know how to do guis, unfortunately. But I have to say the idea is a good one.
I'd really like to see a chat system, a similar like the one in oblivion. Technically, given the versatility of doom3 gui system, I think it would not be very difficult to make a gui with upper area for character text, middle area for normal 3dview of the character, and lower area for the chat options. The chat would start by frobbing an AI and work much like normal readables, ie. if you walk away the chat goes away. Heck, you could probably set up shady characters selling you items for loot during the mission like in deus ex with this.
With a system like this a mapper could have a player-AI conversation without recruiting voice-actors since the actor text could be also done as a readable only. I can only imagine the possiblities of missions where you combine stealth and well chosen words to gain your objectives.
If you manage to pull this one off, I'd love to see a tutorial how it is made, I'm fascinated by the entire idea.
-
Have you tried google?
Yes I have. The typical problem is that key words "free sound effects" find me a zillion 'free' sound effect repositories which then ask money for the sounds, but provide some sounds for free and I do not find anywhere whether or not I can use the 'free' ones really for free. One site said the sounds are free, but then it said that I need to get a written permission if I use them in games.
Therefore I asked if someone happens to know some some reliable sources which are truly free. I'm a bit awkward with these copyright things and I simply want to play it safe, even if it may make me seem a little handicapped.
Yeah, it would take 5 seconds to find the sound I need if the copyright things shouldn't be worried.
-
-
It would probably be easiest to add a new script event for you, say $ai1.PatrolTo( $new_path_node ) so when called,the AI forgets its route, adds the new path node to its patrol and proceeds from there. The method would then take care of all the internal AI memory and stuff.
Yes, that would be the best solution.
I can look into this if you add a tracker entry and make a testmap with two path node patrol loops.Okay, I'm on it.
-
Hey, wait a minute...
*Does a quick test*
Oh yes, it seems I thought the entire thing incorrectly.
It is not the AI who should get the new targets, but the path_corners!
If I make a stim-response thingy which does 'Add target' for a path_corner, it will work. So basically I could have set all the path_nodes in the AI's initial route to point to the first node of the new patrol route. When the change occurs, the AI seems to walk about two path_corners on the old route and then proceed to the new route. The change is not immediate.
As for 'clear targets' response, it works the same way: I can halt the AI by clearing targets from the path_nodes. The problem with this method is that the AI will never walk again. He stops and you cannot give him new targets or anything.
So, the AI-to-new-route has been solved in some capacity, but the solution is not the best possible because the AI will not react to it immediately. This is still much better option than the node teleportation, however.
I'd still love to hear what this mysterious 'atdm:target_changetarget' entity does. Maybe the best solution is somewhere hidden in the logic of this entity?
-
The problem to be solved:
I basically have AI's going on patrol routes. Then I have an event which changes the AI patrol routes completely.
I want to trigger a change of patrol route for an AI who is already walking on another path.
I know the following so far:
- Giving a new target to the AI with response 'Add target' works. But only if the AI has no target in the beginning. If he is already targetting something, 'add target' does nothing.
- Giving the AI a new spawnarg 'target' with the response 'set spawnarg' doesn't work at all. (I'm not sure what this response is for, if someone knows please tell me.)
- There is the response 'Remove targets', which sounds perfect, but it does nothing. Calling such a response on an AI who is walking a path does not stop him.
- I CAN change the patrol route by teleporting the path_corners to new locations, but this is not a very elaborate solution as I'd need to teleport all the path nodes. Not much flexibility there. What if the new path needs more, less or new path_nodes?
- I've noticed that there exists a target entity called 'atdm:target_changetarget,' which sounds like it could be of benefit, but I've found absolutely no documentation for it. Any info on that would be great.
All attempts to help are greatly appreciated.
-
@Fidcal:
Thanks for the link. After browsing through I found the following candidates (mostly for my own reference, but I understood others may be interested, so I'll put them here to save your time finding them):
http://www.freesound...le.php?id=72757
http://www.freesound...le.php?id=25032
http://www.freesound...le.php?id=96973
Not exactly what I'd like, but the license is definately lax enough for my purposes. Does someone else know some other sites? I suppose I have to use these if I don't find anything else.
@BC:
I checked the lanternbot whistle sound but that wasn't what I'd need. I've not planned any significant scripting. If the alarm occurs, then I'll set few guards some new target path_corners. Player setting the alarm on deserves some slight harrasment.
-
Thank you, gentlemen. The link by Tch does not work.
Now we have identified to type of the alarm noise. I suppose the submarine diving alarm is the most nice, but air raid will also be fine.
Submarine diving: http://www.policeint...m/sounds/k1.wav
The mechanical bell is a bit boring since everyone gets used to it in schools.
How should I proceed now? Can someone make a sound effect for me/TDM or should I just pluck a sound from the net? That probably leads to copyright problems with my mission and I don't want that. Is there any free sound effect repositories I could use without problems?
-
I just went through our sound assets and couldn't find a sound suitable for an alarm system.
I've no idea what a victorian-era-steam-powered-alarm-system would sound like, but thiefs 1 & 2 have alarm sounds which might be a good place to find inspiration. I don't have the skills for a sound effect creation feat, unfortunately.
At any rate, surely a sneaking game like this should have an alarm klaxon? I'd need one too for my mission. If some sound-creation-capable individual could create or point me to one, I'd me most appreciative and happy.
Thanks!
-
I've been playing a bit of catch up on the FM's. I have to say Sotha, I love your style. Anything you make, I'll play it. Keep doing what you are doing. You've got the whole ball of wax, in construction, story, ambients. I love your use of sounds BTW. ..
Sounds like I have my first fan! Thank you very much for your nice feedback in here and in The Glenham Tower thread as well.
I am very pleased that my work has provided you with enjoyable moments. Thanks again!
-
The vertical contest has made me think about map verticality gameplay consequenses and I'd like to ask, just out of curiosity more than else, the following question:
Will the AI ever be able to climb ladders? Is this planned behavior?
The answer has some special meaning for the mappers gameplay-wise. At present, ladders are basically a safe-zone. Enemies will not approach from the ladder's direction. Ladders alleviate tension, since it is a guaranteed escape route for the player, as opposed a good ol' staircase where the AI can pursue the player freely. Thus for gameplay reasons ladders should be placed sparingly, not to make things too easy.
AI climbing a ladder in a normal no-alert-level patrol mode would certainly change this as danger can approach the player from the ladder as well. On the other AI's climbing ladders probably provides nasty AI exploit opportunities.
So, what is the teams take on this?
-
Here's my view. It may contain some spoilers:
Gameplay: good. This really is a good mission and fun to play. Nice sneaking. Maybe a tiny bit too easy with all the darkness. The biggest down side with gameplay was that the mission is short.
Appearance: good. This mission is nice to look at. The geometry is nice and cave-looking as it should be and there was no lag or low framerate. Verticality was also used nicely. A lot of climbing. A slight downside was that the climbing got slightly repetitive, but since the mission was short and compact no problems here.
Story: tolerable. I though a lot about this. I wanted to give a good grade. But I simply cannot. Here's my thoughts:
There were a few readables bringing in atmosphere, but I couldn't get enchanted by the story. The readables felt a bit shallow in some way and couldn't bring the mission to life. But this is a simple matter, and it would not be a good reason to give only tolerable grade.
The biggest problem was that I couldn't get the feeling that the map is 'real'. Does Bryce routinely climb every single day a sparking generator cable up to his lair? Or simply jump down the hole in the ceiling of his room? The ladder to his lair is broken and the player needs to stack some crates to get up: a nice puzzle, but how does Bryce and his thug climb up there the same way every day? These made the mission locale unbeliavable (as in breaking of suspension of disbelief) for me and combined with the readables, I can only give a tolerable.
But if you're looking a short nice climb'n'sneak this is a good mission.
-
1
-
-
Looks really nice! I wish I could do something like that, but as they say: some people have it and some people don't.
-
I tried moving the religions posts to their own thread, but I've managed to butcher it--for some reason some of the posts won't move (keep getting a server error when I try).
Sorry about that. The posts that would move are here: http://modetwo.net/d...50entry225640
Heh. Nice thing to get the thread back to topic. Maybe the magnificent and noble new title will bring in new people joining the discussion.
But still... I kinda feel the title 'The Creeps' still fits somehow the discussion we have going on here.
-
Of course science is a belief system. We blur it with words like "evidence" of "a well proved base", but ultimately the entire concept of science asks us to believe that by carrying out experiments and collecting data, we will reach a "truth". There's no concrete proof that this will be the case, but we believe it anyway. This is the same for religion. Replace "evidence" or "scientific methods" with "God" (or Allah, etc.) and you have the same conundrum.
I have to disagree with this totally. The comparison with religion with science is unfair. You should keep in mind that science provides us with a method to formulate predictable models with which to understand the reality. And exploit it. Beliefs do not provide this function.
I agree, for the sake of shorthand, it's fine to say "facts" rather than "the most likely explanation". I also agree that science has provided us with massive advances in our understanding of the universe and I'm in no way belittling it. But there are huge areas with big question marks over it in science. How did life begin? How did the dinosaurs die out? What came before the Big Bang? Some scientists put their hands up and say "we don't know", others put forward a theory based on the most likely explanation of the evidence. A theory requires people to believe in it. As you say, we may understand the workings of electricity, but migh never understand how or why it exists in the first place.Science cannot provide answer to everything. All it basically does is to explain rationally phenomenons we encounter. You cannot present any kind of rubbish as a scientific high-probable (fact), as you need to back you claims up with multiple experiments with supporting observations. In beliefs the situation is entirely different, you can make any claim and everyone should accept it as anyone can believe in anything.
They are entirely different things.
We can never say with absolute certainty what it is, as we are humans and therefore have limitations. It's true that the Earth is either round or not, although the concept of "not round" is incredibly vast to the point of being meaningless. It could be infinite number of shapes. The key issue is how can we know with 100% certainty what shape it is? It's actually a great example. We can only ever see one side of the Earth at any one time. The other side is filled in by our brains to create a belief that there is another side to the Earth, but we just can't see it. This is called object permanence - just because we can't see something, we are still able to hold in our minds that it exists. However, on what basis? What evidence to we have that the other side of the Earth doesn't simply cease to exist when we aren't looking at it?Think of a chair. When we see a chair, we know it's there. If we walk out of the room, all we have is a memory of a chair. Our brain tells us that chair still exists even though we can't see it, but we don't know for certain. On the basis of our knowledge and understanding of the universe, it's completely reasonable to assert that the chair doesn't pop in and out of existence, but there is always, and must always be, an element, of doubt, however small. Now here's the clincher. If I was to believe that if I can't see something it simply doesn't exist, how could you say with absolute certainty I was wrong? Of course it's absurd and in all likelihood I'm totally off the mark, but that element of doubt means that I could be right.
Depends if the room is properly visportalled, whether the chair is there or not..
But seriously, c'mon! This isn't very practical approach. Philosophy of this type can only provide us with meaningless difficuly as we cannot really rely on anything. Sure, it makes nice party talk and we sound clever, but in practical things it is useless: "Woo, I could actually be a butterfly only DREAMING I am a human." It's better to stick to the facts you know that will work and proceed onwards from there.
However, I think you've misunderstood what I was saying if you think I'm suggesting that "all beliefs are equal." Of course they aren't. But everyone has the right to believe what they want, and no one can ever tell someone with absolute certainty that they're wrong. There might well be a God. There might well be gnomes living in your trousers. I'm not saying that all beliefs are on a level footing, but there is no way to tell beyond all doubt that any belief is a fallacy.In science we gather evidence and look at what is likely, but ultimately it's all a matter of probability, not fact. To proclaim that you are definitely right in your beliefs is narrow-minded and frankly, wrong. Or not
So it is okay to allow people being deliberately misguided? It is okay for me to allow people to believe what they want as long as they are given the correct information and then they get to choose. But forcing irrational beliefs to people in school as scientifically proven facts is entirely different thing, don't you think.
-
1
-
-
IS THERE any chance I could join the contest.
Everyone is most welcome to join these contests, but time is running out and it would require a heroic concentrated effort to make a map now from scratch, especially if you're creating your very first map.
There certainly will be contests like this in the future, so maybe you should play some existing maps made by others and learn from them, gather some DR experience and then you're ready to kick some butt in the next contest!
And nothing, of course, prevents you from creating cool missions in the meantime. Start small and simple. It's better to have a small, tense, good looking and fun mission, than a huge mission which is crappy.
-
OK Biker
... I guess since my wife is always saying I'll die from GURD\Cancer\Etc.The information I am accumulating about your wife makes her a really interesting person...
@Bikerdude:
You can really easily use the site Nielsen mentioned or imageshack. Imageshack doesen't even need registration. Just select the files and upload. you can upload several images at once. The system provides you with a forum link which you can copy paste here for the images to work. Really easy. I've not used photobucket so I don't know if it has the same features. Probably these are pretty standard stuff.
If you have many images, you could combine them into a few images, like 5-10 prefabs per image and upload those.
-
At risk of repeating something that has already been said (I haven't read the last posts thoroughly) My two cents are that we should probably take the time to realise that no one's right. There is no "one ultimate truth" and the belief in science is no more likely than the belief in God.
There is certainly no ultimate truth, but science is not a belief system, which could be compared to religions. This seems to be frighteningly common conception. Beliefs do not require any kind of experiments or justifications for itself, but science requires well proved base.
Form what I can tell there's been a bit of a misunderstanding of science here, too. Science doesn't produce "facts", nor does it provide "certainties". All science does examine a set of circumstances and, on the basis of what is known and observable, provide a theory as to the most likely cause. Good science will NEVER say "A causes B" (although for the sake of brevity people might say this), but in fact says "We know that when we manipulate A, B also changes. The most likely explanation is that A causes B". So the idea of God, or fairies painting our leaves in autumn, may be considered by modern science as highly unlikely, but they can never be considered impossible.Certainly. But but in the spoken language we can talk about facts. I am a practical man, and it gets highly tediuos of saying 'with high probability' at all times. But the highly-probables (facts) build up. And with a pile of facts we can understand the universe far better. We can say we know a fact when we understand something natural well enough to do some nice application for. Like electricity. We probably will not reach the one-and-only-truth, but we can understand the secrets of the universe well enough to master it. With science.
We talk about the same thing, but use different words.
Philosophers have long argued that there are inherent limits to all ways of understanding the world because anything we "know" is based on our senses, which is processed through our own perceptions. This introduces bias, which means that we can never know actual truth. We only "know" a tree exists because our eyes give raw information to our brain and our brain comes to the conclusion that it exists.Immanuel Kant (I think) argued that for something to exist to humanity, it must exist within time and space. We can only perceive a chair if it occupies space in the universe and if it exists for a period of time (if a chair exists for 0 seconds then humans can't know it exists. This leaves a whole void of experience that is beyond our grasp - that which (theoretically) exists outside of time and space. God, or fairies, or anything else for that matter, might exist in this realm and we would never know about it. Or it might not. The point is that Kant created this theory using his mind, which, as I said earlier, is fallible. So there's a massive paradox there that means that we can never know absolute truth, and so all possibilities are up for grabs.
OK, ramble over. My point is that we could all be equally right, or equally wrong, but we will never know. So my take on it is that as long as what you believe in doesn't distress you (as in people with distressing psychotic symptoms), you can believe what you want. If you want to believe in God, Harry Potter, fairies, aliens, science, fate or free will, then go for it. Pick one (or several) view(s) of the world that suits you and accept that other people have the right to disagree with you, but also accept that they are no more right or wrong than you are. I picked atheism and science (although you could also label me a humanist).
A humanist! How wonderful! I really think you should go back a bit in this thread. I'm sure there is a lot of material there you'll find most interesting..
Just never believe you're right, never force your beliefs on others and never harm others on the basis of your beliefs (think The Crusades, KKK or Islamic extremists).A good rule, except that you have to rely on something. It's truly a shame that almost no one abides it. I suppose it is a human quality.
-
@bambini:
I suppose fingers will be pointing at least at me, for it was at least my hand on the lever labeled 'highjack thread.' There were many hands there, so I am uncertain who pulled the lever in the end. Could have been me.
I don't know about prejudice and paranoia you're mentioning, but I've been monitoring this thread ever since the highjacking to the religious context. Really interesting stuff, because of the fundamentally different aspects. The different sides can barely understand each other. For me this thread is about understanding why people with religious background think the way they do. I have already learned many useful things!
For Spring, I think it is the enjoyment of a intellectual discussion (correct me if I'm wrong).
What would be the best weapon against prejudice and paranoia, than good clear non-censored discussion? Without discussion, prejudice and paranoia will increase as we have no hope of understanding the other party.
@Sneaksie:
I loved the cats in your video. They are much more intelligent beings than they are given credit for.
The song was annoying.
@Jdude:
Let me ask you this, what WOULD make it rational in your mind? And what WOULD make it NOT dangerous?
The question was not aimed at me, but since I'm still here, here is my take on the topic:
I suppose it is the thing that faith is simply not rational. You are believing something without any kind of verification, experiment, or something like that. People with faith just choose to believe what it reads in a holy book. Or the doctrine of their chosen faith. It could be fairies painting the leaves or a white bearded man sitting on a cloud.
Faith's idea is to attempt to give us answers to the things we do not yet understand. As we gain knowledge, we can drop the bizarre beliefs we have and stick to the facts we have learned. It is dangerous to have people who function fundamentally within the guidelines of the bizarre beliefs. They do not know the facts and they do tend to stick to the old information. If this kind of people reach decision making positions, there will be trouble. Everyone may get harmed by the bizarre beliefs of this one person.
Beliefs would NOT be dangerous, if people would accept new information and facts, re-adjust themselves with the new knowledge. The problem is that strongly religious people tend to stick to conservatism and thus it may even be in their interests to impede the spreading of the new knowledge.
I believe that if I would take a copy of Harry Potter -books and teleport it in the past, the religious people of our time could be saying 'alohomora' instead of 'amen' and praying for protection against Voldemort instead of the devil. Needless to say how rational the above is... But it may give some insight.
-
Sometimes there is nothing like a bit of speedbuilding. As long as you are focused and have time, anything is possible in 3 weeks.
Yep. Proof:
The Glenham Tower was created in 20 days.
The Beleaguered Fence was created in 26 days.
For me, focused bursts of obsessive mapping is the only way I suppose.
-
Thanks, I'll send you a PM as vell
I think I have what I need in beta testers now. So the rest of you will just have to wait until it is released
Thank you! Got it. I'll test it tonight.
-
This is my very first time to do this, but
I volunteer!
-
I'm glad you had fun!
I noticed pictures, who was tainted by dirt (especiallypeople in faces) – really evil. And the burning witch. Yuk seconded!
You're the first one to mention the paintings. I thought it would elaborate the way how the undead hate the living, ripping and smudging their faces.
First, I thought it would be easier to get it out of tower through that quick way onto surface.
The 'explosion' is actually the room above the attic collapsing. You could not have entered that way even if you reached the top. The door is jammed with all the junk.
Why was she alive? I suppose destroying the sphere resurrected her, but that was the last trick she had up the sleeve,because sphere was destroyed, so she had no power anymore. Am I correct?
Yep. Such are the most powerful of undead: they can return to life quite easily. Maybe the hag is still alive, waiting for her return and plotting revenge..
Sorry for the long sharing with my experience, but it just shows how good this mission was
No problems. I enjoy reading how people perceive my missions. It helps me improve. Thank you!
-
What I think would be great would be a play piano animation. Imagine as the player sneaks through the house and hears a piano playing. Enters the room and sees a nobleman or woman sitting at the piano (or harpsichord) playing. That I'd like to see.
Yes! It reminds me of a mission in some of the hitman-games. There was this druglord playing cello. Bach (my favourite!), if I remember correctly. That was delightful.
I wish we had an army of people with excellent animation skills and plenty of free time...
Faith, Reason and Truth
in Off-Topic
Posted
I find this discussions still interesting here. Even the classical nazi card was played!
I just have to comment here that your reputation was lowered by this comment
In this particular case I just have to agree that reputation decrease have to occur. However, later on you've done some nice contributions to this discussion which have also given you positive reputation.
So, keep on giving reputation increases and decreases, but not for whether you agree with opinions or not.
Aggressive, impolite, etc posts deserve negative reputation.
Good insight and well written or other 'good' posts deserve positive ones.
If in doubt do not change reputation.
There has been some discussion about the purpose of this thread. It would seem that the main idea is to enjoy a discussion on religious/logical topics. Also new insight may be gained from here, at least I have. I definately do not recommend stopping the discussion like Mr. Lemony Fresh suggested.
The idea is not to make anyone change their beliefs. We are merely discussing about them and attempting to see why others see things the way they see them.
If the topic seems too sensitive, try to get a broader perspective.