SteveL
-
Posts
3666 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
62
Posts posted by SteveL
-
-
Finished at last! On about my dozenth attempt. This is a tough but satisfying mission. I managed to fall foul of the time limit several times even on Shadow difficulty, which of course meant my save games were useless too.
I had a problem with the time limit playing on Shadow. I didn't know what the time limit was when posting that so didn't call it out as a bug, but my multiple attempts weren't anything like 6 hours long. I probably took the same route and method through each time. Sorry, I know how useless this is as a problem report...
-
The "header" is the first section of the article, the part that comes before the table of contents. It's not in a different place. That said, I was wrong to say that you and others hadn't read the rules
, because I see the rules have been relaxed a bit in the last 10 years. An article about a living person or ongoing project used to be a candidate for speedy deletion if it didn't establish the claim to notability in the header. Now I see that admins are required to do some digging before deleting or merging an article that they consider to be non-notable, even going as far as doing independent research to find out, so the editors who redirected TDM's page to the general idtech4 mods page were out of order. That said, it will help that the article now mentions our PC Gamer award and the print coverage and magazines that have included us on cover DVDs. And opening a talk page discussion is still the right way to handle any edit dispute. All the dispute resolution procedures begin with that:"Talk page discussion is a prerequisite to almost all of Wikipedia's venues of higher dispute resolution."
and now that there's a talk page discussion, anyone wanting to remove the article content is obliged to discuss it there first.
-
Yeah, my point was that the rules are ever changing and we almost lose the article once a year. First it was something about "has to be released", then "mentioned in a print magazine", then the mysterious header (of which I never knew until today) and next month its another insane rule that didn't exist a few days ago.
No, that's rubbish. How many times do I have to say it? Our article did not comply with the rules until a couple of weeks ago. That's why it was vulnerable to deletion. Clearly no-one who worked on it in the past bothered to find out what those rules were. Sorry to pick on you when several others on this forum have been talking nonsense about Wikipedia too, but the rules don't keep changing, and they are perfectly sensible and proportionate. Lots of people want to use Wikipedia for self-promotion, which is natural. WP has to fight back to remain an authoritative source. The rules on vanity articles haven't changed in the last ten years, whether or not some admins made unhelpful comments when removing an (apparently) fluff piece.
-
Yes, There are a couple of 20-page threads on here if you want to seek them out. The consensus was, it's very pretty but it's not similar to the Thief series. I got half way through it before losing interest, and it made so little impression that I can't now remember anything about it, or why I put it down. I do remember being annoyed by pointless quick time events.
-
Here's an old one from when I used to be in a heavy metal band called Deviation years ago. Unfortunately because of all the distortion we used I don't think a lot of the recordings sound very good now. Here's one with no distortion that me and Joe (the singer) wrote and recorded in one go. I like doing things in one take. Sometimes there's a few mistakes but I think you can keep re-recording things to the point that while it's flawless it can also be flat and soulless. Plus the passion to record something new for the first time will always be unparalleled.
I really like that one too, nice work. Live performances and studio recordings have diverged into completely separate art forms by now. I don't know much about modern music but I expect it's the same situation as classical piano recordings which I do follow. Studio recordings are pieced together from dozens of takes, which get split into individual bars a couple of seconds long, and the result is pieced together from the best version of each bar. That's been going on since the invention of magnetic tape in the 1940s. I've seen early videos of Glenn Gould constructing a studio "performance" using a razor blade and sticky tape. I agree that the live versions are always more feeling and more exciting, even though they always contain a few mistakes.
-
I'm the User:L'Acuto who edited the article and talk page recently by the way. That's a new user account but I do have a lot of experience of wikipedia bureaucracy. I clocked up a few thousand edits 10 years ago on admin stuff and wrote a couple of articles, but back then I was sharing an account with my boyfriend who carried on using it after I dropped out. So I registered as a new user to tweak our article and open the Notability discussion.
-
The Wikipedia "noteability" stuff is just insane. Our project exists since at least 2007, was release in 2009 and reviewed/printed in numerous magazines. And yet, somehow we are in danger of being "not noteable?" Edit: And the most insane thing is the same discussion seems to happen every damn year... end of edit.
Our project is definitely notable under wikipedia rules, but we didn't comply with the wiki rule that you have to make the case for notability in the leading paragraph, which made the article an easy target for editors who are overzealous or are just in a hurry. That's fixed.
-
And to top the insanity off, they have "unified" all the usernames on the wikipedia different language pages. This means that now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tels~enwiki(formerly Tels) is mangled. How do I prove to them that it's the same account that it was before?
The one surviving is the one in the german wikipedia...
Forgot to add: I wrote parts of the english and german wikipedia TDM articles, but w/o the ability to login couldn't even find myself in the history. Damn meddlers...
Wikimedia are working on an account merge facility -- it's not available yet -- but you can post your problem at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Username_changesand someone will untangle it for you manually.
-
Sounds great! Really nice tune too. I wouldn't believe you'd recorded it drunk if I hadn't had the pleasure of hearing you play in person after a day and night drinking cider in the sun at Biker's place
-
I dealt with that. Wikipedia editors remove "vanity" articles on sight, that is articles dealing with current people or projects that don't have a valid claim to notability. The rules are that the articles must make the claim to notability in the header, which ours didn't until a couple of weeks ago. I've also opened a notability section on the talk page, which means before any further action is taken, it has to be discussed there, and in the event of any future edit warring we can take it down the dispute resolution path, which works very well despite what people say who've never engaged properly with it. But I don't think there will be problems now that the article complies and we've indicated that we want to engage with the process.
-
Well done, you made incredible progress in a day. Although I can;t help thinking you'd be better fixing DR on your system than re-inventing it. Why do you want DMAP to run from radiant? Just use radiant to make your map file then dmap it from within tdm like the rest of us do.
-
This coolness wouldn't have happened if the Google algorithm reached out into the aether and found there was no Wikipedia article.
What do you mean? There's a wikipedia article.
-
I finally finished the Thomas Porter series! After taking a long break after Beleagured Fence last year because they were too hard for me as a newbie to TDM/Thief. LQD is a superb mission, and not so hard after all, just needing lots of patience waiting for the right moment to dash between shadows and needing full attention to the readables, which were very good: I always knew what was going on despite the unique mechanics. The dialog between undead characters was a great surprise, and was wonderfully written. I normally veer away from undead missions, because I like dealing with characters that feel real, but these undead have motives and personalities
It looked great, and the new shadow AI
were great fun and a good reason to wave a candle around. Only nitpick: it took me ages to find the
mushroom
. The loot goal was trivial again -- I got 1700 on my first playthrough when I only needed 700 -- but I guess you do that by design and it doesn't hurt gameplay. You have to explore everywhere anyway, to pick up the readables and find all your quest items. Thanks Sotha: TP is a super campaign that I look forward to playing again now I'm more skilled up
-
1
-
-
it was very easy to die back then and not reach more than 30 years old of age.
Yes, good points. The average age of people you'd see on the street was a lot lower than now, and in most times and places you were considered to be adult after you hit puberty. A few jobs -- like abbot of a monastery -- had a minimum age of 40, but for the most part people were younger than they are now. It was common in the middle ages for hereditary lords to inherit in their 20s, and even appointed lords like bishops and chancellors were commonly aged 20+, for example. They probably average 55 now. The thing I was reacting to was a misinterpretation that you see all too often from writers -- even historians -- who should know better. They see the statistic that life expectancy was 40, which includes children, slaves, and migrants, and then they say that people expected to die at 40, or even that it was rare to see people over 50, which is plain wrong. People over 40 were rarer than now, but healthy people who weren't persecuted never expected to die in their 40s.
-
1
-
-
Cool!
Edit: although I must fix that typo "a award-winning" instead of "an"
-
Yup, remember that "three score year and ten" (=70 years) is how long adults expected to live in biblical times, for example.
-
You'd still do dmap using TDM itself, not the editor, so that bit shouldn't be a problem. The rest of it sounds insurmountable though, including materials which I think changed completely between idtech3 and 4
I'm no expert in DR which is why I haven't kept up with your other thread. I take it you tried using DR 1.8.1 instead of 2.x?
-
@Sotha: MK did explain he can't use DR right now, and he had a thread about that. Suggestions are always good imo. Some people argue at huge length about them, which isn't helpful, but MK isn't one of those people.
The game already has what it needs to make this happen. When an AI or player gets hit, we know which body part got hit, but we don't use that information except to place the bloodstains correctly.
I don't see how it'd work in a stealth game though. Making it happen to the player would result in a reload, because the player would no longer be able to use their preferred play style. Making it happen to an AI would only be useful if you want to run around in front of that AI without getting hit, which is something that most players want to avoid. If you stay out of sight, it doesn't matter whether the AI is wounded or not.
-
Ulysses: Genesis
edit: ninja'd!
-
+1. That sounds fair and consistent / predictable
-
Yep... that's exactly what I was asking about. I'd like to know how a mission can override this for the player, as it might come in handy for missions I create.
This thread may be relevant: http://forums.thedarkmod.com/topic/16412-setting-spawnargs-on-player
Now I'm curious too. I loaded the map in DR but couldn't see how it was done. And as a general point, we could probably do with an easier way to set spawnargs on the player in DR.
-
Doom 3 as a game was pretty popular. An article said the issue with idTech 4 was being less easy to use as a creation tool than Unreal Engine, or something like that. In any case, I find it a bit inexcusable that so many people are missing one of the best open-source game engines while it's right under their noses.
The one thing it doesn't do awfully well is big open environments. It's a purely portalled engine and doesn't have any optimizations for open landscapes that you can't split into visleafs. I read somewhere that it was originally marketed too widely, i.e. not mentioning the limitations, which might have cost it some fans. We've added some optimizations like LOD for entities, but we still build using visleafs. So it's great for our purposes but not for all game types.
-
1
-
-
I don't think so. It wouldn't work very well without huge changes to the engine.
You (or someone) could have a go at a half-fps version without touching the engine. The way the player view gets set up every frame is pretty straightforward, and it's in the game code. You could easily modify it to draw alternate frames from alternate eye positions, if you could then get a 3d monitor to display that in sync with those glasses that block out one eye each frame (showing my ignorance here
) -
That's a great looking crossbow. Good luck. Making the new art assets and animations would be a lot of work (and a total conversion would probably be too much unless you can gather a team somehow) but I'm sure people would like to play whatever you come up with.
[SOLVED] Distant geometry renders in front of closer geometry
in DarkRadiant Feedback and Development
Posted
Gratz on finding your fix and happy mapping!