New Horizon

There's also the issue of the D3 engine being an additive engine and the Dark Engine being subtractive. It's two different styles of construction. D3 you have a void and you fill it with solids, and in Dark Engine you have a solid in which you carve out spaces.

I'm always up for more as well.

It wouldn't need to be perfect. The model has no impact on the 3rd person movement or collision in TDM, as 1st person is a completely separate system. So if the animations in that mod could work with the TDM model, it would be a massive improvement.

Can't remember the name of the mod but someone imported the garett model and animations from Deadly Shadows into their Doom 3 mod. If you could track them down it might simplify things

Yes. No body awareness please.

If you're just adding animation for player shadows then that won't cause any issues since the first person system doesn't rely on the player model for collision. It's just there for shadow projection. If the first person system was adapted for body awareness like tds, then that would cause the same issues.

This feature is absolutely amazing! Should come in very handy for mappers.

As I understand it from a few searches, the raspberry pi architecture only supports Opengl 2.1 and doesn't work with stock Doom 3. The Dhewm port of the D3 source uses Vulkan which is apparently supported on Pi 4. Dark Mod is now running on Opengl 3.1 if I recall and I doubt there are any plans to abandon that for Vulkan. Someone with a better working knowledge may prove me wrong on all of that but that's my understanding.

Are you running 32 bit for any specific reason?

Yes indeed.

Yeah, the blackjack system was something I looked into years ago. Characters with no helmets can be blackjacked from any direction. It's when you get into helmets that things get tricky. The elite guard helmets with the grill on the front and extension down the back can not be blackjacked, though I"m not sure how many missions actually use them. It has been a long time since I set all that stuff up, but if I recall...the standard helmet guards can only be blackjacked from directly behind when alert. I did my best to make the cones extend far enough to be forgiving but there always seems to be people who have continued to have issues with it. I have to wonder if these players have the AI visual and audio sensitivity on the expert settings. A couple years back there was a player who was going to uninstall TDM because they couldn't stand how hyper sensitive the guards were when compared to Thief. I pointed out those Audio / and Visual sensitivity settings, they lowered them and were able to enjoy the game as they did in Thief...blackjacking was easier, guards weren't seeing them from crazy distances and over reacting. What settings does the Mod ship with these days anyway?

I'll have my recordings for you this weekend grayman.

Same issue though, how does an encumbrance system relate to the intention of the gameplay? I could see it being beneficial if the game was about engaging other AI, fighting them, killing, etc, but that's not the intent of the gameplay here. Thief and by extension TDM are encouraging non-lethal gameplay, exploration, and the thrill of stealing. Slowing the player down doesn't work unless the intent is to make thieving unpleasant. I don't want to manage the loot.

Encumbrance system in a game like this? Not really a fan. The purpose of the game is to steal and gather as much loot as possible, without engaging or killing the AI. So then along comes an encumbrance system that punishes the player for doing exactly what the game is asking them to do, alerting guards with more noise and giving the player more incentive to either engage, kill or blackjack the AI to keep them out of the way. A system like that has been brought up a few times over the last decade, and it still clashes with what I think are the core values of the game. It's not a 1:1 life simulation, it's still a game. lol

haven't had a chance to test thoroughly but it looks really good.

Sign me up! I'm in!

I'll see if I can find the video again. I don't really think it goes into how they got that look, it just seemed to be default and they were teaching how to make an installer in general.

I haven't had a chance to download Fluid and the installer code yet but is it the choice of some type of skin for fluid that prevents it from looking like a standard Windows installer? I was watching a Fluid tutorial the other day and the installer they were making looked like a standard windows installer in their video. Not sure what settings they had used to obtain it though. Might have time to investigate later. It just looked much more cohesive.

Nice! So far I haven't run into any issues using it. I have to echo freyk's concerns with the appearance though. The UI lacks the cohesive look and appearance I would expect from TDM. Can the standard windows appearance be used with this installer? Functionally the installer is great but the appearance lacks a professional quality. The lightweight UI is a bit sloppy looking. Thanks for all the great work.

That doesn't make any sense that the Builder can see you from that far and through walls at that. Worth logging a bug for that issue. What settings are your AI visual and audio set to out of curiosity?

Did you make some saves, install the hotfix for 2.07 and still have them work though?

I'm on an Intel HD 2500, with an i5 processor. I've never been one to play with graphics maxed out, so TDM has been just fine for me but I understand needing to update. I'll have to look into buying a proper card I spose.

Yeah, the conversation about the footsteps keeps coming up. I don't really know if it's a matter of quality of the samples or that some players think the footsteps volume should be 'realistic'. The problem with realistic levels is that they do not provide adequate feedback to the player, which is who the footsteps are intended to inform. They're not meant to be representative of what the AI are hearing, but rather to clearly inform the player what type of material they are stepping on.

Yeah. Really surprised that this is the first I'm hearing of this branch of the editor. Would be nice to see what they did to it. Who would we contact?

Yes, precisely.