Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums


Development Role
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by demagogue

  1. They're not posting, though. I agree it's the trailer. I wonder how much exposure this is getting outside the Thief community. Do you guys have a feel for that?
  2. Well, a lot of it may be subliminal but contributes to an overall impression, even though you couldn't put it into words. So I don't think it was "wasted". But anyway, all of these sorts of issues seem to be exactly the sort of thing you want to bring up near the *end* of the process, to tweak and polish and smooth everything out. Nothing really to worry about at this point, it seems (although probably still worth putting on the table for future refrence).
  3. Wow, that was back in the day when they really meant them to be "Penitentiaries", that is, rooms to isolate a criminal so he could reflect on his sin and do penitence to God.
  4. For what it's worth, my thinking is if a mapper wanted something like this, he should trigger it himself. Because it's really about design features that are at the mapper's discretion, which is what I thought Spar's more general point was. So there might be doors that a guard isn't *supposed* to be able to unlock. E.g., if he's running after the PC in new territory, like a strange house and gets locked in and tries to return to his old path after a while, or even if it's on his normal patrol route but he's like a city watch that goes through technically private property, it'd be strange to hear him say "why doesn't this lock work?" because it's not a lock he should be able to unlock. But if a door is on a guard's home turf, and his key gets stolen, it seems like a mapper could use scripts to custom trigger a bark to cover this kind of situation, and more appropriately, to say things like "damn, where'd my key go." (if he didn't see it get taken); "who's been taffing with the locks" (also, if he didn't see the door get locked), and even be careful enough to trigger different barks or cancel them if he *did* see what happened and just generally tweak it to be appropriate, and that could still be cool. The more general point here I think is that, people make suggestions all the time around here that seem so map-specific that it'd really be better to let mappers custom put them in (because in the right situation they really could be cool), than for the team to assume them in all maps for the toolset, which can only lead to absurd, out-of-context results.
  5. I have to admit I was a little skeptical of the dragging, but watching it in action looks so intuitive. It's sort of what I'd feel like I'd want to do in that situation, to stay crouched low, and just pull a body into a corner. (Although I still hope shoulder-carrying is in).
  6. It was a touching video, more than I expected it to be. The sneaking thief on the ledge, the first k.o., a few of the arrow take-outs and guards falling down stairs, over a bannister, in a pool with a splash. Pretty fun to watch and caught the spirit of classic gameplay quite well, I thought. The loot ching especially brought back fond memories. A few things seemed a little jerky, but as you said above, it seems those things will get tweaked towards the end; so I'm not really worried about it. You can see some of the need for a little more texture appropriateness and variety. Pretty much 3 sets showed off here (warehouse, mansion and cathedral; the cave was just one texture it seemed, although I like how it was bump mapped). I can also see a number of things that you've already updated on that didn't make it into the vid, e.g., the on-screen readable. I also recognized some of those rooms from the screenshots. I liked how it told a little story, ending with a sunken cathedral ... pretty cool. "Broken Glass" is a nice tribute in a number of ways, sort of a bitter-sweet name, actually. Anyway, all around a great release this time around. It was definately worth the wait.
  7. For some reason I didn't catch this on TTLG. A little taste, but great while it lasted. Lots of things going on, but kept a coherant thread going. Too bad time doesn't grow on trees like it used to. From looking at your storyboard it would have been great to see it all played out.
  8. I was thinking about making some textures taken from buildings around New York City as a way to tour the city and take a break when I finish school, especially around the Village (1800s apartments, window-sidings and facade embossings), and downtown ("Civic" style, e.g., more "official" looking facade embossings). Whether you can use them or not, I thought it'd be great practice ... but if you can use them all the better. If I can get away with it, I'd love to dig into people's apartments and get some interior designs ... I could tell them I'm from an architecture magazine and want to take photos for a feature. Is there any way I can get my hands on the Doom3 Texture tutorial, since it seems to be missing on the D3 forum?
  9. demagogue


    What about using the thief model as a stand-alone NPC? (... just wondering as long as the topic is raised.)
  10. By the way, maybe the moment has passed, but while I'm thinking about it. I don't like the analogy between things like chess, baseball, football (either kind) unchanging vs. FPSs being rehashed over and over. Aside from the fact that FPSs at least purport to be story-centric (so like movies and comics will continue to be rehashed, even for plots that are carbon copies). But even thinking about them *just* as games, things like chess and football happen to have overseeing institutions that have a monopoloy on the "official" rules. You even sometimes see people trying to come out with alternative chess and football leagues every now and then, but they usually don't last, not only because the gameplay isn't as good (at least IMO, sometimes they seem just as good), but because there's strong institutional pressure to keep the official game "pure". But FPSs are market driven through-and-through, no monopoly on what is "official" gameplay ... just a lot of market research, a very competitive field, and a nervous, conservative investing environment. Add all this up, you get a lot of product being churned out, all swirling around a very small set of themes (they all see the same market trends) and distinguishing themselves along pretty nominal "stylistic" differences. It seems to me if you want to change the product you have to change the economic incentives. Things like chess and football were lucky in that respect. It could be argued that it's basically a historical accident these games turned into national games, which led to "official" rules and official institutions to enforce a monopoly on "good" gameplay. There are plenty of reasons to think this won't happen for FPSs anytime soon (for one thing, they are often reviled by the official-decreeing establishment). Of course, there are other ways you could change the economic environment, e.g., by supporting independent dev's with subsidies or contractual or investment incentives (sort of like how the independent movie industry works). It's acutally a very similar debate going on with independent movies; how do you change economic incentives to keep good movies coming out and keeping them from collapsing into Hollywood drivel? It's actually a hard problem.
  11. Dammit, don't they know I need my fix! You may as well record those two posts and put them on repeat, Komag. It looks like we're in for this for a while yet.
  12. Well, being a phil major, I can't miss out on this action: The fallacy is that causation doesn't follow by logical implication but by empirical expectation (that is, it's an exercise in probability and statistics, not logical inference) ... textbook Hume. So a later FPS doesn't have to suck necessarily just because it's an FPS; but if all the empirical factors are in place that made all the others suck it's statistically very likely to suck (for Oddity, anyway) as a matter of experience. Not exactly what I'd consider a very killer argument here. At best we're talking about, like, a statistically very small chance (in Oddity's worldview, anyway) that *this* FPS will be the one in a million that breaks out of the cycle all the other past FPS's have fallen into and be amazing. If he's playing the percents, you can't blame him. Then again, it's a free demo, maybe a few minutes time is worth the 1:1 million chance?
  13. I was just about to say... Actually, it was down for a few minutes, and then up again for a few mintues, and then just as I submitted a post it went down again. The last time was a lightening storm. Acc to Dave there isn't supposed to be anything special about this month, but still...
  14. Because I kind of feel strongly about this, I'll respond to it. Of course a game needs things like the PC needs a modus operandi (what do I do?) and "rules" for controlling the PC and interfacing with the world to advance the M.O. (x-control predicably = y-world response & y-world response triggers z-whatever) ... so there are your "rules". But I think (I'm not speaking for Oddity here; this is what I think) that he rightfully put the emphasis on interactivity because the "control of a PC in a world" is really the core of what a game is, and the rules are just one (still necessary) means of bringing that about. But it's good to even perhaps overemphasize it because games today aren't taking advantage of it. Easy example, for most games the level of interactivity is pitifully deficient (competing even with notepad it seems): run forward; shoot whatever weapon is at hand; kill whatever runs at you; pick up health or weapon stuff. But there are so many richer and deeper ways a person can interact with a world or NPCs, and richer situations: helping an NPC with a problem or injury, finding a restaurant for dinner, trying to set up two friends on a date or break them up, sparking a street riot to pressure the city to change a policy or let someone free from prison, or stopping it ... so you need better ways for PCs and NPCs to interact, you need a social world that runs on its own steam going on that you can use or abuse (other people going to work, having lunch, having sex at night). I mean I'm making these up, so these aren't nec the best ideas, but you get my idea. That's how I think about why the emphasis in gaming should be on the "interactive" part (not that rules aren't important too, because of course they are). I guess I should make a token response for the topic at hand. My laptop unfortunately isn't going to run the demo at anything near good speed, and I can't do it on school computers, so still waiting to see all the action. Except for the kid-mutilation (which strikes me as a little gratuitous and unimaginative as well), it sounds promising.
  15. I'm on Oddity's side here (I think; one can never be too sure) on game vs interactive. When cinema first started 100 years ago, it was considered sort of a fluke offshoot of photography, and had a few gimmicks at first, then started rehashing some basic stories... But as it's matured it's really been able to do more than *merely* entertain, going into artistic and humanity sort of directions like we think about cinema and theatre. PC Gaming has that potential. Of course I'm sure "games" will always exist and be as fun always as they are now. But I also look forward to more expressive productions. And what separates gaming as a medium of expression is interactivity, engaging with the narrative or experience rather than just passivly watching it. Also, since it's a creative medium, there's no reason it should stay content with a few themes played over and over (again, like we think about cinema), except insofar as they are universal human themes that never age. But anyway, there's so much potential here, we should start expecting more from PC games and not be held back (while of course saving a place for the really great games that will always be fun).
  16. demagogue


    *psst* By default in T1/2, the "r" key drops an inventory item quietly down without throwing it. I hope I have not shaken your world with this revelation (or did you already know this?)
  17. This is the first time like I've felt like I've had some where else to go when it's been down, though. I remember going to Ion Storm's Thief page once when TTLG was down and no one was around to even complain to.
  18. This has got to be the most unfocused discussion of an update ever. :V
  19. That's great news. I'm usually of the opinion that "more powerful > easier" (within reason, something shouldn't be made more complicated for complicated's sake) ... if someone is going to all the trouble to learn the editor, a little extra work to do more shouldn't be that much of a problem. Anyway, it makes me happy that so many old, familiar features are making an appearance (iirc TDS didn't have wheel locks or keypads at all did it? Did it have elevators?) Haha, I'm just full of misunderstandings today. I did think you were talking about the release of the original Thief, hence, Anno Furtim, Year of the Stealth (or Furis, Year of the Thief). When I said "I'm about 100% sure the case is wrong here", I meant the Latin case. I'm about 100% sure that Anno Furtim is *not* the way you would spell it in actual Latin, because I used the simple (accusitive?) case, and it should be the genitive case ("of the"), but at the time it totally slipped my mind how to do it in Latin. Let's see. A.D. is Anno Domini, so maybe it's Anno Furiti?? Edit: Oh, and 100 posts this makes! Makes me feel like an aspiring newbie all over again. Edit 2: Also, for the record, at first I thought I had inadvertantly blundered into "announcing" something to do with the "big surprise" we were supposed to get in May, which is why I thought my post had a hint about what it might be (hence the "yippee"). I'm actually sort of disappointed it was *just* about the internal DR release, now that we already all know about that. Although, of course, that's cool too. Just not as much subversive-potential.
  20. I interpreted "oh" as in answer to Springheel's comment that my review was actually "a review of the website update" and not whatever else he had in mind (as I interpreted the situation), hence my comment that Spar actually did have something else in mind, which granted it still just a guess of mine, but it sort of excited me anyway. As for "Can it become more official than being announced on the front page? :S", if you mean the update itself then, yeah, I sort of agree. I was just being, you know, extra contrite because I was given the impression that I made a mistake in "announcing" it here (I guess extra-officially??) and I like being a team-player and everybody's buddy and it doesn't hurt so much for me to apologize even though I'm a little confused what I'm apologizing for... But especially if it was stepping on NH's toes, since the last thing I want to do is bite the hand that feeds us (not to mention he's been cool throughout). If you mean the website update "officially announced" the "something else" then I have to admit I didn't catch it. For a moment I thought we'd get a little taste of DarkRadient itself by the look of the link, but it was just some screenshots.* But I was of course happy to see the little blurb we got here. I still really don't have a clue what "it" is ... although now I feel like I have some speculating material to work with. * Actually, if you've been paying attention, there was a link to an earlier version of DR posted on the public forums a while ago where we could have seen it in action ... but since I don't have Doom3 yet I couldn't see it myself.
  21. Haha ... Well, the update was up on the main page. And I forgot that NH usually announces them on the public forum page; I sincerely wasn't trying to preempt anything. Maybe just being unmindful. Maybe it's because we see the update before we get to the forums, so it's like it sort of announces itself ... and I had ideas brewing in my mind that I wanted to talk about while I was thinking about them and wasn't thinking in terms waiting for an official thread -- it seriously wasn't a sudden urge to "announce" anything. In fact, I had this idea that the update had been up for some hours before I commented (since it's already midday for me), and I actually wondered why there wasn't a thread on it yet and was looking for it to comment there, but that could have been my misimpression. But yeah, totally sorry about that NH if you wanted to announce it. Really ... I don't like being a blundering gimp when I can help it. :angel: ... Actually, for the record, I'm confused a little. Is the update what you mean by the "release"? Because when you say "hasn't even happened yet?" ... I mean, the news update is already up on the main page. Does it not "happen" until it's officially announced?? Or is there something else coming, too, that I inadvertantly "announced"? I just want to be one of the good guys, you know. I should admit, though, that it did occur to me while writing that that it's been quite fun being a backseat driver critic on these boards, all the opportunity to say this and that about this and that feature, and none of the responsibility. Thinking that just makes me feel more guilty now. But no malice intended. --------------- Edit (because this was written while I was writing the above): Ah-ha!!! You *were* thinking about something else! And now I think I have an idea of what it is!! Yippee! (If it's actually what I think it is, hell, even if it isn't ... the fact that you guys are so protective makes me think it's going to be good whatever it is). Anyway, sort of funny there.
  22. well, we can't have a public update without some helpful public commentary, so here goes: Where to start? We talked about noise arrow before here, didn't we? Does it work like classical style, it starts crackling when it lands, and when a guard sees it he instantly goes into investigation mode, but around the arrow. Or are there noticable differences? That's a really cool feature that will liven things up because I can't count the number of times I would run along side an AI knowing he'll never see me. Is there ever a time when he'll slow down, "have a feeling", stop, and turn a little to peek behind his back (not very often, but on rare occassion)? Now that would be a (potentially fun) surprise! If it were cued, you could see it coming and have to react fast. Lovely. Not much to add except good to see it. 1998: Anno Furtim, eh? (or Furis; I'm about 100% sure the case is wrong here). That would make 2006 year 9 A.F. This is awesome news. I love playing with S/R because it gives you so many options, so many things you can get going on in the background that give a level a life of its own. Does it essentially work like Dromed, or is the paradigm a little different? Good to hear. Did all the classic T2 objectives get in; any ones left out or new ones put in? Also, is it possible to trigger new objectives in-game? And is the system roughly the same, e.g., reversible vs. irreversible, visible vs. invisible, etc. Very nice. Important for those screenshots in threads to prove you "really did it". Is this the big surprise we've been waiting for, or just part of the normal front page update? [edited stuff out] Anyway, from what you've shown it looks intuitive and promising. Clean looking layout ... and, e.g., the menus have a familiar ring to them from dromed. Suppose I'll have to get used to thinking about "entities" instead of "objects". Are properties organized hierarchically like in dromed? I guess I should pick up Doom3Ed to get a sense of it. Anyway, nice update.
  23. demagogue


    I like that point, and along those lines I have the exact opposite intuition from this: I think that, as ZB says, when a mission is not ghostable, which you can guarantee *will* happen ... *then* if the default is the ability to "not chooose any on loadout" or "in-game drop" essential tools, the mapper will have the real problem of leaving essentail equipment around (which I can see being unnatural in some cases, although it's been done in plenty of FMs and worked; it depends) or tag it undroppable and put it in loadout, and THAT will be the bright neon sign. But if the default is T2 style, can't drop core equipment in loadout or in game (just like you can't drop the ability to jump or mantle, or choose not to have it before the game starts), then the player doesn't know whether he needs it or not. It's just part of the background functionality of the game, again like jumping and mantling. Having the situation like T2 style is the way to AVOID the neon-sign phenomenon in non-ghostable cases (which seem to me will be the majority), it seems to me. But I'm not so invested in it ... because I think players will quickly learn how TDM gameplay is distinctive and there will be a learning curve whichever way is chosen, so practically it may not be as big a problem after time as it may be at first.
  • Create New...