demagogue

This has got to be the most unfocused discussion of an update ever. :V

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.

Oh!

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.

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.

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.

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.

Great news. Flowing water can have some great gameplay functions ... also a good way to move someone through space without it feeling like you're actually moving them.

Well, MUDs are different from IF like Zork, of course, because they are multi-user, and have top-down ascii graphics. (I love IF, too, but just to distinguish the two). The text-based MUDs I know (from 10 years ago) are more like ultima 1 if you remember it. It's all ascii art, the dungeon walls are like "I" and and the PC ("*") and monsters ("M") and other users and items, etc. You use the keyboard to move around, and there are special keys to do special commands, like rest, cast a spell, attack monster, get item, etc. And since there are other people in the dugeon at the same time, you can also talk to them, and interact in other ways, trading, buying and selling items. And as you advance through levels, there's more you can do ... so in a lot of them you see some level 90 wizards just zipping through the whole MUD looking for hapless newbies to harass. But all in all, they are fun to run through for a quick jaunt ... sort of like WoW unplugged.

Not too long ago I finally discovered the world of C64 emulation and finally got to play some games I literally hadn't seen in well over a decade. I was struck how much they still have their magic, and found it quite natural to fall back into playing some of my old favorites.

I can see the PC being made visible, but it should be noticably less, that is, by quite a notable factor. The way I think about it ... the player should recognizably feel less exposed than just strafing/creeping a bit to the side and back, otherwise what's even the advantage of leaning at all - s/he may as well just walk into the hallway a bit and back. But I have some trust, esp if you playtest it enough, that you guys will get it right. And for the record, I liked how Darkengine kept me dark when leaning, too. It really made me love the leaning function as something that was really being my friend in the game, smudging reality for my benefit, maybe ... so I liked to use it all the time, because that situation comes up all the time.

Interactive Fiction isn't everyone's cup of tea, but it's worth trying out some of the top ranked games just to get a feel for how interactivity and good story-telling can go hand in hand, if you've never tried them. (Everything you need to do it you can get from here.) I live for the day when FPS's can do as good a job integrating the two; DX is the only one that even approached it, but is still way off from the potential.

Yeah, such great atmosphere ... really credible as a gargantuan, buried, unholy crypt. I'd have said I was sold on the game when I entered the main chamber ... but really, they had me at "Inside at last..." The most magical level remains for me Constantine's mansion. RTC got a bit spoiled since I didn't actually (fairly) finish it first time through. But geez that level had me absolutely petrified time after time, when I'd feel heroic for simply dashing into the next room!

The TTLG thread on Randy's interview is also good (link), and has the benefit of an appearance by Randy himself to explain himself a little more. Also, note that the second half of the interview just came out yesterday (link). It doesn't talk much about the Thief series, but some good discussion on the future of gaming, or at least the direction he'd like to see it go ... more philosophical.

Well, apparently you've got the job, because you already have "beta mapper" in your profile. Congrats on joining the team.

Back in the day I liked old school RPGs ... the Ultima Series, the Bard's Tale series, Wasteland ... and IF. Anything that could tell a really good story and make me part of it in the game.

Well, as long as you keep things in perspective. The Dark Project is widely held to be the best in the series, the most "magical" in the sense of everything coming together, gameplay, story, atmosphere, level design, etc. This is how Randy -- a level designer on all three, lead designer in T2 and project head of T3 -- recently summed the three up, admitting that the next two never matched that level in his own estimation, and I and lots of people agree. There was some undead, but no monsters, and the sneaking aspect is largely the same for undead as guards, I think. Anyway, as for "time", if you have time for *anything* Thief related, you should spend that time playing the Dark Project before anything else. Seriously, I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that I can't think of anything else in the entire Thief oerve that out-does it taken as a whole package. It's the standard, the benchmark against which everything afterwards is graded.

Try flipping through TTLG's member list! (although granted they let you order by post count. Can you not do that here?)

Ah-ha, that would explain the T2 water contest and the leaning question ... like the T2 oldschool vibe hit you in a big way. By the way, in case you haven't read or thought about it, you can start learning the ropes for Doom3 editing now from the sticky at the top of this page (or one of them, anyway) to a D3 editing forum. And they (TDM) have a position for beta-mapping where you can get your hands on the current tools early-on to start mapping, so they can get the perspective of out-of-the-loop mappers while developing. It might be useful for you if you plan on doing an "all the basics in one place" newbie-tut for TDM like you did for T2 and TDS (maybe not start it any time soon, but later on as release time nears). But I know the TDM guys are going to put out a set of their own tutorials when they release, and this may very well include this kind of tutorial. So I don't want to precipitate any turf war over it if they already have plans to do it. But it was just a thought.

The TDS forum was starting to slow down last year, but a turning point in my mind was when Krypt admitted that the engine was something of a fluke and the T3 devs themselves hated using it ... and from his and Randy's description of things, it was the main culprit behind most of the disappointing features and design-work of TDS, which just adds insult to injury. It just sort of officially confirmed everyone's experience that FM making on it is not only an uphill battle, but against the spirit of the original games even in the dev's minds. I'm happy that FMs are being made on it while TDM is in production, though, and with the minimalist additions I even hope they'll continue like T1 FMs come out on occassion ... adding spice to the mix (actually, better if they come out more often than T1 FMs, because the technology is more advanced). But, yeah, my chips are with TDM for the future. By the way Komag, I was wondering when you'd finally register on these forums and start posting. What took you so long? Or maybe the right question is, what brought you here now?

I was so going into that game expecting the US to get wasted by Italy, given all the negativity by the press, etc ... so I'm happy they came out with at least a tie.

ZB may have a point in that there is something to be said for the "default" to be with undroppable for core equipment, and then mappers can easily add a droppable feature if they want (I'm not sure if that's where he was going in his last post, but anyway that's the suggestion it implies). Anyway, I can see the use of giving mappers the choice, but it's the default set-up that I'm questioning here. I have an intuition that most mappers (maybe in need of verification) will want core equipment undroppable than droppable so they don't have to worry about whether it's there or not while building (in the same way as jumping functionality, etc, core equipement = core functionality) so e.g., they don't have to worry a player may have to cross the entire map to pick up a blackjack in placing things. Sure you can say that may be bad mission design, but then the argument is that undroppability as a default limits the chances for "bad mission design" problems to even come up. And since more mappers seem on that side rather than the other, at least ex hypothesi: one argument for default undroppability is for reasons of economy ... even agreeing with the argument that there can be real advantages if designers want droppability. I can agree that it's good that mappers shouldn't be pampering players, that's one thing, but maybe the default editor set-up also shouldn't be pushing harder work and more design-failure-worries onto mappers, at least not as a default feature. Mappers can still happily take on the extra responsibility/burden of tweaking with core functionality (and all the design worries it raises) if they want with the ability to add dropability as a property, and we can applaud those that do it well ... but *that* should be the *choice* they make (a proactive design decision), not the other way around I think, and having the default switched around is the way to accomplish that. (You might say that the change is as easy as a checkbox, although probably a quite buried one, but that sort of glosses over the fact that a lot of designers may not think about the design issues that in-game tweakability of core functions throws at them unless they are prompted to. There might be a learning curve here as TDM FM making matures, though ... it's hard to sense.) Edit: and to preempt a little here, don't think I can't hear Oddity's argument roaring in the background, "what you're saying is practically admitting we should encourage lazy/player pampering designing" (at least as I imagine it). One, I don't think it's true that it would encourage lazy or even necessarily pampering design. But anyway, I can also just stick with the "economy" argument, even aside from that issue. The idea there is: You get fewer, more resolute people coming to the forums to ask how to *add* droppability (to an undroppable default) when they want to proactively add a design feature that in-game takes away a core functionality to give more player freedom (sort of like coming to ask "how can I let players drop jumping ability" in-game) than the alternative of more people coming to the forums to ask how to revert back to undroppability (from a droppable default) because the default set-up is raising incidental design issues that actually block their vision of clean gameplay throughout their mission and give them something they don't want to proactively think about. Having the default set-up go with the flow is better for economy reasons.

I don't think I've read this before, and anyway can't hurt to ask: So presumably TDM will be out before the D3 source is released. But when the D3 source code is released, are there any plans to add to the TDM package? Or will you just leave well enough as it is. And are there even things you could do with the source code that you can't do with the SDK, anyway?

Not my term, I promise!

FYI, we got a response from Randy in the other forum: http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?...488#post1462488 I've (or at least a post of mine) never gotten a direct response from a dev, so sort of cool. Sounds like he's not as bitter in retrospect as I had expected. E.g., he recognized that other guys had gone on to do successful things, so it wasn't so much an inevitable clash of personalities but more situational. (I get the feeling he's maybe talking about Spector here? I'd agree it's hard to pin that guy down.) Sounds like a healthier attitude, anyway. He really does come across as sounding like he was going to bat for the fans and the situation soured against him. Something to keep in mind, I guess. I get the feeling the team we have here, for as boorish as it can be at times, has a much healthier environment than was the case for TDS (not a high bar to top, maybe). Not having the market/time pressure and having such a better engine to work with I'm sure helps, but probably also not letting your ambition run away to lose track of what you're doing.