demagogue
-
Posts
5906 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
95
Posts posted by demagogue
-
-
-
My favorite kind of update... Assets that not only looks stunning, but that I can actually hope to access and use in a map! Everybody wins!
-
You can use the Location System, but the issue is that the entire location will have the river sound and it won't sound like it's coming from the river nor fall off with distance. That might work if you can make your location close enough to the river, but if it's outside it might not work well. But the advantage is, once you define the location, you could have it miles long and you've got the whole area covered with a few simple steps and parameters.
Speakers are the main alternative that are localized and have a falloff with distance.
Well another option is that you can create a special dummy object and in its def file you can define a sound, like the way a machine or AI makes sounds. Then you could maybe make an invisible & long skinny object out of brushes that follows the river and convert it to a func_stat, but that seems like a really elaborate solution to a simple problem that'd probably be more trouble than its worth.
I think practically speaking a line of speakers would work just fine, but maybe the location system depending on just how big and location-able this river is. -
Here's a video in the style of our game that communicates pretty well the difference between good and bad lighting for a scene.
Â
-
4
-
-
There are a lot of missions that have the player effectively cooking or crafting something as part of the plot. I think it's not even uncommon, so evidently a fine fit with the game. But it's usually handled by the vanilla scripting and the objective system, since it should be tailored to the mapper's own story they want to tell, and I think that's the best way to do it.
Edit: I almost forgot, the S/R system is also designed to do this kind of job. It lets you create a reaction whenever you have two things of some type in some kind of contact with each other.
-
2
-
-
On 4/8/2023 at 7:18 AM, HMart said:
John Carmack the main idTech 4 developer once said, "best way to mesure performance is not FPS numbers but frame timing" and I agree, we tend to mesure game performance by counting higher and higher fps's but you can have a very responsive and playable game at 30fps, if the frame timing is constant and a very lagging game if not, even if the fps numbers are 60 or higher.
Â
I was just reading a post over on TTLG about Thirith's experience playing Sable when he realized the game played significantly more smoothly, and the movement control was less wonky, at 30 fps than 60 fps, and then I see your post explaining just that.
Edit: I should have double checked the date. I didn't realize when I clicked the thread that it didn't take me to the latest page but evidently to the last point I had read up to, which was more than 2 months ago. Sorry about that. Well it's still an interesting thing to point out anyway.
-
I don't recall a system for noise masking. It sounds like it'd be a good idea, but when you get into the details you realize it'd be complicated to implement. It's not only noise that that goes into it, I think. E.g., a high register can cut through even a loud but low register rumble.
And it's not like the .wav file even has data on the register of what it's playing. So either you have to add meta-data (which is insane), or you have to have a system to literally check pitch on the .wav data and paramaterize it in time to know when it's going to cut through what other parameters from other sounds. For that matter, it doesn't even have the data on the loudness either, so you'd have to get that off the file too and time the peaks with the "simultaneous" moment at arbitrary places in every other sound file correctly.
And then position is going to matter independently for each AI. So it's not like you can have one computation that works the same for all AI. You'd have to compute the masking level for each one, and then you get into the expense you're mentioning.
I know there was a long discussion about it in the internal forums, and probably on the public subforums too, but it's been so long ago now I can't even remember the gist of them.
Anyway the main issue is I don't know if you'll find a champion that wants to work on it. But if you're really curious to see how it might work, you could always try your hand at coding & implementing it. Nothing beats a good demo to test an idea in action. And there's no better way to learn how to code than a little project like that.
I always encourage people to try to implement an idea they have, whether or not it may be a good idea, just because it shows the power of an open source game. We fans can try anything we want and see if it works!
-
2
-
-
I was about to say, follow the tracker and you can see exactly what's being worked on, and often the entries come with comments talking about all the issues involved with it, so you know why this or that is being done and not that or this. Then you can even give comments to the comments here, and you're on your way.
The point is, it's important to follow the tracker because otherwise you don't really have any idea what's going on behind the scenes. It happens so often, something you think should be a really trivial thing is actually mindbendingly complicated because of how the game deals with that system, and other things you think could never be done, once you actually look into it, turn out to be really easy, or something you think you see is really a kind of illusion once you dig into it. You just never really know until you get into the details of it.
But if you do get into the details, once you starting understanding your way around the code, suddenly your comments can be really helpful.
Oh, sorry, I didn't even mention the main point of following the tracker. That's where you can see if the issue you're worried about has already been tracked and its status, or you can track a new issue if you don't see it already there, and then follow its status from there.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Skaruts said:
How do you do that, though? I tried changing its success logic to make it depend on the "go to exit" objective, but that didn't make any difference. Still didn't get checkmarked at the end.
I think it has to occur before the "go to exit" objective is triggered. That may just mean moving its place in the objective list, but another idea is to change the "go to exit" objective from that specific objective into triggering two arbitrary objectives in a row or triggering a script that triggers two arbitrary objectives, "objective1" (which checks the "don't kill" box) then "objective2" (which checks to "go to exit" box if all others are fulfilled).
...
This question has probably come up before, so run a search for it. I feel like somebody would have thought about this in designing the objective properties.
-
I think it's probably right that the game doesn't presume when to check objectives or not, but it's really up to the mapper to design it. I think the simplest way to do this IIRC is to have the objective logic just fulfill the objective when all of the other objectives are fulfilled, but of course still irreversibly fail if the player kills. That should do the job.
-
I mentioned this in a similar thread on TTLG. If there's going to be a new Thief game, my vote is for a remake of the original Dark Project.
-
Yes, and speaking of memory, yours is better than mine. But in fairness, the whole point of the contest is that we're coming up on the 20th anniversary of the game!
-
2
-
-
You can probably find the postmortem about it.
They were using the Unreal engine whichever version, the same used for DX:IW, which was already kind of cramped with memory as you can see in that game, although still worlds better than Dromed! But one guy on the team implemented real time shadows IIRC on his own initiative. So they moved to that new version and got sunk into it before realizing it came with some heavy costs, like the memory use was so tight they had to chop the levels into parts with load zones, performance was a constant problem, and a lot of features had to be cut for related technical reasons like rope arrows, swimmable water, etc. And by then the original guy had left the company and I think know one knew the inner workings well enough to know how to fix it. Something like that.
Then all of those problems just got compounded with the editor version for people making FMs. It wasn't even out that long before a group of editors and fans started looking for an alternative engine they could make a total conversion just for making FMs the way the game was meant to be, and the Doom3 engine fell right at that time... And that ultimately led to Darkmod.
-
1
-
-
I don't think a material pack would be judged as part of the contest, but I'm sure it'd be appreciated and in the spirit of the thing. I think it's a great way to be part of the action. I also don't think you'd need to make a full FM. Just a demo of the material pack and/or a nice T3 inspired environment would probably be cool too. Well do what you like. We're talking about being fans of a video game at the end of the day.Â
-
4
-
-
In a weird way TDM can thank TDS for its existence, being so mod-unfriendly. Â
That's reason enough for us to be part of this contest.Â
Â
9 hours ago, peter_spy said:Too bad T3Ed and its workflows are way too unstable (at least for me, on win10) to even think about making something for it again.
Then you should be happy to know you can make an FM in TDM for the contest.Â
-
3
-
-
Higher-level alerts cost more to the score. It's not exactly rocket science. An extra point per level except the highest is even worse, and you can't count level-1 because half the FMs have the player spawn with level-1 alerts. Well more importantly it's not counted in the original rules for ghosting, which is what it's originally for.
But to your point, not knowing where the Stealth Score comes from makes it even more arbitrary to the player. It has to come from something, and it's going to be arbitrary no matter how you spin it, so may as well explain how it's made if it's going to be there at all. Anyway it's well out of the way.
-
I saw that featured on Steam's homepage today and was intrigued. I liked the aesthetic. I didn't really understand the gameplay, but maybe I'll watch a few videos, since it sounds interesting. The concept of a procedural murder/crime & investigation sim sounds pretty fresh; it's a wonder we haven't seen something like it before.
-
Here's a good video of a demo for talking to a ChatGPT NPC in-game. There are bugs to iron out, but I think we've basically arrived, at least at a level functional enough for NPCs.
Â
-
2
-
-
I don't think it's entirely off-base that there's a link between the game being conceived and made largely by map editors and the main antagonists being Builders preaching about good design as a religious sacrament all the time.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, datiswous said:
Which is?
The current working title is just The Dark Campaign.
If you want a little backstory, the idea of this campaign was to introduce all of the major districts and factions of Bridgeport, and give a lot of lore about what's happening in the city and the world. So in that sense it's meant as a kind of ... not official campaign, but the kind of campaign laying down a lot of lore, faction, and setting information on which people can build FMs.
But then the story started taking on a life of its own. The concept is the Empire is at war with their neighbors Menoa. In this world, Menoa is an Islamic or Ottoman-like empire counterpart, the Ghazis, to the Catholic-like Builders. (I understand the more official concept of Menoa is different, but either my concept is just different or I'd pick some other empire to do the job.) At the start, the Menoans have Bridgeport surrounded in siege, with constant flaming boulders periodically raining down.
So our protagonist Khursand is Pakdamani, which is a counterpart to Persian Zoroasters, with his homeland now fully occupied & harassed by the Menoan Ghazis, although his family has already lived in Bridgeport for several generations, also harassed by Builders but at least not killed or forced to convert (yet). So he's kind of a natural opportunist, no friend of either side, but he speaks both languages of the Empire and Menoans and is willing to work with whoever pays.
So the first mission, Shadow of Opportunity, opens with the Menoan district of Bridgeport, where Khursand lives, being walled up into a kind of ghetto to contain them. You've got Menoan friends that want you to help their resistance from the inside, starting with you getting some city plans to the army outside. But as you're getting out, one of the guards they paid off double-crosses you and turns you into the Bridgeport forces. But rather than just executing you, the general gives you the alternative option to work as a double agent on their behalf to bring back intelligence on the Menoan army and do some sabotage on their behalf, which you don't have much choice but to accept. (They're also holding his uncle that raised him hostage.) The next mission has you making contact with the Menoan army and already trying to please both sides in a dangerous tightrope walk, and the story goes on from there.
-
4
-
-
I'd make the campaign I scripted out for Dark Mod.
I also think it'd be good to just make a medieval stealth game with a new protagonist, and just call it a spiritual successor.
-
1
-
-
I like the Gershwin tune. I'll have to see about the game.
-
That'd be a great idea.
To dynamically change EFX, we have to know that it's a dynamic feature and not one permanently set during dmap or spawn time.
-
1
-
-
I really knew that & shouldn't have said it, but thank you for correcting that.
Oh wow, how did I not hear about EV_GetLocation() before? That's great!
As for the performance part, stgatilov makes a good point. If you want to keep running track of the AI's location, you have to keep the script running in a loop, which can really eat up up cycles. (Performance was one of our big concerns with the Location script itself because of that.)
One thing I'd think about is having the script or EV_GetLocation function called only when an AI is ready to make a bark, and it quickly gets its location from there and makes the bark, and then it's done. Then it's only a one-shot script or function call, which is always better if you can do it.
The catch there is I think that'd call for a custom AI script. The issue is if the a future version of the game ever updates that AI script, the custom scripts won't be updated in that version. But since AI scripts should be self-contained, I mean changes almost always take deprecated old stuff into account so it doesn't break old FMs, a custom AI script shouldn't break the FM with new versions of the game. Those AI just won't have any new bells or whistles, which may still be worth it. Or you just quickly add the new things in and kick out a new version if you need to.
Of course another option is that new functionality is added to the core game itself with some new spawnargs added to AI, where barks can be made Location specific. For that matter, the AI scripts might be updated to be more friendly to adding barks to existing AI generally, now that we have a good text-to-voice app to make them. Then all mappers get the ability to do this. That might be nice, if it isn't a big performance hit or otherwise troublesome.
-
1
-
YouTube - Prohibited from using adblocker
in Off-Topic
Posted
FYI adBlocker apparently still works if you just watch videos while logged out, although that's also annoying in its own way.