MirceaKitsune

Quite a newbie question: Does anyone have a link to the wiki page for setting up a map item? Its internal search isn't helping, or I don't know what to search for! Strangely enough, despite making so much progress with several FM projects, this is the first time I actually add a drawn map to my FM.

There's an interesting question with this, which if I'm not mistaken I approached in another thread long ago. I've considered making a big special project in TDM, which if I did I'd have wanted the option to distribute it as standalone: The idea was that the mission would be in the FM list like any other, but also packaged with a copy of TDM containing only the base pk4's the map uses. If this secondary distribution system were considered, I'm curious if there's be any issues with putting it in places like Itch or GoG or similar. Free of charge to respect the non-commercial licensing and wishes of the team in that regard, but I wonder if there's anything in the licensing that goes against posting your mission embedded in a copy of TDM.

Fantastic changes once again. At this point it looks pretty finished: Anything else that wasn't done yet? Especially now that a menu option was added, I'd really like to hear the developers take on this.

Thank you for the rapid fix! Updated recompiled and can confirm everything's working well once more. I haven't updated DarkRadiant in 6 months so unfortunately I couldn't narrow the problem to a more specific date.

Given the slow updates I switched my DarkRadiant Git clone from Codereader to the Orbweaver origin. Everything seems to be working well except for an immediate breaking issue: In the 3D viewport entities without models no longer display the little box you click on to select them, just the arrows showing their angle. Meanwhile in the 2D viewport, I'm seeing lines that seem to stretch infinitely to the right. Here's a shot of the issue on a FM I'm trying to finish, letting @OrbWeaver know hoping the issue is easy to replicate and fix (Linux / KDE / Wayland).

Custom lockpicks can be defined and I believe a few FM's already use them, including a prototype I have in the works where I made an electronic lock breaker. I understand the animations and item attachments can be customized however, which is a good thing: I presume a custom lockpick can use a custom one-handed animation if necessary.

Isn't it bound to N by default, or did I change it? But yes, I think that's the cvar: For me it's always been N for the longest time, I use it to toggle the green / yellow / red squares and check how portals close off each other.

Based on other comments mentioning this, as well as being busy with other things for now, I decided I'll skip on replaying this until visportals and location areas are patched. I partly want to encourage learning how to do those essentials: I think your FM's have good potential, but some of those aspects are basics without which they usually aren't ready. I don't mean to say what to do or give homework, but if you decide to fix those last aspects: Add a visportal inside every door, also around the corners of corridors to cover their entrances. See about adding at least one or two locations with different music and ambient lighting, to get a hang of how location separators work and isolating rooms. You can use the N key in-game to toggle viewing portals, they should be red when a door is closed and green when it's open or no door.

Hmmm: Could those textures not be a power of two, or use a special type of compression or encoding? I always use the highest setting and find even that low-res these days so I wouldn't notice it then, but it's the only thing I can immediately think of.

More insight on what I meant earlier with definitions being hard to attribute: Suppose you have a definition of the form... atdm:something { "a" "1" "b" "2" "c" "3" } I decide to reimplement it. I open a text editor to do so. Given its simplicity, I end up writing the exact same thing by hand since that's what makes the entity work. I can't prove or disprove that I didn't copy it since no one knows what I did on my machine. Even if I did, the result is the same anyway... would it even make a difference if I retyped it from memory? What I could do is change a few of the parameters so it's more original; Say a = 3, b = 2, c = 1. Or I remove c. Or I add d = 4. Or write them in reverse as c, b, a. What counts as good enough? There's no clear line that I can think of! Not unless it's a long definition with a lot of parameters, so it has a clear structure attributed to someone writing it... in which case one could just shuffle them, change a few values, add or remove some parameters, use original code comments and it can't be traced back via any specific elements. Other assets can be attributed as they have much more complexity and chances at being different. Like if I draw over an existing texture to change a few pixels, you can tell it's the same texture and I used large parts of it without making them myself. Of course if my texture was just a single color (1x1) I could post a copy and believably claim I made it myself and just happened to get the same one color, as it would be silly for anyone to copyright any value within the range 255x255x255 that's already been used by someone somewhere countless times.

I played this FM recently and didn't see that issue. I finished it right before the new year, I always run the latest dev snapshot so whichever that was by 30-12-2024: If something broke in TDM to cause it the change must be within the past 2 months.

Thanks for that notice and observations! Is that my port of the anthro characters? The originals weren't created by me but I integrated them myself, their author released them as CC0 and I kept the license for my fork. Scripts and defs are an interesting question: If they count as code, they need to be GPL as one of its clauses is all code distributed with the source code must also be GPL. Of course definitions may not count as code depending on who you ask, plus the engine code and game code may not be distributed in such a way as to trigger that requirement. A fun aspect is how the defs can be rewritten from scratch to say the same thing while being unique: When is it no longer licensed to the old author? Maybe if I just change the default health value on an AI it's technically my own definition... if not then I may need to redefine all parameters and make them uniquely mine, or something in between. Since no one knows what I'm copying in my local text editor, no one can truly say when a configuration block becomes unique and can be relicensed.

This reminded me of something I kept forgetting, I think this is why I ran with capped FPS: The main menu still doesn't provide an option to fully disable the cap, only to set a higher value for it. There's no unlimited value for the "Max FPS" field, you can go up to 300 then it loops back to 30. Shouldn't that option be provided, or does the engine not allow fully disabling capped FPS and still requires a limit? Actually why not mix the "Uncap FPS" and "Max FPS" settings? It might reduce clutter to have one field. Options would be Capped, Uncapped, then all the different numbers. Even more so, why not mix Uncapped and 60? Technically it should be the same thing, feels redundant to have both under different names. Unless of course there's an important technical distinction between the two modes that shouldn't be removed from the engine; Do "com_fixedTic 1" and "com_maxFPS 60" practically do anything different, any reason not to remove the legacy var entirely and use maxFPS to get the capped FPS of the old days?

Are there more details on this? I have an 144 Hz monitor, I enabled vsync and set the FPS cap to 144 as well. I figured that's the best way to not waste processing power, since how could it help to either render more visual frames or physics calculations than the monitor can display? Besides, few areas in few FM's will run at 144 FPS from a few camera positions and angles

With the Beta window closing and 2.13 release drawing near, does anyone think this can be improved at least to some extent? While it's not a gameplay breaking issue, I still see it as a very obvious problem: The AI behaves in absurd ways and often doesn't detect where it was attacked from, seemingly due to alert locations not being sent or overriding each other, in which case it's hopefully easy to find its wiring and try something different that offers better results.