Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

snatcher

Member
  • Posts

    919
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by snatcher

  1. Years ago I don't know but If I was to risk my chips in 2024 I wouldn't bet in an established community of a 25 year old classic. TDM has been around for a decade now and if it didn't spark there already it never will. Thief veterans gather together and share stories about the good old days and that's great. The next generation of TDM players won't come from the past but from the present and future, imho.

  2. Very informative post, @Fiver.

    Few months have passed and it probably is time to ask this again ⬇️

    On 10/5/2023 at 9:19 PM, snatcher said:

    Is anyone in here in favor of the current sorting (very first screenshot in this topic) over other options? Please speak up.

    1. By going current, missions are kind of sorted and mission names are respected.
    2. By going true alphabetical, missions are sorted and mission names are respected.
    3. By going article last, missions are kind of sorted and mission names are not respected.

    Please comment if you disagree or have something to add to my three points above.

    If I were to decide I would personally find defending the second option the easiest: how would you like Windows to sort your files and folders?

  3. 22 minutes ago, STiFU said:

    To be fair, he has put forward a lot of evidence internally. There was a huge (and heated) discussion and we eventually landed on a compromise.

    I totally understand, 'though, how you feel like this comes out of nowhere. I get it.

    I didn't notice anything in this change (positive feedback I guess) other than the high mantle speed. Give us players more power (faster, better, insta, auto...) and most will embrace it without hesitation. Good, bad? I don't know. A choice in the design of your game. What troubles me is the motivation, justification and presentation of a couple of recent changes.

    My perception is that all this is very personal. My perception is that this is more about Thief than TDM.

    • Like 3
  4. 6 minutes ago, Baal said:

    But just for the sake of this discussion: what if the default action for bodies (drag or shoulder) could be chosen with an option? A simple checkmark that switches these around (either short frob = drag and long frob = shoulder or the other way around)?

    Both variants would be ok with me.

    This above.

    It is easy to give but difficult to take away. I suggested @Daft Mugi to initially stick to a single hold-frob value of 0.2ms, 0.5ms... whatever he thinks it's best for the average player. If this value doesn't work, it can be changed in the future. If the new single value does not work either, we then can think of alternatives.

    By following this we are left with two options: New frob and old frob, instead of four options, one of which reads alien for new players.

    frob.jpg

     

    The new hold-frob is built on top of everything and it is out of the way. This whole change feels like an improvement and the point of controversy has to do with the default action for bodies. I suggested @Daft Mugi that all changes stay but the setting focuses on bodies only. This way we could have "Frob body action": a) Shoulder b) Grab & Drag.

  5. 52 minutes ago, wesp5 said:

    I'm sure many people don't use the frob helper.

    It's enabled by default in 2.12. Most players will keep it, I guess.

    52 minutes ago, wesp5 said:

    I like the idea much better that the name is displayed if the body is highlighted! Snatcher, could you possibly change your current show-name-on-frob feature into this?

    On second thought I think we better not. The text on frob servers three purposes:

    • Get to know the name of AI (if any) without the need of shouldering.
    • Get to know the status (KO/Dead) of AI without the need of shouldering.
    • Get to know if something is in the grabber, but this is minor, and it could only be considered a feature if all objects had a proper name.

    The player triggers the text with his/her actions. If we do it on highlight then it is us who is triggering it, and the player may or may not want it displayed at that moment.

    Back on topic,

    16 hours ago, MirceaKitsune said:

    In the past you could tell by their eyes: Dead AI would have them open while knocked out AI had them closed. Last time I played it seemed like even this stopped working and both cases had their eyes shut... a recent bug perhaps?

    Yeah, this is something I noticed too.

    16 hours ago, MirceaKitsune said:

    So here's one idea that should work great: Alongside the eyes we could have the mouth be open, which is easier to spot from a close distance. Knocked out AI have their mouth closed, dead AI have it open which is a clear cue and also looks more... well, dead.

     

    I like this idea very much. I think it could work.

    Also, a new arg for mappers: on_death_tongue_out.

    • Haha 1
  6. No, to get the text in vanilla TDM you must shoulder the body. The alternative you are looking at is modded.

    3 minutes ago, MirceaKitsune said:

    A solution might be the text appearing just by highlighting the body [...]

    Interesting 🙂

    4 minutes ago, MirceaKitsune said:

    [...] that would be like checking the AI's pulse so it works.

    That was the idea for the modded version.

    • Like 1
  7. 12 minutes ago, Dragofer said:

    Since 2.10 or so FM defs will always override core defs if they both have the same name. FM files override core files of the same name and path.

     

    7 minutes ago, Baal said:

    It actually is possible to override single declarations without touching the core files. I just got it to work with a footstep sound replacement. At least I think so, I am not a hundred percent sure yet.

    Music to my ears! My bad, then. My first attempt at modding TDM had to do with sounds in 2.10 and I failed and parked it. I am very glad to hear it was possible back then and now. Thanks.

  8. 22 hours ago, Baal said:

    Is it possible to override a single definition (from a .sndshd file for example) instead of whole files?

    I want to replace some footstep sounds. If I include the sound shader defnition files, I'll have to keep them up to date with the base mod, and I don't want to do that. Instead, I just want to override single definitions in a separate file. Is that possible?

    This is a nightmare for both mappers and modders, and not only in the audio department. As far as I can tell, and unless you employ elaborated tricks, it is all or nothing.

    Things can change, though.

    EDIT - Wrong assumptions. Confirmed a few posts below.

  9. The below video illustrates some of the points I tried to make earlier.

    This new (or returning) player is experiencing TDM for a first time and I would say his mood and style perfectly fit the primary target audience of TDM. The player is unaware that shouldering bodies is a thing. See how it plays out.

    1st situation - From 00:00 until 03:30
    2nd situation - From 27:30 until whenever you want


    The player quickly figured out how to drag and manipulate (turn around) bodies and I detect no sign of frustration. The circumstances even lead to a couple of comical moments. Sooner or later this player will get to know about shouldering bodies and he will, as it couldn't be otherwise, prioritize shouldering. It all has been learned organically and the player can now switch tactics if desired.

    Now consider this same player was playing 2.12. I don't see any reason for this or any other player to ever getting to learn or appreciate body manipulation. 2.12 teaches players to move grain sacks out of the way, devoiding any sign of "humanity" from ragdolls.

    @stgatilov commented ragdoll manipulation is something like an engine show-off. Considering the amount of work that went into the feature I tend to believe the mechanic was seen as an opportunity and built as such. Let's for a moment travel to a parallel universe and pretend the developers decided shouldering bodies alone was the way to go, just like in Thief. How long would have gone by until someone wondered: wouldn't dragging bodies be cool and more realistic?

    I agree that shouldering bodies could be done with one (long or short) click. The problem I have with the final implementation is that the case was presented one-sided and there was no retrospective or interest in alternatives. We took a shortcut and as a result we missed half of what the journey offered. We didn't think big.

    Besides that above, players are now exposed to:

    • Unintentionally shouldering bodies while trying to retrieve items from bodies
    • Unintentionally un-shouldering bodies when trying to operate doors

    @Daft Mugi & friends set out to do this change and I have no problem with that, but I feel this whole topic is unbalanced. Some points have been hardly considered or discussed so excuse that I insist. If anything, this topic will make it for a good read for those coming next in a few years time 🙂

    • Like 3
  10. 3 hours ago, OrbWeaver said:

    Is that the one with the really confusing labyrinthine library that nobody's allowed to go into? I always thought that would make an excellent (part of a) Dark Mod mission.

    Agree!

    EDIT - I have a vague memory of a T2 mission with a labyrinthine stair puzzle, probably inspired by the movie or by Escher's Relativity, but I don't remember the name of the FM 😑

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...