Search the Community

It seems like more and more "thief" and "thief players" is becoming a short hand to dismiss community members earnest desire to improve the game - which happens to be a barely legally distinct "thief style" game which was made by thief fans for thief fans and is "designed to simulate the stealth gameplay of Thief". Who is the predominant player base of the game supposed to be beyond fans of the thief games? Is there some better avenue to find feedback for the game beyond this forum? FOSS and linux forums? I have seen maybe half a dozen posts from that segment. I am a thief fan, I play thief fms, my association with those games is what drives me to play and make things for this game. Are we supposed to pretend the original games are not a huge reason why most of us are here at all? TL;DR version:

This is the same scheme the most radical voices in this debate have been asking for from the start. (Myself among them.) I thought it was settled that having extinguish on short click created a back-compatibility risk for a small subset of old FMs. I think the concern was putting out candles that are needed as a light source to progress, and then not having flint to relight them. That's why the current (mechanically and cognitively sub-optimal) compromise was selected. Am I remembering right? If so, let's just all reread the thread history rather than rehash this argument over again.

This is what you said: 1) That while playing you found you could not extinguish moveable lights 2) This was because of the need to use the hold frob and did not remember this I know you wouldn’t make a misleading statement about the implementation of the hold frob mechanic as a pretext to bring up your issues with the consistency with the controls, so I assume you forgot the original controls of the game or your custom keybinding for “use inv item” reset when you updated the game or something. At this point in the thread I am not going to recommend to you that you use an optional mechanic that you don’t like. There is a version of the training mission in development which tutorializes the hold frob mechanic - though eventually it would be good to develop a tutorial mission that is less freeeform than the training mission.

Thanks! 1) Doing LONG_PRESS PAD_A (what I, for lack of knowledge, call "jump-mantle" or "_jumpmantle") differs from doing PRESS PAD_A ("_jump"). "_jumpmantle" differs from "_mantle", so they must be mapped to different button-calls. "_jumpmantle" differs from "_jump", so they must also be mapped to different button-calls. This appears to be the case, but it is not evident (or changeable) in DarkmodPadbinds.cfg. "_jumpmantle" seems to be hard coded to always connect to the same button as "_jump" but with a long press. It is as if bindPadButton PRESS PAD_A "_jump" is not actually just binding PRESS PAD_A to "_jump", but rather interpreted as "link PAD_A (regardless of button press time) to behave exactly like keyboard SPACE for short and long presses". I would have expected the default DarkmodPadbinds.cfg to explicitly read: bindPadButton PRESS PAD_A "_jump" bindPadButton LONG_PRESS PAD_A "_jumpmantle" bindPadButton PRESS PAD_B "_crouch" bindPadButton LONG_PRESS PAD_B "_mantle" ... but neither LONG_PRESS PAD_A or "_jumpmantle" is listed in the file. If there are actions "_jump" and "_mantle", I suppose there must also be an action "_jumpmantle" since it is possible for the player to do all those movements: * "_mantle" does the movements "crouch on the high surface, then stand up" * "_jumpmantle" idoes the movements "jump slightly forward, then land standing on the high surface" * "_jump" idoes the movements "jump up, then land exactly where you started" If the actions "_jump" and "_moveup" are not synonymous, then perhaps the action "_moveup" is what i call "_jumpmantle"? 2) Thanks for the link! It was useful in more than one way. I'll link to that page from https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Bindings_and_User_Settings#Gamepad_Default_Bindings if I can get an account on the wiki, which proved more difficult than i thought (https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22327-how-can-i-create-an-account-on-the-tdm-wiki/). However, it does not answer my question how to find out the name ("<button>") used for a button on my gamepad. Basically, I would need to press the button on my gamepad and some program could tell me "That button is called 'PAD_A'". In my case, I have a gamepad "Logitech F310" (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logitech_F310_Gamepad.jpg) which has a "Logitech button" (see image) that I want to use. I was hoping to find out the "button name" for that button and then edit DarkmodPadbinds.cfg to map it to a function. 3) ... but if that button has an "unusual name" that TDM does not recognize, then it may perhaps not work. E.g. if that button is called "PAD_LOGITECH" and TDM cannot recognize that name, then I cannot map anything to it via DarkmodPadbinds.cfg. Using QJoyPad I can map any keyboard key to it instead, as a workaround, but I cannot map MODIFIER to it (since MODIFIER cannot be set to a keyboard key). If current implementation is still called "experimental", then I must say it works very well; @cabalistic: kudos for that! I may not have continued playing TDM had it not worked with a gamepad.

The beta testing thread is up:

It is possible that this is a setting that needs to be activated to work: https://mantisbt.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=23221

After having trouble dragging the body where he wanted, the player said, "No. Noooo." (29:09) Player said, "I'm sorry. I'm not trying to look up there. It's just very awkward to drag bodies." (30:08) What I see is a player having trouble being stealthy while playing a stealth game, so this video just adds evidence in support of making shouldering the primary action over dragging. I never saw that he figured out how to shoulder a body. I think we are wanting to optimize for two different scenarios: One is to optimize for a stealth experience, and the other is to optimize for a "comical" experience. If I'm understanding you correctly, you have a strong fascination with body manipulation. Earlier in this thread, you stated: What you find as "comical", I see as the player suffering with the gameplay and struggling with the controls. Players have written their frustration with the pre-2.12 controls and stopped playing TDM all together. I've already seen players write about their interest in trying 2.12 based on the recent changes, which is huge. They're willing to give it another go, and that's great for our community. I am interested in watching playthrough videos and reading player experiences with the 2.12 version once released. Then, we'll be able to get more feedback about the 2.12 controls. Body manipulation is still available, and I find that it's even easier to do with the 2.12 controls. @STiFU commented something similar: @snatcher, given that body manipulation is so important to you, then I suggest creating a group and creating content about body manipulation. This could be similar to the groups that ghost or ironman the game. For example, Rule #1: Bodies must be dragged. Shouldering bodies is not allowed.

I am going to sort-of reveal that this is loosely like the nature of my upcoming mission. I noted it here when JackFarmer asked about things that are coming along in this post: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/profile/37993-jackfarmer/&status=3943&type=status It too is a builder church. The player is requested by a hopefully famous character in another mission to handle some business that is affecting the congregation. I am looking to invoke some info and history laid down in other missions as a hook story.

I recall (from a year ago) I did try to go back as far as I easily could using TDM public resources. Also general searches on Google and Wayback Machine, for the specific filenames like "fontimage_12.dat" (in conjunction with "stone_0_12.dds") or possible alt naming like "stone_0_12.dat" Maybe someone with TDM SVN/Art Archive privs could get further into the past. Or who has a machine with Doom 3 loaded? It is also possible that file is present in one of the other Thief variants, possibly with a different filename. Someone else would be better placed to explore these possibilities.

To follow on. While the TDM distribution does have a DDS file for Stone 12pt: tdm_fonts01\dds\fonts\english\stone\stone_0_12.dds it is missing the corresponding DAT file: tdm_fonts01\fonts\english\stone\fontimage_12.dat so the system uses Stone 24pt as a basis instead. BTW, the Russian version has both files for Stone 12pt. If you try to use the Russian DAT (renamed) with the English DDS, pixel nightmare. I asked around in TDM a year ago if anyone had the missing dat file. No luck. Hmmm, didn't mean to highjack this thread. I'll shut up now.

Then the characters that you removed the pixels from would be less-well shaped. The right solution is to change the metadata around character spacings. That's deep in the weeds. And probably better pursued as part of generating a 12pt Stone image. If you want to take this on, I can send you some links. I did some prelim research on this last year, related to computing the width of a Stone string, but never tried to do a font edit or gen, because a lot of steps seemed unclear. EDIT: Some of my thinking here is that maybe the scaling down from the available 24pt Stone image to a desired 12pt is introducing artifacts. Also, backing off a bit from what I said above, maybe not removing pixels, but shifting any problematic character glyth sideways within an image, would fix things well enough. EDIT2: These are the main forum links I found helpful The "Stone Print" source font in ttf form is available, e.g., from www.fontpalace.com. Useful Doom 3 tutorials are #10 "Using custom fonts" & #11 "Editing fonts". Tools include "Export Font to Doom3 - v1.02" and Q3Font. Some of this stuff comes from the wayback machine of the internet archive. I can get you copies. Sorry, can't help much with DDS editing tools.

I created the page: https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Lightgem In the source I placed the following text: <!-- Page text made by forum user Fiver: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22327-how-can-i-create-an-account-on-the-tdm-wiki/&do=findComment&comment=491145 --> Personally I think the page isn't really necessary because the info is already present under HUD.

Would it be possible to remove the extra pixels in the fonts if somebody could point out to me where these are? When looking at dds from the fonts01 archive I only see white on transparent in Paint.NET and I can't make out anything...

We used to have a more open policy about wiki access but got burned by spammers who acted in bad faith. If you have a wiki idea, please post a document and other members with wiki access can vet it and add it. Once you have proven your long-term viability, you will likely gain access to self-edit. Nothing guarantees that a spammer isn't "playing the long game" and waiting for such access but it increases the barrier of entry and makes the endeavor less enticing. I refrained from commenting on this thread because I do not have privileges to add users to the wiki and therefore generally do not feel comfortable speaking on behalf of those who do have such privileges.

In the first post of the other topic Geep proposed: Then Stgatilov's answer: But I think applying subtitles in different languages shouldn't be too hard I would think, but I don't know how the current translation system works. The engine should apply the correct subtitles based on the applied language setting, this doesn't need a whole new language system I think. Not sure who's going to write those subtitles though. I can only do Dutch and English and nobody needs Dutch I think. I suggest further discussion of this to take place in topic https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/21741-subtitles-possibilities-beyond-211/

Yeah it would be cool to see some more detailed statistics and it’s a shame they aren’t really captured. Since we are talking about fan mission platforms, where players also make the content for the game, I feel like the best thing we’ve got is you can look at the number of content releases for the games. Keep in mind the graph counts campaigns as single missions - so for example NHAT and TBP both count as 1 mission. A good year for TDM has has approaching maybe 50% - mostly we’re 25-30%. https://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152494 You could also look at the number of ratings thief missions get on https://www.thiefguild.com/ vs TDM ones, but that is pretty iffy in that you could chalk that up to more awareness of the site in the thief community than TDM Out of curiosity is there a reason a thief player can’t be a new player? I kind of think a player is a player and new players would be ones who are playing the dark mod who weren't? Is there disagreement the base of players most likely to pick up the game are fans of the thief games? They are certainly the most fruitful place to find feedback on the game beyond the sphere of this forum that I have seen. When we were trying to finish up SLL there was a lot of discussion on the forums about how long it had been since there was a release for the game. I am thankful that the stats show at least some stability over the years in terms of releases for TDM, but the trend for all of the games is decline. Not doing anything is a valid response if that’s what the devs want to do - it is not possible to provide evidence that any effort will slow that inertia. As a player and content maker I would just prefer trying to find feedback where it is offered from players who were willing to try the game but ultimately could not engage with it and see if there is anything that can be done within reason to ease them into the game. The game has a lot to offer imo. All those players are potential contributors - contributions in turn attract players - it’d be nice to see the cycle go on as long as it can.

All right y'all. We need some good ole data instead of 28 pages of -- well, you know. The "mantle roll" is the amount the view rolls or tilts during a mantle. So, if you could be so kind as to: Launch TDM 2.12 Beta Go to Settings -> Gameplay Set "View: Mantle Roll" to: 1.0 and test in game (100% of original mantle roll) 0.5 and test in game (50% of original mantle roll) 0.1 and test in game (10% of original mantle roll) Finally, vote for your preferred setting. The increased mantle speed changed the feel a bit and perhaps the mantle roll would feel better tweaked some to match it. (Edit: To clarify, this is about a potentially different default mantle roll value. The "View: Mantle Roll" slider in the settings will remain, regardless.) This thread is for your click-ity click vote on the poll at the top of this page. All constructive comments about the increased mantle speed in 2.12 are welcome on its own, wonderful thread:

I just recently became aware of this feature: https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Particle_collisions_and_cutoff Unfortunately I completely missed it, as when I went to create weather effects in my FMs I just followed this (which doesn't mention it): https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=A_-_Z_Beginner_Full_Guide_Page_3#Rain_and_Snow The point of this thread is to a) make people aware of it and b) gather feedback from any mappers that have used it so we can get some mapper-focused documentation in the Wiki. The page above is great for background information about how it works, but as a mapper I really just want to know: What are the limitations of this (i.e. when should it be used and when shouldn't it be used)? Why isn't it the default behaviour? Why all this work to get it into the map? What built-in support for it exists (particle definitions, materials, etc). Do I need to create all this stuff myself? Texture layout vs. Linear layout: what's the difference in the end, pros/cons, why would I use one over the other... Why does it need a separate command (runParticle)? Can this just not be bundled in with dmap? A clear, step-by-step instruction on how to implement it in a map from beginning to end using a simple use case. Tagging some users who have relevant experience with this: @stgatilov @Goldwell @Amadeus

Creating a new thread for this as it was being discussed in an old beta-testing thread starting here: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/21822-beta-testing-high-expectations/&do=findComment&comment=490751 I suppose the main questions are: when should this spawnarg be used, if at all? why was it introduced in the first place? Can we get it documented properly on the Wiki so misuse isn't propagated? @stgatilov @Dragofer

heh its the rtx 2080 ti asus strix gaming OC not even running in SLI the cpu was overclocked a bit 4.2 ghz up from 3 ghz (gets pretty hot beyond that but at 4.2 it barely scrapes 40 degrees in my setup). the 6950x is a 10 core 20 thread broadwell i7 so not to shabby. the gaming machine i built uses SSD's exclusively 2 x 2tb samsung 870 evo and one 2tb crucial nvme. PSU is a 850 watt seasonic platinum. it has 32 gb of G-skill DDR4 ram. board is an asus x99 deluxe with a dual thunderbolt adapter which i dont use atm so is disabled. plays everything i throw at it at more than 60 fps in 4k. only lacking the tpm module for the board which ill probably get next to atleast have some of the requirements ready for win11, still have to disable the check for the cpu because its not on the win11 list but it runs fine (tested).

With a year full of changes, I'm pretty sure I can find something that might increase GPU load in some cases. However, if it seems that 2.12 is slower to you. Please find some specific locations/cases, compare to 2.11, and report this. Be sure to include name of mission, viewpos, and you config file (see the wiki page linked in the first post of this thread). Occasionally unintended performance regressions happen. The worst thing is that they are rarely noticed until a few years later...

@Frost_SalamanderIf it is helpful, I have express permission from Marcel of cgtextures/textures.com that packaging his assets in a .pk4 is acceptable and at the time he was fine with packaging them in TDM projects: Also you mentioned not being able to use your images for just textures - do I take it this means you can use them as textures and within materials in the context of a mod - you just can’t package and release them as only textures correct? Lastly idtech 4 is an engine old enough it’s package files (.pk4s) can be opened with any archive software (would be difficult to mod otherwise). I will include your license information in my documentation if I ever get to release, but is there any special consideration I should give to packaging assets derived from your images in older game engines which lack modern security? The main thing I hope is to just ensure you include his license and that you do not distribute the textures themselves outside of the context of the fm. There is a bit of a slippery slope in that terms on the site have changed a lot over the years. The current licensing model finally seems to state that the photo ref textures are ok to use in "Scenes" for example, but for many years it stated it was only acceptable to use them specially in models. There are many many assets in core which are from this site, which were licensed under these much older terms: https://web.archive.org/web/20100818122748/http://cgtextures.com/content.php?action=license Ultimately if something is licensed, the terms can change. So buyer beware.

IMO points like that assume that content is put in an encrypted / binarized package that can't be easily opened with common software (see Unreal or Unity asset packages, etc.). PK4 is a plain zip archive and everyone knows how to open it. Edit: I had similar problem in the past, with a piano music composer who allowed some of his works to be used in video games, free of charge, but on the condition it was part of a larger file where you couldn't access his audio files.

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but what is the conclusion here? I'm particularly asking about textures.com, because in my latest FM (WIP) I've used tons of textures from there. When I first looked at it, I had concluded that it was OK to use them, but now I'm second guessing that because of this (also mentioned above): Please note that it is not allowed to release our images under Open Source licenses (even when the materials are modified). If you are working on an game that is released under an Open Source license, you need to release content that has been created using our materials under a closed source license. However, this here make me think it might be OK? From https://www.textures.com/support/faq-license#3d-model CAN I USE THE MATERIALS ON A 3D MODEL OR SCENE OR VIDEO GAME LEVEL WHICH I WILL OFFER OR SELL ON A DIGITAL MARKETPLACE? Regular textures may be bundled with 3D models, scenes or video game levels under the following conditions: you have customized the materials for the 3D model, scene or game level, all materials are actually used on the 3D model, in the scene or game level you are selling the model and materials in one package. In other words: do not use bundling as a loophole to sell a texture or material pack. Please add the following text in the documentation accompanying the model: "One or more textures bundled with this project have been created with images from Textures.com. These images may not be redistributed by default. Please visit www.textures.com for more information." IMPORTANT: the exception to this is any content in the Special Content categories: 3D Scans, 3D Scans Atlas, 3D Objects, 3D Foliage, Substance, PBR Materials, Decals, HDR Spheres, HDR Skies, Graphic Designs and 3D Ornaments. The materials in these categories may NOT be bundled with 3D models or scenes. This even applies when you modify the materials: modification does not mean you are allowed to bundle these types of materials. Again I'm specifically talking about using these are part of a fan mission, not the core game. To satisfy the conditions above, I will: customisation: all textures have been converted to different formats (.dds and .tga) or resized I won't include any textures in the .pk4 that aren't included in the mission the FM will be bundled into a single .pk4 package (and I'm obviously not selling it). I'm only using the 'regular textures', not PBR or 3D materials. I will include the text 'One ore more textures...' in the FM readme.

Looking at the code, the originals were "pm_mantle_pull 750" and "pm_mantle_pullFast 450". The new "pm_mantle_pull" value is "400". A "pm_mantle_pullFast" value of "450" would be slower than regular pull, not faster. With both being set to "400", they are at least similar. Other than that, it's subjective and the feedback from playtesters was positive. Also, referenced internally here: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22256-movementcontrols-settings-in-main-menu/&do=findComment&comment=489158