Search the Community

Thanks. If you press X to activate the clipper tool and cut a brush, can you confirm that breaks even this solution until Radiant is restarted?

For an as-yet unknown reason, this commit seems to break XML parsing on Linux: #6439: Use xmlReadFile instead of xmlParseFile which has been deprecated and removed. Privatise Document() constructor accepting an xmlDocPtr. As far as I can see, the commit is entirely correct. xmlParseFile is indeed deprecated, and the new usage of xmlReadFile matches what the libxml2 examples are suggesting. But the result is that although the xmlDoc* returned from the function is not NULL, nothing XML-related works, the entire registry system returns only empty values, and almost all of the tests are broken (because the main radiant core cannot be initialised without any registry values available). Changing back to xmlParseFile makes the problem go away but is an unsatisfactory solution because it specifically reintroduces a deprecated function call. I am not sure whether this is a bug in the specific version of libxml2 on my Ubuntu system, or something incorrect about how we are calling xmlReadFile (i.e. perhaps it requires an encoding or a particular non-default option to correctly process our XML files). Unfortunately like many of the core GNOME C libraries, the documentation is bare-bones and explains almost nothing (like what any of the parsing options actually mean), and I cannot see an obvious way to ask libxml2 to return meaningful errors, or to query exactly what might be wrong with a constructed xmlDoc* object. It makes me wonder if it would be better in the long term to ditch the reliance on libxml2 and instead use one of the light-weight C++ XML parsing libraries like RapidXml or pugixml instead. Not exactly a trivial change but might not be too cumbersome since the existing XML code is wrapped in our own xmlutil classes and not generally used directly by the rest of the codebase.

sadly for my part even the most ellaborate workarounds were a nogo at the time, and believe me i tried... select packages might be avaliable if they behave but as a general rule no as far as i can see. isolation might have a grating sound to some who likes to have all software availiable (even if it is not built for say this kinda gui GTK/KDE) but for the most part the flatpak versions work just fine without messing up system libraries, hell i can even autostart packages like greenwithenvy (GTK) on the plasma version (KDE) with a trip into system settings. where it mostly fails is with themes if you use say the dark theme it might not work in that particular app atm, but they are working on it. XFCE is a personal favorite here to, it is lean fast and looks quite good, the Solus version is currently in beta so not sure how well it runs ?. Im using the plasma desktop version myself . I also quite like OpenBox despite not being used in many distros, like XFCE it is lean and fast but lacks a bit of options for controlling things from the desktop by itself requiering knowledge most users dont have to setup the juicy parts.

As I understand the TDM license there are roughly three types of contributions to the TMD project as a whole: 1) Contributions to the source code of TDM: These are licensed GPL or BSD and can therefore be used already today by commercial projects. 2) Contributions to the 2.3 GB media/gamedata included in TDM at install: These are licensed CC-BY-NC-SA and restricts commercial use. 3) Contributions of fan missions that can be played using TDM and are added by the end-user after the install (either by the ingame downloader, website, or other source): These are not part of the core product and the license says "Any missions [...] are the property of their respective authors, and different licensing may apply.". This means the FM creators can choose any license they want, anything between CC-0/PD and strict copyright. Possibly even put additional restrictions on its use (e.g. say "You may only download and play this on regular TDM"), right? It is up to the end-user to abide by the stipulated license. The included missions "Training Misson", "A New Job", and "Tears of St Lucia" appears to fall into category (2) according to "Unless explicitly stated otherwise, all [...] non-software components that are distributed with The Dark Mod are licensed under [CC-BY-NC-SA]". Does anyone know if their license says anything else?

Personally I can see some ancillary benefits from trying to move TDM from non-commercial-libre to true-libre, beyond getting off the FOSS community's naughty list. There are a fair few indie devs who have tried to make modernized Thief-likes. None of them have done half as good a job as this community. I think that is generally down to the engine. All the detection and movement systems take a lot of time to implement, which you guys have already paid down. Imagine if those indie devs had the option to use TDM as the base for their games. More of these games would be published, and more would be successful. And this in turn would grow the public knowledge base about working in Dark Radiant and TDM. Some of those devs might make their own public FMs. Some might contribute to the wiki and documentation. Some might contribute to project maintenance or even donate new features that they develop. Personally I would call this one of the bigger things that you could do to keep the project alive. It would definitely be a big project to bring the project assets into compliance or to fork off a compliant TDM-lite. A year ago I would have said it is impossible, but AI is changing things. It can make art and it can write code, and especially when it has a working example of the thing it is recreating to learn from. It still would not be easy, but at least possible. Let this be a lesson for creators to select your licensing carefully. It is not always easy to change after the fact.

To cater to both audiences. I mentioned LibreGameWiki as one example. nbohr1more mentioned other uses. Explicitly allowing reuse and spread will help TDM reach a wider audience and would hopefully attract more volunteers. More volunteers which can help improve both TDM versions. There are several benefits for a project of being in the Debian repo. One is that TDM Debian-users can report defects on any package directly to Debian (no need to register on separate forums). Debian may then fix the issue themselves (in their "TDM-libre" package) and will offer the patch upstream to TDM, who can then choose to accept or reject the patch. I envision "TDM-libre" to have the same capability of downloading any mission as regular TDM. The only difference is that "TDM-libre" would come packaged with the regular engine (which is GPL+BSD) and an included mission that has libre media/gamedata. When I play TDM by myself, I want the unlimited-play and can accept commercial restrictions. But if I were to promote it somewhere, or charge for a stream when playing online, or make a video, I would want a version without commercial restrictions (and can temporarily accept limited-play) to make sure I don't violate anyone's copyright. Perhaps. That's what I'm trying to find out.

I suggest you use the term "I", to make clear that it is something YOU want, and that you speak for yourself. But, as wesp5 mentioned, I don't really know what this is about, at all. And, I'm also wondering about all the newly registered people lately, who just arrived at this forum, and already want to revolutionize this mod. This is a thing I noticed 2 or 3 years ago, and which hasn't been present in the 15 years I play this mod and frequent these forums now. Really seems like a common thing these days, to not knock on the door, but kick it in, and stomp right in.

When talking about a possible libre version of TDM (https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22346-libre-version-of-tdm/) it seems we believe all media/gamedata included in TDM is licensed CC-BY-NC-SA. I am not familiar with how the process of adding new media/gamedata works today; I have seen files uploaded to the bugtracker which developers then commit to SVN, but I don't know if there are other ways. It may be a good idea to implement a process that when new components (media/gamedata included in TDM) are added, the contributor is asked to be explicit about the license (a choice which may defaults to their previous preference, for usability). It won't fix the past, but it may help in the future. This will make it easy for contributors to add future data under a more permissive license if they choose. Libre media can be added and its license can be tracked, rather than assumed to be CC-BY-NC-SA. I suggest looking at how Wikimedia Commons has implemented this: the contributor state the source and license at the time the data is uploaded. This can be done either by providing urls or by saying "It's my work and I choose this licsense". The first step could be to add a way to keep track of each filepath in SVN, author, license, sources. Start by setting the value for each file's license to "(default/legacy CC-BY-NC-SA)". Possible implementations for a user interface for new additions are: * Use our own wiki, which runs Mediawiki (same as Wikimedia Commons). I see several benefits of this, but we also need a way to accept uploads of batches, not just single files. * Look at how other open source projects have solved this. There may be more appropriate solutions available. ... but I'll leave the implementation open. Suggestions are very welcome! If the author of each file already in SVN can be tracked, then it may be possible that the author is willing to give a blanket permission for all their past files in one statement, and all their files in SVN can be updated in one commit. A productive contributor willing to release some of their work under a more permissive license could make a big change. If Dark Radiant would support letting mappers search media/gamedata by license (does it already?), it would make it easier for mappers to create a completely libre mission, which would help facilitate a TDM-libre release. If I understand things correctly. This post does not address all details and it may contain misunderstandings or assumptions, but it's a start. Also relevant: * Is there a compiled and maintained list of recommended or deprecated resources for mappers to use? * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/20311-external-art-assets-licensing/

In that case, separating libre components from non-libre components does not seem possible, and like you say we may then have to assume it is CC-BY-NC-SA. That is something we may want to address, but I'll start a new topic for that. According to the TDM license (https://svn.thedarkmod.com/publicsvn/darkmod_src/trunk/LICENSE.txt), both GPL and BSD "3-clause license" apply for the source code: * The portions base on Doom 3 (1999-2011) is GPL * The portions by Broken Glass Studios / The Dark Mod Team (2005-2011) "were"(?) distributed under "revised BSD license". According to the Debian Free Software Guidelines (https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/): * Both GPL and "modified BSD License" are accepted into the Debian "main" repository * "Non-Commercial License" (it sounds likely CC-BY-NC-SA falls into this category) is accepted into the Debian "non-free" repository ("revised BSD license" and "modified BSD License" are different names for the BSD "3-clause license", see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses)

Dragofer's teledoor also has a fade to dark effect, which could be useful. You could combine that with an ambilight-style Presence Lamp, so that if you come close(r) the wall lights up around it.. Just kidding.

TDM has tons of textures from "free" texture resources that do not allow redistribution and cannot be incorporated into a commercial project. Someone would need to create a huge replacement pack of textures that do not break the look of existing missions and do not infringe on the copyrighted textures. Also, many artists who contributed to this project do not want 3rd party entities to use their work in commercial projects. They intended the models, textures, sounds, animations to be exclusively used for Darkmod content. You would either have to replace ALL assets or contact every contributor and ask them to re-license their assets. Many contributors are no longer active with the project and haven't visited the forums in years so it would be no easy feat. I cannot speak to Debian policy but I think that they treat installers that add non-free content the same as non-free content itself. One could argue that Steam is such an installer but I guess Debian would counter that there are a few fully Libre games on Steam. I think Debian, Ubuntu, or Linux Mint need to consider a repo that allows for games (etc) that include non-libre content but intentionally offer this content for free to the community with no stipulations other than "don't try to sell it as a product".

This post differentiates between "gratis" ("at no monetary cost") and "libre" ("with little or no restriction") per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre * A libre version of TDM could: ** Qualify TDM for an article on the LibreGameWiki *** TDM is currently listed as rejected https://libregamewiki.org/Libregamewiki:Rejected_games_list because "Media is non-commercial (under CC-BY-NC-SA 3.0). The engine is free though (modified Doom 3) (2013-10-19)" ** Qualify for software repositories like Debian *** TDM is currently listed as unsuitable https://wiki.debian.org/Games/Unsuitable#The_Dark_Mod because 1) "The gamedata is very large (2.3 GB)", and 2) "The license of the gamedata (otherwise it must go into non-free with the engine into contrib)" and links to https://svn.thedarkmod.com/publicsvn/darkmod_src/trunk/LICENSE.txt Questions: 1) tdm_installer.linux64 is 4.2 MB (unzipped), which is far from the 2.3 GB which is said to be too large. Yes, the user can use it to download data that is non-libre, but so can any web browser too. If the installer itself is completely libre, does anyone know the reason why it cannot be accepted into the Debian repository? 2) If adding the installer to the repository is not a viable solution, would it be possible to package the engine with a small and beginner friendly mission built only from libre media/gamedata into a "TDM-libre" release, and add user friendly functionality to download the 2.3 GB media/gamedata using "TDM-libre" (similar to mission downloading)? 3) Would such a "TDM-libre" release be acceptable for the Debian repository? 4) Would such a "TDM-libre" release be acceptable for LibreGameWiki? 5) Would the work be worth it? * Pros: Exposure in channels covering libre software (e.g. the LibreGameWiki). Distribution in channels allowing only libre software (e.g. the Debian repository). * Cons: The work required for the modifictions and release of "TDM-libre". Possible maintenance of "TDM-libre". I'm thinking that the wider reach may attract more volunteers to work on TDM, which may eventually make up for this work and hopefully be net positive. 6) Are there any TDM missions that are libre already today? If not, would anyone be willing to work on one to fulfill this? I'll contribute in any way I can. 7) I found the following related topics on the forum: * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/16226-graphical-installers-for-tdm/ (installing only the updater) * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/16640-problems-i-had-with-tdm-installation-on-linux-w-solutions/ (problems with installation on Linux) * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/17743-building-tdm-on-debian-8-steamos-tdm-203/ (Building TDM on Debian 8 / SteamOS) * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/18592-debian-packaging/ (Dark Radiant) ... but if there are other related previous discussions, I'd appreciate any links to them. Any thoughts or comments?

The gamepad implementation allows for a great degree of flexibility to personalize settings, aside from a few minor issues that I mentioned here: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22337-gamepad-bindings/ I would say that playing TDM with a gamepad works very well, especially considering that it was implemented as experimental and hasn't been changed since then. If I could, I'd go back to 2021-you and congratulate you on buying that gamepad. I notice that your DarkmodPadbinds.cfg looks very different from mine...

TDM is marketed as: It's a tremendous achievement - a detailed tribute to the Thief series. (link) Since The Dark Mod is designed to simulate the stealth gameplay of Thief, many things will be familiar to veteran Thief players. (link) It should be of no surprised when folks suggest making a change to TDM that fits more closely with Thief when it makes sense. The majority of active TDM players and mission authors I see today are also Thief players. And, besides the folks here on this forum, there aren't many places where the dev team can get player feedback on TDM, especially players who gave up on playing TDM all together. The Thief (including TTLG) community is one of the only places where we can get feedback in general and from veterans of this stealth game type. Feedback I received from a player: This is great news for our community. For our community, more players increase the likelihood of more devs, mission authors, and content creators. For the content creators, more players experience the content they make. That said, I think most agree that TDM is not meant be a 1:1 copy of Thief, and that's a good thing. Changes to TDM should be carefully considered and playtested before release. EDIT: To clarify, addressing player complaints does not mean copy Thief game mechanics. It means that when player complaints are addressed, a solution that is appropriate for TDM is implemented.

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:

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.

Are you tired of looking at the same old painting skins? Do you want exciting, new banners to revitalize your WIP? If so, look no further than this all-in-one CC0/Public Domain asset pack filled with Paintings, Tapestries, and Prints! For the low, low price of $0.00, you can get over 80 brand-new images that will launch your Dark Mod map into the stratosphere! It doesn't get more FREE than this, people, so get the .pk4 while supplies last! This asset pack has been brought to you by @Wellingtoncrab and myself! Love it? Let us know! Hate it? Tell us your woes! Find a bug? We'll fix it. And did I mention that all these images are CC0/Public Domain? So go nuts! You can download the .pk4 from Google Drive here. Enjoy, Taffers!

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

Nice, dark shots. I'm in.

I'll add one thing, which I didn't state earlier because I assumed it was obvious. But I'd like to make it clear. What is the purpose of dragging a body and body manipulation in this stealth game? In my opinion, it is a "tool" or "game mechanic" that gives the player the ability to do two things: The last 10%. After shouldering a body and dropping it in a desired location, the player can drag and hide it more precisely in the shadows. Is just a foot or hand sticking out into the light? No problem. Grab and drag it into the shadows. No need to shoulder and drop the entire body again. That's a good thing. Dragging gives fine-tuned control for that scenario. Nearby shadows. After KO-ing a guard near a dark area, the player can quickly drag the guard into the dark area. The distance here would be one or two body lengths away. Given that the distance is short, dragging is quicker than shouldering and dropping. That's a good thing. Dragging gives a quick way to hide a body in that scenario. In my opinion, the 2.12 controls enhance the experience for those two scenarios, because the controls give a quick way to grab a body, drag it into position, and release it quickly and precisely. However, most of the time that fine-tuned control is not necessary for this stealth game. Shouldering and dropping a body can work well enough, hence why it became the primary action. That said, being able to precisely drag a body is a great enhancement to just shouldering, and it's something players can learn and appreciate given time.

In Elixir, wall is not lit, in dark, but when player approaches, it gets lit. Beta3

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.

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.

Maybe a dark ritual at the start of the mission would be nice.

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.