Search the Community

Or... If you'd rather, you could work on the Objectives gui. It's quite easy and I can give you all the relevant graphics. You'll have to import a new font though (but wait until we're sure which one). http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showtopic=3808 What's your preference?

After you have patched it to 1.3, you can apply my patch to update the functionality of the Doom e inspectors window. Just a simple fix to let you minimize it. http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showtopic=3086

Well, you could work with Ishtvan on the Mission Statistics gui. I posted the concept in that thread. http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showtopic=3800 It uses the same background as these main menus, but you won't really need the graphics in order to start it, right? edit: Don't you have ftp access? I think that's where drumple is posting the menus.

If it slows down then of course we should'nt. I just thought that the AI already have to calculate how loud the sound is, so you can just take thevalue from them. Oh I see, you thought I meant player wise. No I meant the loudest volume at which the player was heard

Yeah the usefulness of dropping core weapons would be getting past checkpoints in some specific undercover cases, or maybe you want to risk throwing your sword to create a very loud distraction or to solve some puzzle, who knows.

As for the sound engine, that's part of the core D3 and we cannot modify it, so what you hear is determined by the sound engine, pretty good though. As for sound prop to AI and such, that was made by Ishtvan so he knows all the details, but to sum up: yes AI will hear things dependant on surface, noise level (won't hear you even running if he's near a really loud generator) etc. DarkMod will be closed source FOREVER and we will never let evils such as the "general public" spoil it! J/k Nah, when we release it it will be open source, so you can go and change the AI, lightgem, blah blah blah if you really want to. There will be tutorials that explain how to do things/where to change things/how to corrupt your HDD But yeah, if you don't like curving fire arrows (like my brother does'nt) you can just open the script file with a text editor and set it's gravity to 0. That's just an example The D3 source code will be available in about 2-4 years as Carmack announced, but the SDK is already there and useable. Hell, if someone had enough money, they could buy havoc and integrate it into D3 (the physics are in the SDK) Hope that helps

I don't have any particularly clever GUI ideas right now for a Mission Stat screen. I think once upon a time we had talked about doing something similar to a pirates-style summary, complete with graphics: http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showt...=618&hl=pirates That might be a little overly ambitious now. edit: Actually, scratch that. I DO have a clever idea. I'll put a mock-up together shortly. Ish, what mission statistics do we record?

Here's the original thread that shows the comparison shots: http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showt...roadhead++arrow None of the screenshots showed the fletching of the new arrows which was why I missed them. I do like the shape of the head better, but I'm more comfortable with the size of the original arrow model. Resizing Dram's model might be the best option.

FYI, we got a response from Randy in the other forum: http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?...488#post1462488 I've (or at least a post of mine) never gotten a direct response from a dev, so sort of cool. Sounds like he's not as bitter in retrospect as I had expected. E.g., he recognized that other guys had gone on to do successful things, so it wasn't so much an inevitable clash of personalities but more situational. (I get the feeling he's maybe talking about Spector here? I'd agree it's hard to pin that guy down.) Sounds like a healthier attitude, anyway. He really does come across as sounding like he was going to bat for the fans and the situation soured against him. Something to keep in mind, I guess. I get the feeling the team we have here, for as boorish as it can be at times, has a much healthier environment than was the case for TDS (not a high bar to top, maybe). Not having the market/time pressure and having such a better engine to work with I'm sure helps, but probably also not letting your ambition run away to lose track of what you're doing.

Hello, and welcome to the forums I'll try and answer a few of your questions: If you liked Thief 1/2 (some parts of 3) then you'll like this mod Generally speaking we all loved Thief and are trying to recreate something similar in the D3 engine. Basically, we're making a Thief-ish mod for D3. I'm not sure if we discussed this on the dev forums but I think that if we added shields it would be a bit too much (it's bloody hard enough to hit the guard in the face etc with an arrow as it is). We don't have the random deformation water ala HL1 but we do have water like in HL2. The water effect atm looks very nice and because you'll be easily able to modify the textures etc, you can change the water to look different if you wish etc. Also, there's several types of water, or "liquids". You can easily make your own and this will be in a tutorial. While most people did have swords or whatever in the medieval ages, to see a thief suddenly pop out in front of you is very unnerving, plus he might look like an assassin to you, so you might just get scared shitless. Otherwise, it might be law that no swords to be worn in the street, who knows? In Thief 1/2 there were the Hammerites, which forged their own hammers etc. They also DO swing their creations at you In the DarkMod, the similar faction is Builders. While we are making a campaign later on, we're first releasing a toolset, so it'll be up to FM authors to create levels. So it's up to the FM maker to decide what happens Though we will release a few sample maps to try out an play. I'd love to see some daytime missions, but again, it's up to FM authors to make missions once the toolset comes out Yet again dependant on the FM creator, though we will provide a vast variety of meshes etc that you can use, such as wheelbarrows, etc. It is very easily possible to make a large city map though, so you can easily have several missions happen in the same map. With the sillhouette, don't know how feasible it is or not. The guards' acuity also depends on difficulty, so if you choose Expert, expect nasty surprises > Well we discussed this problem and I believe we came to the conclusion that AI will not climb ladders because it would be a bad idea (in their mind), such as the Thief can wait at the top and kill the guard as he climbs up. There were arguments for it of course, but I think the main issue was balancing it, so we decided against it. Expect better then Thief AI > The mod will be open-source, so you'll be able to mod in whatever you like. Though it's of course limited to free projects, so you can't make money from our free work Hope that answers it all for you

Currently there is a problem with implementing items like torches as prefabs because names are preserved, thus messing up triggering. See: http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?s=&sh...indpost&p=70114 Even if the torch problem is fixed in a programmatic way (*crosses fingers*), it would still be useful for other, non standard items, if DarkRadiant had logic built in to preserve assocations/relations, instead of names. E.g., a prefab made up of: torch_trigger_1 torch_light_1 would be "intelligently" duplicated as: torch_trigger_n torch_light_n Where I suppose n could be consecutive numbers within the map (perhaps the first lowest instance among all items within the prefab could be determined), or failing that, perhaps just a random number or string. For instance, "torch_trigger_356a" would rarely collide with another entity of the same name. If it did, the user would only need to generate another. Disclaimer: I don't know for sure this isn't already in GTKRadiant, as I don't currently have it installed.

Just for pak, the two ambients I posted in the Team forums: http://208.49.149.118/TheDarkMod/audio/amb..._greenhouse.ogg http://208.49.149.118/TheDarkMod/audio/amb...s_cementary.ogg

Spring already mentioned the problems with AI waking up, and it is very much a programming issue...as much as a mapping issue. In addition to those problems, you're further encouraging the player to kill..because if the AI won't stay down, they're sure as hell not going to dick around with guards they supposedly knocked out and have to knock out repeatedly. The guards who wake up, would likely also bring in backup...so again, the player is slapped in the face for being stealthy. Knocking out guards is supposed to be a gameplay reward, for using stealth...over..murder. It also throws a wrench into the whole 'no kill' objective that crops up in higher difficulties...what if you're in a heavily populated map and the awakening guards make it next to impossible to finish without becoming completely frustrated? Yes, I know that this can come down to mapping as well, but it's pretty obvious that the gameplay would become severely unbalanced with re-awakening guards. The choice you make...regardless of how miniscule it might seem, is the difference between you being a Thief and a cold blooded killer. Killing AI is louder, more messy and (at least in TDM) more of a hassle...for those who are a little more determined to be a killer, they will just try harder. Blackjacking can still be tricky, but it is encouraged more because it carries moral implications...and the stats will let you know it...or a Failed Mission screen on higher difficulties. At any rate, we discussed the pros and cons to death within our internal dev forums. It's bad for gameplay. Sure, the initial waking up might not be hard...but the introduction of such AI behaviour creates a veritable hell storm of 'extra' gameplay issues to balance. It changes the nature of Thief style gameplay more than you might think...and balancing the system we're already familiar with is going to be challenging enough. It's a 'cool' idea, but not necessarily a good idea for what we're trying to accomplish. Maybe for a different type of game, but not for a Thief game.

Ok, good ... there's more to work with there and I can clear up some confusions. Although ... unfortunately, not much time here, I'll have to answer this later, but maybe I can outline a bit here. Yeah, I can agree with you that there's probably a visceral reaction at the sight of certain kinds of gay behavior across a very broad demographic, but I don't see the rest of the argument following at all. So going back to my cogsci days ... disguist is handled by the anterior insula (in the double-dissociative sense it's both necessary and sufficient for the feeling of disgust). Two problems. 1. One, I'd argue that culture is doing more work to drive a-i activity (or rather, cultural and "identity" understandings, work going on in the parietal lobe taking cues from social context) in this case than a-i activity is driving culture, certainly more than you are giving it credit for ... that's a big claim that requires more effort than I can give it here, though! But lots of ways to support the idea: (1) cross-cultural a-i studies (some cultures, guy-hand-holding is disgusting but not in others; cock-in-mouth disgusting over a broader range among males but not 100% nor uniformly, more to say there), (2) plasticity of a-i activity within one culture over time (this idea of "habituation", like prisoners), (3) cross-modal studies (that is, comparing a-i activity at (a) the sight of puke or crap even an erect cock to a male (in a non-gay context, though, disgusting to non-homo males for quite straightforward natural-selection reasons) vs. (b ) a token gay scene (& be sure to separate what is disgust at the gayness of the scene itself vs digust just, e.g., at seeing a cock that would be ok in a traditional marriage context). So I'd argue that the former (a) are going to be much more "reflexive"; the latter (b ) are in a family of reactions more like taking instructions from a higher-level, so to speak, more a signal of parietal-lobe disapprobation ("I'm not the kind of person that tolerates that kind of "sick" behavior") than a visceral reflex within the a-i itself. That is, I don't think you are justified to use the word "instinctual" with gayness itself, and I'm not sure the science backs you up on it), or (4) cross modal studies with other forms of pornography vs. gay porn, and then (5) that cross-cultural. I mean, whatever anyone wants to speculate on, the answer here lies within the work of the anterior insula, and it's a much bigger wash than the idea you seem to have of how it works. But I think "instinctual" is not the right concept to be going with. Although I grant the feeling may be quite "visceral" for some persons, ideas of "gayness" triggering the a-i doesn't seem to work like seeing puke the way I understand it; it's much more "top-down". There's just a lot of argument to cover that one, can't do right now. I mean, seriously, lots of work to be done here to make sense of this argument one way or another, making distinctions, drawing lines, getting the evidence lined up... So I'll just leave it at a wash, grant that it's visceral for a wide male population, but won't let you get away with saying it's driving culture any more than Nazi disgust at Jewishness was "instinctual" and driving their cultural norms. The idea of "instinct" just doesn't fly with concepts at that high level. 2. But two, the reason I can skimp on #1 in any event, is that: even if that weren't the case and you were right (which I don't think you are), it would make zero difference to the moral authority of claims that homosexuality is unnatural. I mean, doesn't everyone remember we had a whole enlightenment to deal with this issue? A cultural aversion does not a moral judgment make; doesn't matter how loud you cry "tradition!". I don't give 2 shits what some Amazonian native gets sick at his tummy at seeing ... We in the civilized world base moral restrictions on reason, the most basic rule being: A moral restriction has moral authority just to the extent that it would be irrational for anyone under the restriction to reject its application. Are gays being totally irrational when they say social approbation for their sexual preference is unfounded? No, it's the perfectly reasonable response we'd expect them to have. I may just be misunderstanding the point trying to be made. I think you can try to say as a historical fact, the work of the a-i (e.g., with the hypothesis that it is genetically hardwired to "see gayness -> disgust") explains in descriptive terms why so many anti-gay laws exist, whether they're morally right or not. And I'd reply that, to my understanding, it's actually a relatively poor explanation and that parietal-lobe-centered "cultural" understandings, put into social context, is a much better explanation, and the a-i at best plays a supporting role by taking instructions from the parietal lobe in eliciting feelings of disguist at the thought of certain gay behavior. But anyway, all of this is a debate in the discriptive analysis; what explains social attitudes on gay-ness. As for the moral (normative) analysis, to me all of this just seems flat irrelevant, maybe at best a good argument for prohibiting public lewdness. But the "harm" of a-i activity by unseen sexual behavior is simply laughable as a serious moral claim to restrict homosexual behavior. And it's the moral argument that's the important one. Anyway, it's a fun exercise to think through ... Not that many hold-outs even left in the culture wars nowadays (in the West, anyway), so I feel like we should argue 'em up before they're all gone.

No it wasn't...I took it while playing around with the AI. (and it's there to show AI in action, not the map) There's discussion about head-turning here: http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showtopic=3705

Oh jeez, I didn't mean to start WW3... Look, I just made the assumption, that since you a ) are promoting TDM as a freely available toolkit for making stealth based games and b ) have a public forum where non-contributing parties may discuss the mod, that there was an implicit invitation for ideas, comments, suggestions and criticisms, which I have obviously been making. Now if I am wrong in that respect, it begs the question as to why you have a public forum at all, after all, if you have discussed it all internally and made final decisions, discussing things on a public forum would seem to be a waste of your time, and you might as well close the public forums and just post progress updates on the website. And as Sparhawk says, why would I wan't to go through the process of putting a team together and starting my own project from scratch when there is a free toolkit in development which looks like it will fulfil most of my needs? And since you appear to be inviting public input, why wouldn't I make suggestions for things that would mean less work for me? I don't expect you to follow them up, but it would be nice if there was some serious discussion, not out of hand dismissal, or deliberate misinterpretation of what I am suggesting to avoid a properly considered response. @Domarius, at the risk of causing you a great deal of offense (and I promise you I don't mean to, I really have nothing against you personally), I have to agree with Sparhawk in so far as to say that you do come across as someone who has been formally educated in the creative arts, and it has been my experience that this type of education instills a certain mindset that does come across in your comments. I dropped out of a Fine Arts degree and switched to Science very quickly when I realised how quickly the formal Artistic education was eroding my creativity and ability to think outside the box. This type of education teaches you The Way as though you could formally define artistic works using a formula. this is why most of art, music and computer games come across to me as being formulaic. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that a formal education in Game Design (for example) is inherently bad, just that it teaches you a certain skills at the expense of some other skills, which are often more important for certain endevaours than the ones you may have been taught. I'm not saying that this applies to you, I don't know you, but I can only go on what you have written in these forums, and all I'm saying is, your comments are consistent with a certain school of thought which I have some difficulties with.

Excuse me? Sorry, but that ticks me off a little bit. This is a Thief inspired toolset, and we appreciate fan input, but I personally don't appreciate people coming into our forums with an agenda and trying to force us to incorporate ideas, that we've already discussed and voted down years ago, in hopes of just being able to walk in after we've done all the hard work...just so you can 'test' some ideas. The Doom 3 SDK is openly available...and for that matter, the full Quake 3 source code is now available. You could gather your own team and create the technology by rewriting the engine with your own team...instead of pushing ideas on us. We've got a big enough workload without this crap. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude...but it really upsets me.

Just wanted to say, the TTLG staff has been granted an interview with Irrational and is collecting questions for them in a thread in the BioShock forums.

Aww. http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?s=&sh...indpost&p=62289

I've posted some concept art for this: http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showtopic=3760

Welcome to the forums (8?]=

@Demagogue Whoops, forgot to finish that thought. The other advantage of having them shouldered is that you can carry them through doorways, tight corridors, up short ledges or something else they might get stuck on if you were dragging them. I don't think we should allow carrying bodies up ladders or mantling while carrying a body though, that is pretty unrealistic. There are some reasons for adding dragging: 1. It's faster to start and stop moving the AI, no matter what we do there would be some delay moving them to the shoulder, whereas dragging is pretty much instant as soon as you frob the extremity and go. 2. It allows better positioning of the body. For example, if there's a shadow along the wall, but the AI won't fit in the shadow area lying down, drag them into a sitting position sitting against the wall. If you're trying to hide the AI out of sight somewhere like a large crate, you throw them in but their feet get caught on the ledge and are sticking out, grab the feet and push/pull them the rest of the way in. 3. It's "immersive." In RL you would expect to be able to manipulate individual parts of the AI, and the technology to let you do it is already ingame, so we might as well make it all the more believable by including that option. I think you're making some assumptions about the control scheme that aren't true. There are ways of making it very easy to input which you want to do. @Obscurus: We'll hopefully be able to reach some sort of compromise. Maybe the noise of dragging an AI isn't that loud, as in it can only be heard within a 1-2m radius, and maybe shoulder an AI takes 5-10 seconds (trust me, that will feel like a very long time ingame). Re:Health potions The FM author has complete control over what's available in the pre-mission loadout and what objects are in the mission for the player to pick up. If the author doesn't want to put in any health potions, they don't have to.

Hmm, I don't know of a list, unless you're referring to BT's mansion floorplan post (which I doubt). http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showt...1038&hl=mansion

ah, do you have that list of rooms requried in the mansion? Its hard to make a floorplan without them. I remember seeing a list somewhere (and i'm sure i printed it out), i hope its still on the forums.

I was being silly. To tell you the truth I am unsure about the vibe of the forums, whether they are light hearted or serious. It is childish that comment I made. And I apologise. Sometimes I feel like my back is up against the wall here and I resort to what the great Japanese sword saint Miyamoto Musashi says with regards to dealing with multiple oponents. I have to check the graphics card at home. So loading is the only issue? Surely the more powerful the system, then shouldn't be affected by the loading times so much?