Search the Community

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...

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.

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

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 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.

hmm my guess is after reading some about it would be that the tensor cores would use data from the previous frame and the current frame and then try to guess pixel positions using AI to fill in to the generated frame ? i wonder if it would be all that visible but some minute corruption might be possible to notice if the AI guesses wrong (scenes with high movement). kinda reminds me of how we converted ntsc to pal here in europe though a whole lot more complex. ntsc to pal conversion was originally done by playing the film fast at 25 fps the two sequential fields were created from the same frame and displayed 1/50 of a second apart, the conversion is then done by repeating every 5th field with a process called 3:2 pulldown. in essence the frames are roughly doubled and most of them contain the same data as the previous frame, this is in most cases inpossible for the human eye to notice

https://www.waferworld.com/post/why-is-germanium-making-a-comeback-in-the-semiconductor-industry germanium was the material used in the first transistor but was harder to work with, so it got waylaid when silicon was discovered. it does have better charge carrying capabilities and is very stable, with the advanced fabrication technology today it made sense. since it also has 3 times the electron movement speed compared to silicon

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/

I also hope the big pile of movement changes is finally over All these changes seem minor but cause heavy reaction. First we got overly lengthy arguments about it internally, now the same continues publicly. I'm not sure why everyone thinks parkour was the main motivation. In fact, I watched parkour videos to understand how the hell it should be possible to do the wall climb up as fast as @Daft Mugi wants it. Now I play Prey and its climb up is insanely fast, totally unrealistic... I guess in the end most people are annoyed by having to wait for the same boring mantling animation and prefer to regain control faster. By the way, I believe 50% of reception to such changes boils down to plain habit. When I took the first build of faster mantle it seemed crazily fast. But after we tweaked it (I don't think we made it much slower in the end) the reception gradually changed and I did not feel it that absurdly fast anymore. That's why I even suggested accelerating mantle gradually (e.g. 100 ms per release) to avoid much negative feedback

In what way has any of this been "aggressive"? I ask, because I've tried to be the exact opposite of aggressive as much as possible. If I can improve here, I'd like to know. Have others been aggressive towards you? What are you insinuating here? I ask, because it sounds like you are either displeased with me personally, with the dev team as a whole, or with mission authors. What do you think needs to be addressed exactly? Would you mind making this clear, so we can improve? If it makes you feel any better, all of the player control and movement issues that I'm aware of that can be addressed have already been addressed. So, I personally don't have anymore player control or movement changes planned at this time. Regarding this mantle speed change, I proposed it internally and created the original solution. But the final solution was a dev team collaboration, and therefore I'm not the sole contributor of this change. The core team, including myself, already addressed this change. Are those the details that you wanted to read?

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.

Ok, I get it. You were talking about the mantle roll, and not the mantling speed. Regarding the mantle roll, yes, I don't really have an opinion on that. My issues are rather that the mantling seems too fast. I don't care which additional animation of the head is involved. IMO, the whole movement is simply too fast.

I don't think you really get my point. Of course, a game can't and shouldn't be realistic in all regards (unless you actually simulate something), but, if something feels too arcade, then it breaks immersion. And, yes, of course that's subjective, but, the new mantling simply seems too fast to me. Just like the old Quake and Doom games seem too fast to me, in terms of movement speed. Nobody runs that fast, not even Usain Bolt. And, by the way, if these movements are modelled on some real life videos, I suggest that it is also taken into account that the thief is neither a parcour artist, nor a strongman competitor. So, he shouldn't be as fast or as strong as these people.

Realism is for simulators and even then, there must be compromises. Reasonable is the right word for TDM. Regarding player movement it really depends on the character and how you want players to feel in his shoes. Is this a vulnerable veteran thief or a sneaky young cat? In this regard the increased mantle speed and the (single) grunt sound convey opposite connotations, imho.

No. There are limits to what a human is capable of, and, when a game like TDM, which is supposed to be a "immersive sim" feels too arcade-ish, then it's something I don't consider desirable, especially when the other movement (walking/running speed, swimming, diving, leaning etc.) or the use of weapons seems pretty realistic.

Would be great if this could be fine tuned a bit. I also think it's exaggerated. Again, I like TDM for its rather realistic movement.

I know this is semi on-topic and likely guaranteed to never happen. But I still can't help dreaming of TDM someday getting a cinematic dialogue system like in DeusEx: If you get close to or frob an important character that has something to say, movement is blocked and you go into a third person view staring you both down while the music changes, every few lines the angle shifts so you see yourselves from a different direction as you talk to each other. The most awesome thing would be dialogue options still, those I'd dream of seeing even more. Imagine being able to tell different things to a character in a prompt, changing some choices based on what you say! Could be used both as a simple store for street corner vendors... or to tell friendly AI to take different actions like waiting or following you or fleeing, I know TDM doesn't go for those types of missions but I still see it as a worthy possibility. Technically both could be done with a script. So if I ever need it I might put together such a dialogue system myself in a custom entity. Would definitely be fun to see someone else experiment with this through the new subtitles though.

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

Haven't tried 2.12 yet but I want to ask,any work done on ambient occlusion? I have found it to improve the looks of many missions but it didn't work well always. For example when changing your view some of the fixed shadows in the corners vanish. edit: Ok I tried the 2.12 latest version and I liked the leaning more than the previous versions also deactivating the mantle roll feels like an improvement for me. Movement is closer to the first two originals of the series. Also is there a way to keep settings unchanged when installing a new version? Everything resets even if i tick the box to keep the original file up on installation.

No, I find the controller the ideal way to play Thief games regardless of whether it's for VR or not. I game and compute from my couch with a wireless KB/mouse and a DS4Windows Xbox controller emulator setup. For Thief games, I use the Xpadder controller scheme someone posted on this forum almost 10 years ago, originally for TDM, but I use it mostly for Thief 1 & 2, and it feels nearly perfect. The trick is to get what feels ideal for you in the re-mapping. I saw one poster here implying he spent an entire day getting his controller configured just right for him and TDM (I didn't like his cfg though). However, the native TDM controller feature has analog movement at its lowest that's faster than that for the TG/T2 games (adjusting in_padDeadZone mentioned above didn't help). I like to creep.

I can confirm your issue. My monitor can run at 165 Hz so I set the in-game FPS cap to 166. When capped at 166 FPS I can't hear any faint footsteps while creeping either, but when set to a cap of 144 FPS the creeping footsteps played as expected. I've only played a handful of missions since I got this monitor so I likely just didn't notice this and if there were any other oddities like the camera and other movement, I didn't notice them either. Still, there's clearly something subtle happening at higher frame rates. I'd be curious if the problem happens on say a 60 Hz monitor but still capped at 166 FPS. Guessing it would. As for the other thing you noticed where the actual frame rate cap doesn't seem to match the one selected in the menus, I think this is more of an issue with the Doom 3 (id Tech 4) engine the game uses as its base. My understanding is it took some work to actually get higher frame rates than 60 working in the game in the first place. Even the dhewm3 source port of Doom 3 doesn't have it working correctly. Even if you uncap the FPS the timing of the game goes to warp speed and it's completely unplayable. https://github.com/dhewm/dhewm3/pull/297. Amusingly there's at least one TDM dev who posted there, since people talk about how TDM implemented their own solution (not without its own bugs).

I tried the beta yesterday in the Training Mission. The new frob system is very nice. It's very easy now to pick up a body (obviously), and, the manipulation of limbs is easy as well (although it will surely take some time for me to get used to it, simply because I'm so used to the old system). Not so excited about some other changes. The leaning, for example, while improving the viewing angle of the player, feels a bit unrealistic. I know, the new system is closer to the one in the original game, but, I don't know if any of you tried to lean in real life. No way any human being could lean so wide, unless it's tied to a rubber band. I get it, gameplay isn't always about realism (actually, in most cases, it isn't), but, I think a game shouldn't feel too arcade-y, and, this definitely does feel arcade. And, I always liked Dark Mod for its rather realistic movement. Same with the new mantling. I don't know what you felt was wrong with the mantling before, but, this new, faster system just feels arcade. The mantling was already very quick compared to what a human is capable in real life, but, the new system even exaggerates that. Yes, it feels smooth and fast, but, I prefer a bit of realism. So, yeah, rather a 1 out of 3 out of the systems I mentioned which I feel like is an improvement. The leaning and mantling, I rather consider setback. I think this is, in general, a bit "bleeding edge" in terms of gameplay changes. I really didn't feel like mantling and leaning needed an improvement, for example, and, it might make a change for missions which were designed with the original gameplay.

I'm pleased that the latest builds of TDM offer analog controller support but is there anyway to fine tune it and adjust movement speed when pushing the sticks forward/backward/strafe etc? Right now the slowest movement using the analog stick is too fast. Can it be made to creep forward or strafe even slower? I would still want it to be able to run at maximum speed if the stick is pushed forward all the way however.

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