Search the Community

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.

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".

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:

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.

If you disable VL by spawnarg, I believe they act like normal lights. Pretty sure you could use lod_bias args so that moonray patches show at low and lowest detail settings while VL would render at normal to highest. https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=LOD_Bias Still, VL performance hit is pretty low in 2.11 and newer.

I did play Thief and FMs, but I don't play it any more, except for major things like Black Parade. The clunky movement and antiquated Dromed editor is what discouraged me from interacting with it over the years. I regularly play and sometimes make content for TDM, because it has much better movement model than Thief. I know that most missions don't use it well, but if you construct your geometry (gaps, ledges, distances) using power of two measurements, movement and mantling feels fast and snappy. There's no need for regression in that regard, in my opinion, there's a need for assets and missions made with the movement model in mind, to showcase its strengths properly. Even if TDM originally intended to "simulate the stealth gameplay of Thief, many things will be familiar to veteran Thief players" the actual mod history was a bit different. The team came up with a mission platform that has its own identity when it comes to mechanics. The way assets were made might have been a huge mistake, but that didn't prevent the platform from growing. Since you like anecdotal evidence, noone other Skacky once said that TDM movement model was super clunky, after playing The Painter's Wife. It was really hard to convince him that if a mapper places geometry this poorly, and isn't aware what spatial measurements play to the strengths of a movement model, no movement model will save his mission. And there is no fixing of this problem on the engine side, although it's not the first time when TDM team tries to address the asset problem with engine changes, which I suspect will ultimately lead to even more problems down the line. In game development, things like core mechanics and player tools are locked-down first, in one of the pre-production phases, because all the levels will be constructed around them. Making changes in core mechanics in a project this mature is very risky, I assume you don't plan on going through all playable spaces in all released TDM FMs to check for errors. Instead of making incremental changes in fundamental mechanics, I'd encourage you to create a fork, or some kind of major version bump candidate, like 3.0, where all things could be revamped: movement, player tools, UI, new frob mechanics, perhaps with UI contextual icons, new training map to incorporate all that, etc. Once all new elements fall into place and create something new, with a map or maps to back it up as relevant changes, it will be easier to convince existing player/author base that it was worth it. I assume the existing fanbase is already fragmented, as a result of all those heated discussions around the topic. But with multiple versions available for download, the transition to hypothetical "TDM 3.0" should be easier. It could be similar to UE2 and UE3, and you could also use this as an occasion to draw the line for backwards compatibility. I know there are old systems and variables kept in place just in order not to break existing missions. This way you could e.g. redo the LOD system, implement lights using math functions instead of textures, etc.

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 already implemented. This is exactly what my extension of the new control scheme does. tdm_holdfrob_drag_all_entities Have fun, mate! EDIT: Correction: Sorry, I misread your post a little bit. Only for extinguished lights and food remains, the hold-type-grabber is used with my extension. For lit candles and food, short frob is still grabber and long frob is extinguish / eat. The thing is that there are plans to keep only one control scheme on the long run, which I am totally against, 'though, see below. I have already commented/suggested internally that the frob-code needs refactoring anyway, and if we were to do that for 2.13, we might as well introduce a simple switch. Basically, the code would determine if short frob or long frob has been pressed and then decide which action to perform based on the chosen control scheme. And for your information, my preferred solution has always been to keep the original controls, but have long-frob as a shortcut for frob + use. This might be an option with the proposed refactor. Let's try to keep the discussion constructive, please. There is no need to make it more heated.

Hi everyone, I know I am pretty late to the party, but I have been doing some playtesting of this feature and I am honestly loving the way bodies are handled now: hold mouse to move it around, release mouse to drop it again (hold-type-grabber). It just feels very natural and somewhat authentic this way. I love it so much that I would like to see it optionally extended to all grabber-interactions. I also think that the new control scheme is a bit inconsistent because, depending on entity type, different kinds of inputs are required to achieve the same game functionality (the grabber). Here is a table showing how different entity types are currently controlled: Entity type Short Press Hold Button… ...Release Button Junk Grabber Nothing Nothing Food Grabber Eat Nothing Loot Pick-up Nothing Nothing Bodies Shoulder Grabber Release from Grabber Lights Grabber Exstinguish Nothing Tools Inventory Nothing Nothing And here is a suggestion of how I would change it to make it consistent and to have more objects use the fun hold-type-grabber from bodies (of course the release from grabber by button release could be made optional such that a second click would release from grabber) . Entity type Short Press Hold Button… ...Release Button (or optionally press again) Junk Nothing Grabber Release from Grabber Food Eat Grabber Release from Grabber Loot Pick-up Grabber? Release from Grabber? Bodies Shoulder Grabber Release from Grabber Lights Exstinguish Grabber Release from Grabber Tools Inventory Grabber? Release from Grabber? All use-type interactions would be on short-press, whereas all grabber-interactions would be hold-type or on long press / press again. In addition to being more consistent, this control scheme also has the advantage that the grabber is always intentional, i.e., you never accidentally pick up a junk object. The only downside I can see right now is that, with the hold-type interaction, object rotation is a bit more finicky with the hold-type-grabber, because you have to press two buttons at the same time, but it's absolutely doable (I tried).

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.

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

Myself and Baal have extensively used BounceLights in our WIP, the problem is that while they create superior lighting mood they effect the LG when we would rather they didn't. So my question is: Is there an arg or a script that can be applied to these BL's to stop them effecting the lightgem..?

Static lights only, lights should be cutting through the portals by far, however one is rotated by 45* on the wall which could perhaps be related. Here's a DarkRadiant screenshot for now, showing the setup best as it can be seen... I selected both the interior and exterior light entities that might be involved.

The time has finally come for me to release my 5th mission for The Dark Mod. This project started sometime around 2015-2016 (couldn't find any old files to confirm) with me starting poking on a city mission and for some time I built quite randomly without a plan. I expected I could plot a story later; You can never go wrong with a city section, eh? I had a hiatus and did other projects in my life with model painting and skydiving and mapping became more and more scarce. Now and then I felt an itch to map and some kind of responsibility towards the mod team to produce something, to provide and give something back, if you will. At the start of the pandemic I started building more focused on this misson, but still no exact goal on what I wanted to achieve. Finally I decided I wanted a mission where you follow a person and the mission continued to grow in a linear fashion. I am not the quickest mapper and have severe problems on how to imagine a scene without building it first. This means that I often have to redo scenes and lots of stuff gets unnecessarily built just to be removed later, hence the almost absurd build time (about 1900 hours all in all). Betatesting came about and I got very good tips and feedback and decided to redo a lot of the mission. This need for a rework could have killed my motivation but fortunately, as the map was designed, it only required a modest amount of work and the mission became so much better for it! Sometimes I believe I'm somewhat of the uncrowned king of missions with a bit more unusual and experimental playstyles and this mission also have some elements that isn't used that much. In contrast to some of my other missions though, this one isn't depending on any quirky meter or sun shining down on the player (Reap as you sow *cough*). As mentioned, it is a sprawling city mission with lots of exploring that I hope will satisfy you! So DeTeEff gives to you: Who Watches The Watcher? ver 1.0 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YYoJJnxr2UbGxemTR-WoWmH64fbazusH/view?usp=sharing The night is creeping over Bridgeport. You squint in the street lights as you trot down the small alley to where you're about to meet your contact. As a man who straddles the line between lawful and outlaw, it's not often you have peaceful interactions with the City watch but as you're about to learn, this time they have more problems on their hands than to deal with petty thieves like yourself. You see the trademark silhouette of a City watch helmet approaching and you make a last take of your immediate surroundings, should you have to flee if things get awry. The guard presents himself as Albert and you listen carefully to his story and you quickly realise that you don't have much to fear from this man; The Citywatch has wrestled with some internal problems lately with missing reports and evidence that disappear. Albert strongly believes they have a mole on the inside that works for the Greynard RoughBoys; a band of ruthless thugs that doesn't hesitate to maim anyone who oppose them. You learn that he thinks the mole is no other than a Sergeant named Clerwick. Your mission will be to find this man, and collect intelligence on his doings for the night. And as it is payday, you should of course also help the inhabitants to carry some of their heavy purses. Mission type: Creepy elements? Undead? Spiders? Thanks to: My wonderful girlfriend who endures my constant talking about mapping and for helping me with readables and story design and some voice lines. Dragofer - Scripting help Springheel - All those modules Sotha - Hangman model Henrik Swenson for providing some ambients Digiffects Sound Library for some custom sound bites Betatesters: Acolytesix Datiswous Duzenko Jaxa Mezla Nort Prjames Shadow Thebigh Wellingtoncrab Wesp5 And a big thank you to the community for keeping the mod alive! I hope I haven't forgotten anyone... Known bugs: -The AI in TDM is inaccurate in some ways. They will sometimes behave strangely when returning to their original routes after being alerted, like sitting on chairs in weird ways or turning in places, especially if they meet another AI in narrow places. I have done my best to adjust these weird behaviours but with the complexity of everything that's going on and the player making different desicions/noise, it's probably impossible to adjust for everything. I believe I have ironed out the last wrinkles I can, with respect to my knowledge/skills. -Frobbing out of boxes/chests/drawers has always been a pain but I think this is largely an error within the code and how frobing works as the frob highlight wants to lock onto the box itself and not its contents. -There seems to be some kind of bug with the skybox, especially in places where there is water reflections present; The Sky/water volume switch between an opaque variant to a more translucent one. Neither is straight up ugly, but it's jarring to see the sky switch (as it seems randomly). I don't know what is causing this, and I have decided to let this one pass (if any players knows what is causing this, please let me know so can I squash this annoying bug. PLEASE POST ANY QUESTIONS/SPOILERS IN SPOILER BRACKETS

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.

This post is quite frustrating for me, because it sounds quite critical. In person, it would be easier to point out the good parts and ask what's going on with other parts. Without that, unfortunately, it's just using this limited medium of text and a few screenshots to point out things and hoping there is a solution, which isn't an ideal way to communicate. Edit: The main thing is that I know that you, @stgatilov, did a lot of great work on this. I've seen the commits and improvements over time, and I appreciate you spending your time to improve this game we like to play. So, I really don't like to talk about aspects I don't enjoy, and unfortunately, I'm not enjoying volumetric lighting. The volumetric lighting in Hazard Pay has quite a few issues that degrade its look, but the one volumetric light I noticed in Iris (Moonlit Manse area) looks good. So, maybe it really depends on the volumetric settings in each map, and they can be tweaked/fixed. I'd like to see an option in the settings menu to enable/disable volumetric lights. Could you please add that cvar? Something like r_volumetricLights 0/1. This has three benefits: For those who prefer the look of the game without volumetric lights, they can turn it off. This is really not different from being able to toggle bloom, ambient occlusion, color precision, and shadows maps vs stencil shadows, so why not volumetric lights as well? It'll help those who are having performance issues or need to keep the temperature of their graphics card at a minimum. Volumetric lights (or maybe it's really the shadow maps?) add between 5 to 25 watts of power to the graphics card I measured. I imagine those playing on a laptop would be impacted the most. Others may get unwanted fan noise. It'll help with measuring and comparing the performance between volumetric lights off and on. As for player preference, the moving volumetric lights in Hazard Pay cast shadow maps with edges that wiggle/wave whereas stencil shadows are static/still. That wiggle/wave doesn't look good and is distracting. Maybe the shadow maps can be improved to fix that? It also has fog that has graphical artifacts that look like distorted waves, but those can be fixed/reduced by increasing r_volumetricSamples from 8 to 24 (screenshot #1). Other volumetric lights have fog with multiple ring artifacts that no setting I tried fixed/reduced them (screenshot #2 with ring pattern marked). The rings seemed to be where the fog touches the wall. There are some volumetric lights that make areas of a scene overly bright, especially when two volumetric lights overlap (screenshot #3). Given all that, the look of stencil shadows without volumetric lights is preferred. As for performance, it's probably pretty good to great, but I don't know how to quantify it other than that it adds 5 to 25 watts of power to my graphics card, generating more heat. (Again, maybe it's really the shadow maps?) The FPS is a steady 60 fps even with all settings maxed out. r_softShadowsMipmaps 0: Added ~10 watts in one scene. r_volumetricForShadowMaps 0: Turns off shadows completely where there is a volumetric light. Stencil shadows are not used/seen. r_shadowMapSize 512: Reduced ~5 watts in one scene. r_volumetricSamples 0: Can significantly reduce wattage (~10 watts in one case), but then it looks blocky, of course. Interestingly, when I set r_volumetricSamples from 8 to 100, it might add ~5 watts without an FPS drop. I hope volumetric lights can improve a bit more along with an option in the settings to enable/disable them.

Slightly offtopic, but I've been tinkering with differend UE engines lately, and it occured to me that current version of TDM is actually fairly close to UE 3/UDK in terms of rendering and graphics features. Have you ever considered adding lightmapping as an optional way of lighting maps? Given the way most TDM assets are made, it could provide a big boost in performance, while offering much better look. And that, potentially, would be a much, much smoother transition into a new level of visual fidelity than PBR, which requires remaking all textures, materials, and lights. Edit: I forgot that models would need to be re-saved with a dedicated uvw channel where faces are unwrapped in 0-1 space in order for lightmaps to work correctly. So, it looks like any effort to get to next level of visual fidelity will require significant artist effort...

I dom't use it, i found it here with the filter set to OpenSource. the TOS and PP isn't excluding for an OpenSource app, if they use ads mean that they also need to pay an server for this online service. OpenSource is not synonymous with free either, perhaps after the beta phase it is no longer free, so perhaps you can take advantage of the fact that it is still free to create a series of textures that can be used or search another one in Futuretools. AI generated textures and assets, by definition, don't have any copyright, so you can use them as you want. https://www.futuretools.io/?pricing-model=free|open-source&tags-n5zn=gaming

The problems with the lightening texture has vanished, moreover, the camera screens work now perfectly, I had here and there strange results (glass texture not showing up, lights do not show up) in 2.11 and the previous beta. Thank you @stgatilov

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/