Search the Community

Another idea, and not saying any of the previous are not good. Just throwing this out there. What about something like the following pseudo-code? if (readable || map || inventory || objectives) // is displayed gamma = r_postprocess_gamma_ui brightness = r_postprocess_brightness_ui else gamma = r_postprocess_gamma brightness = r_postprocess_brightness So, when a readable, map, objectives, or inventory screen is shown, it changes to the UI gamma/brightness settings. On close, it changes back to the game gamma/brightness settings.

I think the reason the dev forums exist is to provide a place where the implementation of features can be discussed without getting mixed up with other debates when someone believes what the devs are doing is wrong. We often post public discussion threads for features with subjective elements like the frob outline, because community feedback is very important. But there will always be vocal defenders with strong views for or against certain features, or how exactly it should be implemented in their opinion. At some point a decision has to be made and be carried through, which is what the dev forums are for. Almost all of the threads are very technical, basically explaining and discussing recent or potential code changes with other devs. Its hard to say. Its a hobby the devs do in their spare time, so people come and go when they're in the mood and when they have the time. The team page is mostly accurate except for some relatively newer additions like myself.

I just read@motorsep Discovered that you are able to create a brush, then select it and right click "create light". Now you have a light that ha the radius of the former brush. Just read it on discord and thought it may be of use for some people in the forums here too.

Hi! I'm making my WIP and wanted to ask the community what they currently think about objectives concerning KO limits, no-kill and loot. Please understand that I, as FMA, will not be bound democratically by the majority opinion. I just want to hear your thoughts about this. Thanks!

Thanks, Dragofer. Implementing such UI facelift is fairly easy to do with zero risk of breaking anything. Target files: game/Objectives/MissionData.cpp (source) guis/mainmenu_success.gui (pk4) strings/*.lang (pk4) - Optional? Unfortunately there is little I can do on my own (mod) since this part of the source code is structured in an awkwardly linear, uncontrolled and strict way. If there ever is an initiative to seriously discuss improvements and come up with suggestions and mock ups, count me in. Let's just make sure someone is available and willing to commit changes of MissionData.cpp. Cheers!

Now I only have one more game breaking bug that's plaguing my mission. And I do mean game breaking! When the player has completed all the mandatory objectives and goes to finish the mission the objective to "return to where you started" ticks off as completed, but the mission does not end. This has happened to me before in a mission that I've yet to release, and I did get it working again, but I have no freaking idea what I did, it just suddenly worked I think. I've combed through my objectives looking for anything that might make an optional objective unintentionally mandatory, but for the life of my I can't find anything. Even if this was the case I don't think that the end objective would tick off as complete in that case. The mandatory objectives are built as follows: 1: Knock out AI and bring him to a specified location. (all diff levels, mandatory, visible) Component 1: Let the target entity X be in location entity Y 4: Get 1200 Loot (normal, mandatory, visible) Component 1: Acquire 1200 entities 5: Get 1800 Loot (hard, mandatory, visible) Component 1: Acquire 1800 entities 6: Get 2400 Loot (expertl, mandatory, visible) Component 1: Acquire 2400 entities 17: Return to where you started (all diff levels, mandatory, visible) enabling objectives: 1 AND (4 OR 5 OR 6) Component 1: Let the target 0 entities of the spawnclass idPlayer be in location entity X Could there be something wrong with my objective structure? If not what else could be the problem?

There is a script object to alter the objective state setObjectiveState(1, OBJ_COMPLETE); setObjectiveState(2, OBJ_COMPLETE); : : : If you do this for all the objectives (so until the number corresponding to the amount of objectives you have) the mission should end. There may also be a console command to finish the mission, but I am not certain about that. Regarding the outro: Are there any hints in the console that may give a clue on what is going on?

I just found this thread on ttlg listing Immersive Sims: https://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151176

Recently revisiting the forums after a longer period of time I wanted to check the unread content. I don't know if I am doing this wrong since.. ever... but on mobile (visiting the unread content page on my smartphone) you have to click on that tiny speech bubble to go to the most recent post in a thread. If you don't click correctly you'll hit the headline and end up at post 1 in the beginning of the thread. It's terrible on mobile, since not only the speech bubble is really small and was to miss. But also the thread headline is just millimeters away from it so you go right to the first post that was ever made instead of the most recent ones. Am I doing it wrong? I just want to go through u read content a d the to the newest post from that topic.

For the record I actually agree that any restrictions on play-style should be optional, if that is at all possible. That includes loot objectives, no-kill objectives, knockout limits, and save restrictions. Generally speaking, none of them should be required at any difficulty. BUT if someone wants to build an entire level around one of these restrictions, and wants to make it a hard requirement so that people understand how to play their mission properly, I think they should be both free and encouraged to do so. At the worst we find out there is no audience for that kind of mission and nobody else has to waste their time thinking about how to make one in the future. At best people click with the new concept and future missions in the same mold can make the restrictions optional, because everyone now understands how they should be played. (And incidentally, Aluminum's unlucky misread of Hazard Pay shows precisely why aggressive limitations are sometimes needed to snap a player out of their customary playstyle [as Wellingtoncrab so perfectly explained ]. Maybe it would have worked better if Hazard Pay had an [optional??] objective requiring you to kill 10 zombies? ) I was going to argue with this, but actually you are right. Due to the interaction with TDMs inconsistent knockout and platforming it is true that restricting saves requires some adjustments to typical level design (beyond just plopping down save point at regular intervals). I don't think it is an intractable problem though, and luckily we have some very bright minds who will be the first in line to try out concepts like this if they ever gain any traction. It's true that Hazard Pay didn't quite nail some of these aspects as well as we might have wanted. I think its save points, and especially the gears for them, were too sparse. It would have helped to add some extra music boxes before the major difficulty spikes (like at the bottom of the silo where you get the sword, and maybe in a dark corner by the quarry security station). But it was only a first attempt at something like this. The concept's been demonstrated, and, if there is an audience for it, it will get better in future iterations, which hopefully will find a better balance between different playstyle preferences.

You don't seem to understand that a change to the save system is a much deeper intervention into gameplay than differing loot objectives, or no kill objectives (and also a fundamental change to how a gameplay system of the mod works in general). Talking about "exhausting". It's a shit idea, regardless of how long we discuss it here.

Exactly! For me, it's the bigger loot goal, most of the time. And, if we take a look at what the original Thief's did with the different diffictulties, it's exactly that: More objectives, higher loot goals, more AI. Maybe no kill objectives. Maybe I'm a traditionalist, but, I like the mod for being close to the original games, thus wouldn't want it to stray too far from those. Save rooms would be more for games which resemble Resident Evil for me. Apart from not liking such save systems in general, because, I don't want to do the same stuff over and over again. By the way, to name some numbers: I quicksave about 150 times per mission, probably more in longer missions. You can imagine how it feels if someone takes that away from you, just because he knows better how YOU want to play this game. Because, that's something you need to realize, that you design the game or the missions for players out there, not just yourself, or people who like to play the way you do. I totally appreciate the amount of work mappers put in this game, and I'm grateful for every mission, but, should this become the standard for saving in TDM, or even the standard for expert difficulty, then I simply will stop playing this game, because, that's just not something I want in a game like this. Especially as, again, everyone is free to save as much or as little as he/she wants already.

For the record, based on @grodenglaive's assistance, I was successfully able to add the property obj#_enabling_objs with a value of # AND # AND # etc. to atdm:target_addobjectives and it worked in my test map. The escape objective now does not trigger merely by entering the area before objectives are completed. It went a lot smoother than I thought, actually.. I was given to believe it was going to be difficult to enable based on the A to Z tutorial and other comments, but it seems relatively easy to implement so far.

I did read that, but unfortunately it assumes the existence of an Objectives Editor, and for reasons I'm not entirely certain, my installation of DarkRadiant does not have one.

A@datiswous Ah yeah, well sorry, I was quiet busy and only visiting discord. First time here on the forums since months now I think.. Thank you for the subtitles. I encourage everyone who is interested in using them to download it from here as I'm not sure when I'll be able to implement them myself into the mission. Again, thank you for your work.

I assume you got the other objectives in from following the guide, which is missing that step (https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=A_-_Z_Beginner_Full_Guide_Page_6#Putting_Objectives_in_the_Mission). Here's a snip from my atdm:target_addobjectives, which shows my final objective (obj10 in my case). Looks like the line obj10_enabling_objs is the key. Hope that helps.

Is objective_ent set to 1? Search it out on Objectives in the wiki for best info. If you have multiple "things" that need to be in the same location, you need separateinfo_tdm_objective_location brushes for each one. I fell into that trap trying to get started mapping.

Hello again. I'm almost done with the A-Z beginner tutorial, but I've noticed in some sections of the Dark Radiant wiki they mention an Objectives Editor. It's supposed to be in the Map drop menu, but at least in the v3.8.0 Dark Radiant I have installed (on Linux) there's no Objective Editor to be found. Most mention of it seems to be at least a couple of years old, but was this Editor removed in the latest version of Dark Radiant? Or is this some strange bug on my end?

OK, posting this in case anybody else is having the 1.5 second crash I was experiencing in Linux: if I quicksave immediately on mission start, before the message about reading the objectives appears, then I am able to continue normally, quickload normally etc. So DavyJones is probably right, it seems to be caused by something happening during- or right after that message appears.