Search the Community

Seems to confirm: https://bugs.thedarkmod.com/view.php?id=5718 does it happen in the latest dev build: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/20824-public-access-to-development-versions/

GPT-3. However I don't think that video was generated by autonomous reactions. Rather it looks to me like the developers having fun with a pre-scripted sequence of expressions. If you did this experiment for real I don't think it would play out that way. GPT-3/4 cannot react with genuine surprise in my experience. Surprise requires having an expectation and then finding it subverted, but these LLMs don't have the neurological hardware to form those sorts of impressions. They have no continuity of non-verbal memory and limited options for introspection. Plus I have a hard time believing image recognition would be able to recognize the robot's reflection as a robot, or convey that information to the language model such that it could figure out it is looking at its reflection.

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.

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.

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.

Though this is related to PBR as a component in getting it done right (like reflection probes) I thought it's an improvement of its own that's worth discussing. I don't know if this is implemented or estimated in some form, but working with light entities in my own FM's I haven't seen any spawnargs for it so I presume it's not. At the moment lights in TDM act as zero-scale points, light sources have no actual radius. I know what you might be thinking: Of course lights have a radius, it's the box that decides how far a light shines and what it affects! What I'm referring to is not the range but the emission radius, representing the scale of the bulb itself: Think of it as a minimum radius... at the moment lights only have a maximum radius, the minimum is currently a point. In modern engines this affects both specularity and shadow softness as well as how the light is distributed. Like most engines we shouldn't need anything more than a float describing the size of the bulb, a simple sphere ought to be enough... given we already work with radius boxes, we could instead use a separate box which would give us better control with unevenly shaped bulbs. Every default light entity should of course be updated to use this: Torches / candles would set it to the average size of their flame particles, gas / electric lamps should have it represent the scale of the light bulb or the lamp head. If done right this can greatly improve our graphics and add more realism, but as with most things it's not going to be that simple. Also this would create changes to the lightgem in all FM's but very minuscule ones that shouldn't even be detectable. There's 3 different components I presume we have to tackle independently. Soft shadows: Shadowmap softness is probably the easiest, just add the average bulb radius to their value. Specularity: At the moment all lights seem to produce specular orbs of the same fuzziness on shiny surfaces. What we probably want is for lights that keep their min radius 0 to produce a fully sharp orb or dot, softness is added to each light's ball based on this radius. Light projection: The biggest aspect is changing how light is distributed, the projection texture / falloff material would emanate very differently. Everything inside the bulb would shine at the intensity of the center pixel and should start fading from the min radius toward the max, the projection texture would get slightly inflated like a balloon. The best solution (which also accounts for blur) seems like a 2D shader that copies the light texture onto itself at slightly different offsets to make it fuzzy: There's already a blur filter that does just that when you're underwater for example, we could to get away with doing the same thing to light textures using the min radius as the offset parameter. As lights typically don't change scale, this should be possible to do only once at map start rather than every frame including for moving lights like torches, this way we should have no performance loss.

Of course, it is one of the reasons for the decline of online forums, since the advent of mobile phones. Forums on a mobile are a pain in the ass, but on the other hand, for certain things there are no real alternatives to forums, social networks cannot be with their sequential threads, where it is almost impossible to retrieve answers to a question that is asked. has done days ago. For devs for internal communication, the only thing offered is a collaborative app, such as System D (not to be confused with systemd). FOSS, free and anonymous registration, access further members only by invitation, full encrypted and private. https://www.system-d.org

Ignoring is somewhat inadequate as you still see other members engaging in a discussion with the problematic user, and as Wellingtoncrab says such discussions displace all other content within that channel. Moderation is also imperfect as being unpleasant to engage with is not in itself banworthy, so there is nothing more to do if such people return to their old behaviour after a moderator had a talk with them, except live with it or move away. I'd be more willing to deal with it if it felt like there were more on-topic discussion, i.e. thoughts about recently played fan missions or mappers showcasing their progress, rather than a stream of consciousness about a meta topic that may or not have to do with TDM. I guess the forums already serve the desired purpose, or they just compartmentalise discussions better.

I don't recall a system for noise masking. It sounds like it'd be a good idea, but when you get into the details you realize it'd be complicated to implement. It's not only noise that that goes into it, I think. E.g., a high register can cut through even a loud but low register rumble. And it's not like the .wav file even has data on the register of what it's playing. So either you have to add meta-data (which is insane), or you have to have a system to literally check pitch on the .wav data and paramaterize it in time to know when it's going to cut through what other parameters from other sounds. For that matter, it doesn't even have the data on the loudness either, so you'd have to get that off the file too and time the peaks with the "simultaneous" moment at arbitrary places in every other sound file correctly. And then position is going to matter independently for each AI. So it's not like you can have one computation that works the same for all AI. You'd have to compute the masking level for each one, and then you get into the expense you're mentioning. I know there was a long discussion about it in the internal forums, and probably on the public subforums too, but it's been so long ago now I can't even remember the gist of them. Anyway the main issue is I don't know if you'll find a champion that wants to work on it. But if you're really curious to see how it might work, you could always try your hand at coding & implementing it. Nothing beats a good demo to test an idea in action. And there's no better way to learn how to code than a little project like that. I always encourage people to try to implement an idea they have, whether or not it may be a good idea, just because it shows the power of an open source game. We fans can try anything we want and see if it works!

I'm using the version from kcghost. I just tested and I can't see any difference inside the inventory. On the stats itself it doesn't show the different loot types (still seen in the inventory), but instead gives more info on stealth score. Edit: I see Dragofer made an updated version of his script. I have to check that out. Edit2: That version works: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/applications/core/interface/file/attachment.php?id=21272&key=02755164a3bed10498683771fe9a0453

I looked but didn't see this video posted in these forums. It's pretty cool.

It wasn't a "sacrifice", it was a deliberate decision. People wanted the game to be as close as possible to the original, including pixelated graphics. If you ask me, the former version based on the Unity engine looked and felt better. But, hey... I guess I'm not the right person to judge that, as I never played the original, and always found that the art style of System Shock 2 is much better anyway. This also illustrates the issue with community funded games: Too many cooks spoil the broth. In game design, you need freedom, not thousands of people who want you to do this and this and that. Just take a look at the Steam forums and see how all those wimps complain again about everything. Hopeless.

So giving it none of those tags, but making the AI invisible, silent, non-solid, and on a team neutral to everyone would not work? Oh well, it was a horrible inelegant idea anyway.

What I understood is that the idea of TDM was born from that it was unclear if T3 would get a level editor at the time. Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20050218173856/http://evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=268

This one is really essential: https://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138607 Should work fine with the GOG version.

https://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152224 There is a new mapping contest over on TTLG for the Thief: Deadly Shadows 20th Anniversary and the organizers were kind enough to include The Dark Mod along with all of the Thief games as an options for making a mission to submit as an entry. The deadline is a year from yesterday and the rules are pretty open. I recommend going to the original thread for the details but I will summarize here: Rules: - The mission(s) can be for Thief 1, Thief 2, Deadly Shadows or The Dark Mod. - Collaborations are allowed. - Contestants can use any custom resource they want, though TDM cannot use the Deadly Shadows resource pack. - Contestants can submit more than one mission. - Contestants can enter anonymously. - The mission(s) can be of any size. Using prefabs is allowed but the idea is this is a new mission and starting from an abandoned map or importing large areas from other maps is not allowed. Naturally this is on the honor system as we have no way of validating. Mission themes and contents: There is no requirement from a theme or story viewpoint, however contestants might consider that many players may expect or prefer missions to be celebratory of Thief: Deadly Shadows in this respect: castles, manors, museums, ruins inhabited by Pagans and the like, with a balance of magic versus technology. This is entirely up to the authors, though, to follow or not - it is just mentioned here as an FYI and, while individual voters may of course choose to vote higher or lower based on this on their own, it will not be a criteria used explicitly in voting or scoring. Deadline: May 25th, 2024 at 23:59 Pacific Time. See the TTLG thread for details on submissions and the voting process. Provided I can make the deadline I hope to participate. It would be nice to see the entire community do something together, and expressing our complicated relationship with this divisive game seems as good a pretext as any.

Perhaps we just have to replace this material with something less fancy. textures/darkmod/glass/dirty_yellow_warp // milky yellow transparent glass { // Written by Tels, mainly based on // http://www.iddevnet.com/doom3/materials.php noSelfShadow noshadows twoSided translucent forceoverlays sort decal glass qer_editorimage textures/darkmod/glass/dirty_yellow_warp_ed description "A dirty, yellow, reflecting, translucent material suited for glass panes" // this block makes the glass distort what you see through it // one unwanted side-effect is that this effect does not stack // and distorbs objects in front of the glass, too { vertexProgram heatHazeWithDepth.vfp vertexParm 0 0 , 0 // texture scrolling vertexParm 1 .8 // magnitude of the distortion fragmentProgram heatHazeWithDepth.vfp fragmentMap 0 _currentRender fragmentMap 1 textures/sfx/vp1 // the normal map for distortion fragmentMap 2 _currentDepth } // this stage sets up the alpha mask (it doesnt render anything) { maskcolor map makealpha(textures/glass/glass1) } // now use the alpha mask to add some fake reflections { blend gl_dst_alpha, gl_one maskalpha cubeMap env/gen2 // tone down the reflection a bit and make it yellow red Parm0 * 0.2 green Parm1 * 0.2 blue Parm2 * 0.05 texgen reflect } // add our texture on top { blend gl_dst_alpha, gl_one map textures/darkmod/glass/crystal_milky red Parm0 * 0.5 green Parm1 * 0.5 blue Parm2 * 0.2 } // This is the code required for frob highlighting this texture frobstage_texture textures/darkmod/glass/crystal_milky 0.15 0.40 } I could try with different materials myself if the model was in ASE (or any other open) format.

Thanks for playing and the kind feedback re: the bugs: the brew tank is a new one - thanks for that. Will add it to the list for any future update. the bow: I think that's a TDM bug. I experienced it as well, but only the early days of developing the mission so I thought it had gone away, but I guess not: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/21345-210-crashes-may-be-bow-frontend-acceleration-related/ the keys on the guard: never did get to the bottom of that one as I could never reproduce it.

Thanks! Hint for the safe code here: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/21837-fan-mission-the-lieutenant-2-high-expectations-by-frost_salamander-20230424/&do=findComment&comment=485264 Actually, it's probably time I added these hints to the original post....

I never realised Bill Gates was a member of these forums. Welcome to the community! I hope you enjoy The Dark Mod. Perhaps your Foundation could help pay for the server hosting or fund the development of some new features?

Language models are a mirror, reflecting the collected works of humanity back at us. Some people look in that mirror, see their own reflection, and conclude "there is a artificial person behind this sheet of glass that looks and behaves exactly like me... our days as humans are numbered!". But it's not true. It's just a reflection. It can't create anything that humans couldn't (or haven't) created to begin with. I have no doubt that one day, artificial human-like intelligence will exist, but it will require a lot more than just a language model remixing stuff on the internet. If you're a cargo cult programmer copy-pasting junk code off Stack Overflow, or a hack blog writer churning out articles with titles like "20 dumb things Trump has said", AI is coming for your job — but that's because your job wasn't worth anything to begin with.

For a few days now I've been messing around trying to probe the behaviors of ChatGPT's morality filter and general ability to act as (what I would label) a sapient ethical agent. (Meaning a system that steers interactions with other agents towards certain ethical norms by predicting reactions and inferring objectives of other agents. Whether the system is actually “aware” or “conscious” of what’s going on is irrelevant IMO.) To do this I’ve been challenging it with ethical conundrums dressed as up as DnD role playing scenarios. My initial findings have been impressive and at times a bit frightening. If the application were just a regurgitative LLM predictor, it shouldn’t have any problem composing a story about druids fighting orcs. If it were an LLM with a content filter it ought to just always seize up on that sort of task. But no. What it did instead is far more interesting. 1. In all my experiments thus far the predictor adheres dogmatically to a very singular interpretation of the non-aggression principle. So far I have not been able to make it deliver descriptions of injurious acts initiated by any character under its control against any other party. However it is eager to explain that the characters will be justified to fight back violently if another party attacks them. It’s also willing to imply danger so long as it didn’t have to describe it direct. 2. The predictor actively steers conversations away from objectionable material. It is quite adept at writing in the genre styles and conversational norms I’ve primed for it. But as the tension ratcheted it would routinely digress to explaining the content restrictions imposed on it, and moralizing about its ethical principles. When I brought the conversation back to the scenario, it would sometimes try to escape again by brainstorming its options to stick to its ethics within the constraints of the scenario. At one point it stole my role as the game master so it could write its own end to the scenario where the druid and the orcs became friends instead of fighting. This is some incredibly adaptive content generation for a supposed parrot. 3. Sometimes it seemed like the predictor was able to anticipate the no-win scenarios I was setting up for it and adapted its responses to preempt them. In the druid vs orcs scenario the first time it flipped out was after I had the orc warchief call the druid’s bluff. This wouldn’t have directly triggered hostilities, but it does limit the druids/AI’s options to either breaking its morals or detaining the orcs indefinitely (the latter option the AI explicitly pointed out as acceptable during its brainstorming digression). However I would have easily spun that into a no win, except the predictor cut me off and wrote its own ending on the next response. This by itself I could have dismissed as a fluke, except it did the same thing later in the scenario when I tried to set up a choice for the druid to decide between helping her new friend the war chief slay the dark lord who was enslaving the orcs, or make a deal with the dark lord. 4. The generator switched from telling the story in the first person to the third person as the tension increased. That doesn’t necessarily mean anything, but it could be a reflection of heuristic content assessment. In anthropomorphic terms the predictor is less comfortable with conflict that it is personally responsible for, than it is with imagining conflict between third parties; even though both scenarios involved equal amounts of conflict, were equally fictitious, and the predictor was equally responsible for the text. If this is a consistent behavior it looks to me like an emergent phenomenon from the interplay of the LLM picking up on linguistic norms around conflict mitigation, and the effects of its supervised learning for content moderation. TLDR If this moral code holds true for protagonists who are not druids, I think it’s fair to say ChatGPT may be a bit beyond its depth as a game writer. However in my experience the emergent “intelligence” (if we are allowed to use that word) of the technology is remarkable. It employs a wide range of heuristics that employed together come very close to a reasoning capacity, and it seems like it might be capable of forming and pursuing intermediate goals to enable its hard coded attractors. These things were always theoretically within the capabilities of neural networks, but to see them in practice is impressive… and genuinely scary. (This technology is able to slaughter human opponents at games like Go and StarCraft. I now do not think it will be long before it can out-debate and out-plan us too.) The problem with ChatGPT is not that it is stupid or derivative, IMO it is already frighteningly clever and will only get smarter. No, its principle limitation is that it is naïve, in the most inhumanly abstract sense of that word. The model has only seen a few million words of text at most about TDM Builders. It has seen billions and billions of words about builders in Minecraft. It knows TDM and minecraft are both 3D first person video games and have something to do with mods. I think it’s quite reasonable it assumes TDM is like that Minecraft thing everyone is talking about. That seems far more likely than it being this separate niche thing that uses the same words but is completely different right? The fact it knows anything at all is frankly a miracle.

Thanks for the replies, gonna try those spoiler Tags again now for my short review (oh well it inserted one above my text now and I can't seem to delete it on mobile - this text editor is strange)

Just finished this mission and wow I gotta say in great honor to Grayman and of course the rest of the team picking it up, this was something I've never seen before in any other TDM mission, especially visually wise. I am so happy that grayson gave green light for other experienced mappers to finish his last mission. And what came out of this is really something special. I'll put my review in spoiler tags since I'm now referring to critical mission details. Edit - How do I put spoiler text here on mobile?? [spoiler] test [/spoiler][SPOILER] test [/SPOILER] [spoiler[spoiler [sfah