Search the Community

It's another aspect of, over time, tailoring the degree of subtitles shown to reflect the needs and preferences of the individual player. I think some low-hearing/audio-off players might appreciate brief soundscape descriptions, including weapon sounds; others would find it clutter. I understand that distinction is not personally of interest to you. For now, a fourth category is just theoretical, not a 2.12 item. I'm just asking for a different description of the existing category, other than "effects", that we can both live with. Something that sounds more human. How about "expressions"? If we can agree on a term, then I will revise the appropriate barks to use it.

On a slightly related note, why ambientrimcolor material keyword was removed in 2.11? Notes show that it was "unused" – was it even advertised to mappers and content creators?

Yes, while Saint Lucia and A New Job are a little different, seeing that they are parts of the official introductory campaign, we usually use the bugtracker only for engine and core asset related issues. Please use the respective FM threads in the future.

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.

@stgatilov: You also mentioned some relevant things here: "Maybe start with finding who are these "we" people who want to change the license to assets?..." So far I only know of myself. Others are free to agree or disagree. (It may be worth keeping in mind that the population of current TDM contributors is not a representative sample of the population of all potential contributors. Anyone who has already joined did so accepting the current conditions. If we offer options, more may want to join.) "As a programmer, I definitely do not want to maintain any additional packages." I understand. And since I can't do it myself it will never happen unless someone is willing to help. "And I do not want to get entangled into any kind of licensing questions." The strength of any collaboration can be evaluated by its ability to harness the talents and interests of each contributor. Any open source project, where everyone participates by their own free will, will have a hard time compelling any of its participants into doing something that does not interest them.

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.

When talking about a possible libre version of TDM (https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22346-libre-version-of-tdm/) it seems we believe all media/gamedata included in TDM is licensed CC-BY-NC-SA. I am not familiar with how the process of adding new media/gamedata works today; I have seen files uploaded to the bugtracker which developers then commit to SVN, but I don't know if there are other ways. It may be a good idea to implement a process that when new components (media/gamedata included in TDM) are added, the contributor is asked to be explicit about the license (a choice which may defaults to their previous preference, for usability). It won't fix the past, but it may help in the future. This will make it easy for contributors to add future data under a more permissive license if they choose. Libre media can be added and its license can be tracked, rather than assumed to be CC-BY-NC-SA. I suggest looking at how Wikimedia Commons has implemented this: the contributor state the source and license at the time the data is uploaded. This can be done either by providing urls or by saying "It's my work and I choose this licsense". The first step could be to add a way to keep track of each filepath in SVN, author, license, sources. Start by setting the value for each file's license to "(default/legacy CC-BY-NC-SA)". Possible implementations for a user interface for new additions are: * Use our own wiki, which runs Mediawiki (same as Wikimedia Commons). I see several benefits of this, but we also need a way to accept uploads of batches, not just single files. * Look at how other open source projects have solved this. There may be more appropriate solutions available. ... but I'll leave the implementation open. Suggestions are very welcome! If the author of each file already in SVN can be tracked, then it may be possible that the author is willing to give a blanket permission for all their past files in one statement, and all their files in SVN can be updated in one commit. A productive contributor willing to release some of their work under a more permissive license could make a big change. If Dark Radiant would support letting mappers search media/gamedata by license (does it already?), it would make it easier for mappers to create a completely libre mission, which would help facilitate a TDM-libre release. If I understand things correctly. This post does not address all details and it may contain misunderstandings or assumptions, but it's a start. Also relevant: * Is there a compiled and maintained list of recommended or deprecated resources for mappers to use? * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/20311-external-art-assets-licensing/

Yes, the description is somewhat unclear. When it says "The in-game downloader might show something different than the main menu.", I don't perceive that as a problem. Sorting a list by titles (articles last) is one thing; presenting the full title (with article first) is another. And they serve two different purposes: * When presenting the title in a list along with other titles by other authors, I would want to put more emphasis on functionality, usability and the overall presentation of the list as a whole. It is in everybody's interest that the list is functional and neat. * When presenting the title by itself, I would want to put more emphasis on the author's wishes. I think the web page and the list on the wiki should follow CMOS too, for the same reasons. By the way: the web page (https://www.thedarkmod.com/missions/) has a column "Type" which has values "S" or "C" but it does not explain the difference. Does anyone know?

I'm not sure if it's in TDM's interest to serve a "libre" version that essentially is cripled until you add the non-free content. Making an AppImage version of TDM seems more interesting.

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".

This post differentiates between "gratis" ("at no monetary cost") and "libre" ("with little or no restriction") per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre * A libre version of TDM could: ** Qualify TDM for an article on the LibreGameWiki *** TDM is currently listed as rejected https://libregamewiki.org/Libregamewiki:Rejected_games_list because "Media is non-commercial (under CC-BY-NC-SA 3.0). The engine is free though (modified Doom 3) (2013-10-19)" ** Qualify for software repositories like Debian *** TDM is currently listed as unsuitable https://wiki.debian.org/Games/Unsuitable#The_Dark_Mod because 1) "The gamedata is very large (2.3 GB)", and 2) "The license of the gamedata (otherwise it must go into non-free with the engine into contrib)" and links to https://svn.thedarkmod.com/publicsvn/darkmod_src/trunk/LICENSE.txt Questions: 1) tdm_installer.linux64 is 4.2 MB (unzipped), which is far from the 2.3 GB which is said to be too large. Yes, the user can use it to download data that is non-libre, but so can any web browser too. If the installer itself is completely libre, does anyone know the reason why it cannot be accepted into the Debian repository? 2) If adding the installer to the repository is not a viable solution, would it be possible to package the engine with a small and beginner friendly mission built only from libre media/gamedata into a "TDM-libre" release, and add user friendly functionality to download the 2.3 GB media/gamedata using "TDM-libre" (similar to mission downloading)? 3) Would such a "TDM-libre" release be acceptable for the Debian repository? 4) Would such a "TDM-libre" release be acceptable for LibreGameWiki? 5) Would the work be worth it? * Pros: Exposure in channels covering libre software (e.g. the LibreGameWiki). Distribution in channels allowing only libre software (e.g. the Debian repository). * Cons: The work required for the modifictions and release of "TDM-libre". Possible maintenance of "TDM-libre". I'm thinking that the wider reach may attract more volunteers to work on TDM, which may eventually make up for this work and hopefully be net positive. 6) Are there any TDM missions that are libre already today? If not, would anyone be willing to work on one to fulfill this? I'll contribute in any way I can. 7) I found the following related topics on the forum: * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/16226-graphical-installers-for-tdm/ (installing only the updater) * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/16640-problems-i-had-with-tdm-installation-on-linux-w-solutions/ (problems with installation on Linux) * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/17743-building-tdm-on-debian-8-steamos-tdm-203/ (Building TDM on Debian 8 / SteamOS) * https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/18592-debian-packaging/ (Dark Radiant) ... but if there are other related previous discussions, I'd appreciate any links to them. Any thoughts or comments?

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.

Right, @datiswous. That other initiative requires Team Work. No interest so far.

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

After having trouble dragging the body where he wanted, the player said, "No. Noooo." (29:09) Player said, "I'm sorry. I'm not trying to look up there. It's just very awkward to drag bodies." (30:08) What I see is a player having trouble being stealthy while playing a stealth game, so this video just adds evidence in support of making shouldering the primary action over dragging. I never saw that he figured out how to shoulder a body. I think we are wanting to optimize for two different scenarios: One is to optimize for a stealth experience, and the other is to optimize for a "comical" experience. If I'm understanding you correctly, you have a strong fascination with body manipulation. Earlier in this thread, you stated: What you find as "comical", I see as the player suffering with the gameplay and struggling with the controls. Players have written their frustration with the pre-2.12 controls and stopped playing TDM all together. I've already seen players write about their interest in trying 2.12 based on the recent changes, which is huge. They're willing to give it another go, and that's great for our community. I am interested in watching playthrough videos and reading player experiences with the 2.12 version once released. Then, we'll be able to get more feedback about the 2.12 controls. Body manipulation is still available, and I find that it's even easier to do with the 2.12 controls. @STiFU commented something similar: @snatcher, given that body manipulation is so important to you, then I suggest creating a group and creating content about body manipulation. This could be similar to the groups that ghost or ironman the game. For example, Rule #1: Bodies must be dragged. Shouldering bodies is not allowed.

The below video illustrates some of the points I tried to make earlier. This new (or returning) player is experiencing TDM for a first time and I would say his mood and style perfectly fit the primary target audience of TDM. The player is unaware that shouldering bodies is a thing. See how it plays out. 1st situation - From 00:00 until 03:30 2nd situation - From 27:30 until whenever you want The player quickly figured out how to drag and manipulate (turn around) bodies and I detect no sign of frustration. The circumstances even lead to a couple of comical moments. Sooner or later this player will get to know about shouldering bodies and he will, as it couldn't be otherwise, prioritize shouldering. It all has been learned organically and the player can now switch tactics if desired. Now consider this same player was playing 2.12. I don't see any reason for this or any other player to ever getting to learn or appreciate body manipulation. 2.12 teaches players to move grain sacks out of the way, devoiding any sign of "humanity" from ragdolls. @stgatilov commented ragdoll manipulation is something like an engine show-off. Considering the amount of work that went into the feature I tend to believe the mechanic was seen as an opportunity and built as such. Let's for a moment travel to a parallel universe and pretend the developers decided shouldering bodies alone was the way to go, just like in Thief. How long would have gone by until someone wondered: wouldn't dragging bodies be cool and more realistic? I agree that shouldering bodies could be done with one (long or short) click. The problem I have with the final implementation is that the case was presented one-sided and there was no retrospective or interest in alternatives. We took a shortcut and as a result we missed half of what the journey offered. We didn't think big. Besides that above, players are now exposed to: Unintentionally shouldering bodies while trying to retrieve items from bodies Unintentionally un-shouldering bodies when trying to operate doors @Daft Mugi & friends set out to do this change and I have no problem with that, but I feel this whole topic is unbalanced. Some points have been hardly considered or discussed so excuse that I insist. If anything, this topic will make it for a good read for those coming next in a few years time

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.

Then the characters that you removed the pixels from would be less-well shaped. The right solution is to change the metadata around character spacings. That's deep in the weeds. And probably better pursued as part of generating a 12pt Stone image. If you want to take this on, I can send you some links. I did some prelim research on this last year, related to computing the width of a Stone string, but never tried to do a font edit or gen, because a lot of steps seemed unclear. EDIT: Some of my thinking here is that maybe the scaling down from the available 24pt Stone image to a desired 12pt is introducing artifacts. Also, backing off a bit from what I said above, maybe not removing pixels, but shifting any problematic character glyth sideways within an image, would fix things well enough. EDIT2: These are the main forum links I found helpful The "Stone Print" source font in ttf form is available, e.g., from www.fontpalace.com. Useful Doom 3 tutorials are #10 "Using custom fonts" & #11 "Editing fonts". Tools include "Export Font to Doom3 - v1.02" and Q3Font. Some of this stuff comes from the wayback machine of the internet archive. I can get you copies. Sorry, can't help much with DDS editing tools.

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.

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/

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.

The 2.11 (and prior) feedback came from TTLG and Thief discord servers. During early testing, several of these players and Thief FM authors expressed renewed interest in trying TDM and some have become regulars of TDM because of recent changes. I consider that a win for the TDM community, because more players and mission authors are good for us. More mission authors means more missions for us to enjoy; more players means a bigger audience for those mission authors. (I'm vague here about who the players are for privacy reasons, but you can find them by searching TTLG, Thief discord servers, and TDM discord servers.) As for the mission authors, the dev team got feedback from them during development of the increased mantle speed in 2.12. The main feedback that was listened to was that mantling should be faster, especially the overhead mantle. As for who they are, perhaps they can chime in here to let you all know.

I tried it. I don't get this behavior what @snatcher has (maybe performance related?), but the background is misaligned somehow: