Search the Community

I hope that is not the new TDM version. https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/20784-render-bug-large-black-box-occluding-screen/

As far as I know Blow only works on small flames that mostly can be extinguished by Frob in my patch anyway. Actually the fact that the core developers wouldn't include pinching out oil lamps compared to candles, which is rather illogical to me but was always excused by not breaking existing missions, was the main reason I made the patch in the first place!

The project to round up viable orphaned translations is mostly complete now. https://bugs.thedarkmod.com/view.php?id=4726 Since Darkfate has their own translations it took awhile to merge the older translations with the darkfate formatting since they generated new string numbers from scratch. A few missions are so radically changed that the old translations are practically worthless now ( and some Darkfate translations are also incompatible with the latest mission versions ) but most of the work was salvageable. I added a "Translation Pack" column to the Missions wiki: https://wiki.thedarkmod.com/index.php?title=Fan_Missions_for_The_Dark_Mod all entries marked with "Yes" are working translations that use Darkfate's translation design ( includes xdata, GUI and Map files if the author didn't perform localization changes in their own mission pack ). Sadly, these changes do not show in the mission downloader list. You will need to delete mission_l10n.pk4 files from the darkmod/fms/mission_name folders to acquire the new translation packs that "actually work". Not all mission packs contain all languages. Mostly you can count on Russian being in there, but a good percentage have German and Italian strings too. French, Polish, and a few other languages are represented but not very broadly. Hopefully now that the packs work other contributors will add more language strings. Mission administration details: Going forward, it would be courteous if the mission admins ( like myself ) would diff the map files when new mission updates are supplied and replace all the objectives, inv_name, pop-up messages, and shouldered names in a copy of the new map file with the previous string codes then copy that file to the map folder in the translation pack folder. Ideally, authors will be encouraged to run their missions through the converter so only new strings need be added to the packs but not everyone likes that workflow and how cumbersome it makes future edits to the mission.

Thanks for the replies, particularly the reference to the embarrassingly-obvious "Music & SFX" subforum just below this one. I just like the music: I don't have any illusions about creating a fan mission. I messed with Dromed way back in the day, and I remember what a black hole of time and sanity it was.

For free ambience tracks it's as Freky said: you look around on the internet for tracks with the appropriate license to be included in your FM. Fortunately, you likely don't even need to bother doing this as a beginner as there's an entire "Music & SFX" section of the forums full of good ambient tracks for you to use if the stock tracks do not meet your fancy. You might also be interested in Orbweaver's "Dark Ambients", which come with a sndshd file already written for you.

So where do you disgustingly clever/creative people find all of the great, very Thief-esque ambient tracks I hear in so many of these missions?

Yes, it's time to do something about this. For all missions.

Unlike some fan missions for the Thief games, the TDM fan mission authors take care that there is no copyrighted material in the missions.

This sounds like an easier solution because it needs no breaking glass models or particles. Still it needs all electrical lights to be switchable though and I don't know if this is set globally or in the missions...

dev17042-10732 is public. We decided to restore the ability to create cvars, so the broken missions are "unbroken" as they are. Although I'll still try to hunt down and remove overriding scripts in the future.

For the FM? For beta 1 it's here: https://drive.proton.me/urls/H1QBB04GA0#oBZTb1CmVFQb I've already done around 100 fixes though, so you might want to wait for beta 2 which should be ready in a couple of days hopefully. All links are in the first post of the beta thread here: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22439-the-lieutenant-3-foreign-affairs-beta-testing/

This topic is going in different directions and it is difficult to tell if we all are in the same page. Facts: Stgatilov wants to change (improve, I guess) something and while implementing the change he realizes he will break some mission in the process. Mappers have been including (now obsolete) core files in their missions and the developer wants to know why these files were included in the first place, as in: the purpose. Changes in two mission are unavoidable, unless the authors go back and revisit the entire logic of their missions. Changes in eight missions are avoidable, in the sense that missions remain essentially the same with or without these changes. Regardless, if the improvements are to be implemented ten missions need to be reviewed and updated. Now my opinion: Considering how the topic is going the next time Stgatilov wants to improve something similar he might think it twice (we all lose because of ten missions). If these same improvements were to be implemented in the future chances are not ten but fifteen missions would have to be reviewed and updated which begs the question, does the inclusion of core files in missions put the present and future development of some areas at risk? No, as long as things remain under control: preserve what must be preserved, encourage and support innovations, identify and address trends. This requires an effort by all parties involved.

That's a very valid question. Personally, I'd say the key is to watch what the otherwise-disengaged fringes of the community are saying. If first time posters or long time lurkers start coming out of the woodwork about well made new missions, praising them for their geometry and story but saying that innovative parts of the gameplay felt frustrating or off, that's probably the first sign that the innovations are starting to get out of hand. For a more concrete example, re-read the comments on Hazard Pay. As much as I and many others love that mission, it's clearly a case where the author strayed further than many people were comfortable with. It also points to the likely endgame if authors do take their customization too far. After getting the negative feedback, kingsal made adjustments, and now the mission is much more friendly towards player preferences that don't match the author's original vision. You don't need to restrict the mapmakers' tools to stop them from straying too far from the traditional formula. When people start speaking up, the authors will rein themselves in on their own.

I can only speak for myself, but I think option 2 would be fine. This will at least allow the missions to be playable on the dev builds for now, and we can see if any other issues pop up

Speaking of actions for the missions which only tweak zoom delay. What would you prefer right now? Mission broken on the latest dev build (as it is now), but working as intended in the latest release. Mission working as intended on the latest dev build, but working without customization on the latest release.

I could take your reply much more serious, if you wouldn't call my valid objections "whims". If you don't care about what players think about the decisions you made in your missions (or your "whims"?), then I wonder why you make your missions public at all. Seriously, I'd recommend to get off your high horse.

Well, I disagree. I play this game for the features it offers, not the features some mission author thinks he has to change to his personal favor. And, frankly, some of the more current missions offer too much of that "I think this works better" feature change. For example, the sounds some missions introduce add nothing over the original sounds, but are rather worse in my opinion.

Damn right, and I personally am going to keep making changes on how I want MY mission to be played and what I think is best for MY FMs. If that's not to your tastes, then I'm sorry these changes don't align with your preferences, but there are tons of other missions you can play that do. FM authors have ZERO obligation to provide uniform experiences that try to cater to everyone. Some people are going to enjoy these custom changes (I really loved the Resident Evil style saves, and I can't wait to see more missions with that) and other players are gonna be unhappy about them, and that's a crying shame, but it is not going to stop me from making FMs how I want them to be. Never once has a beta tester or a player brought up an issue about these kinds of choices I made for my FMs

Well that doesn't mean that everyone is d'accord with all the gameplay choices he made in these missions, does it? All I can say is that I never got the impression here or elsewhere that there are issues with the weapon behavior in TDM. Maybe apart from the blackjacking, which has been a controversial topic in the past. I can only repeat myself in arguing that the big problem is the uniformity of essential gameplay elements. The game just doesn't feel coherent, if every FM author changes important gameplay dynamics, and it makes it difficult and frustrating, not just for beginners.

Gosh you're right. As a result it only managed to snag spot #10 in terms of highest user rated TDM missions on thiefguild. Kingsal could make a mission where you crawl around like a baby in moon gravity and I might be right there with you saying it was a bad idea. It'd still be his mission so his choice.

Sounds great. Unfortunately you don't have to get very far in any discussion about either changing existing gameplay mechanics or about giving players more in game customization options to see why mappers stop bothering with the debate club politics and instead divert the energy to do what they can to address what issues they can themselves. There is clearly also a disconnect between how people think they feel about these changes and how they do in practice. Kingsal's missions seem to be widely considered as some of the most polished missions in the game, because they are a holistic designs that look, sound and play a certain way. As a result I have never seen a player complain about something like the run modifier being increased in a particular missions thread and it’s clear there are very few players who are ultimately conscious of anything besides that the overall experience feels good. So there is reason these get adopted by other authors. The players are entitled to their opinion - but it's the mission authors choice ultimately. And I can only speak for myself, but I came to TDM because I saw working examples of things I wanted in my mission. These were not “stock” or “standard”. They were achievable by virtue of the games extendability. If the day comes where we get locked out of that kind of control of our designs, I would probably walk.

I agree entirely. Unless a mission is aiming to present a completely different gameplay experience (like making a rapid-fire archery-based combat mission instead of a stealth mission), I see no reason why things like bow aiming should vary on a mission-by-mission basis. If the defaults are widely disliked, they should be changed. If they are a matter of taste and there is no agreement on what the value should be, they should be configurable by the player and take effect in all missions. Imagine if every desktop application made its own tweaks to your keyboard layout or mouse acceleration because the author didn't personally approve of the default values. It would be a horrible user experience. Some applications actually do this with fonts, and yes, it's horrible. Potentially useful functionality made inaccessible because the author decided to ignore system font choices and DPI, and impose his hand-picked non-scalable 10pt font which I can barely read.

As a player, one thing I'm also not too fond of is the lack of uniformity. I think mission authors should take into account that especially players new to the mod want to figure out how the weapons work, and, they will have a hard time doing so, if many missions tweak the weapons. Apart from the "WTF" moment, they will also not know what the default behavior of the weapon is. Also not a fan of some other things some missions introduce, like the different sounds for foot steps etc. Most of them don't improve anything over the default sounds, to be honest. They're rather worse, and irritate me every time I play a mission with custom sounds.

2.12 we introduced the mission.cfg We just need to ensure that the cvars revert when switching missions.

Are we switching 10 scripts for 10 defs? What if the core def changes sometime in the future and we then have not 10 but 15 or 20 missions from different authors with this def? What if, in the end, nobody is willing to change/enhance/improve the bow because of the trouble? This is the day people might look back to in the future, which reminds me: