Ricebug on 29/10/2014 at 20:18
As you know, I typically post the number of FMs made for each flavor of Thief every January. (
http://www.bogadocious.com/thief/T2_FM_Stats.png) LINK
I wanted to ask this forum, since y'all know the nuts and bolts of design and creation: There are currently 20 older missions that have been re-done under New Dark for 2014. I was not planning to include them in next January's report. Before I step on anyone's toes, however, I wanted to get some feedback.
Yandros appears to have spent a good deal of time re-doing his WLB, while many of cardia1's FMs (no offense, Pedro) were recompiled for the sake of lighting and a few tweaks here and there. Bottom Line: if one is included, they all have to be included.
LarryG on 29/10/2014 at 21:30
At this point in time, with NewDark running both T1 & T2 missions, and if you really want to be accurate and continue to use the engines the missions were developed for as stat, then you need a new stat for NewDark vs. T2 vs. T1 vs. .... Nothing was released for either T1 or T2 in 2014, right? All 2014 releases were NewDark, weren't they?
Or you could enumerate the missions by which engines they currently run under, which would essentially show the missions which got broken by NewDark vs. the ones that didn't ...
Xorak on 29/10/2014 at 21:32
When I started to write this I was thinking they all should be included as newly released, but as I think about it, I'm leaning towards not including any of them, even if they feature new gameplay. How many mission updates have there been over time, some featuring new locations and such, and yet have these been counted in your yearly updates? Unfortunately that would mean even a heavily reworked mission would still not count as a 'new mission.'
Though if you wanted to include them, you could somehow mark separately the number of missions which were re-released or something.
Renault on 29/10/2014 at 21:47
@LarryG - I don't know about a "New Dark" category - missions are typically still classified as T1, TG, or T2. You have to fire up the correct executable to get the mission to work properly and use the correct set of assets. New Dark isn't a universal thing - yet. At least that's how I understand it.
I think if the point of the yearly list is to show the number of new missions released, then the re-releases should not be counted. I'm guessing a mission released in December as version 1.0 and then updated to version 1.1 in January is not counted towards the latter year's releases. New Dark re-releases are pretty much the same thing.
Yandros on 30/10/2014 at 00:40
Even WLB-ND is still mostly a cosmetic update, so I agree it should be in or out with all of Pedro's. I also agree with Mike that it makes more sense not to count them as new releases. Now if this had been the full-fledged redux of WLB which I have on the back burner, I would feel differently, but in that case it will be much more of a new mission inspired by the original than a simple update. But just relighting in 32bit, upgrading textures and fixing bugs shouldn't count as a new release IMO.
Ricebug on 30/10/2014 at 01:00
Missions to date:
[INDENT]
* T1/G: 2
* T2: 12 (brand-new FMs)
* T3: 1
* TDM: 7
[/INDENT]
So adding the "updates" would inflate the T2 number to 20. I'll go along with the majority. There's a heckuva distance between going from a blank screen to a full-blown mission versus merely putting new clothes on one to pretty it up.
Le MAlin 76 on 30/10/2014 at 10:32
Quote Posted by Brethren
I think if the point of the yearly list is to show the number of
new missions released,
then the re-releases should not be counted. I'm guessing a mission released in December as version 1.0 and then updated to version 1.1 in January is not counted towards the latter year's releases. New Dark re-releases are pretty much the same thing.
I am agree but i think so the author must change the title "
Thief Fan Mission Statistic" or add a subtitle "The new missions released per years" in order to remove the ambiguity of the of the quoted title.
There is an error of the syntax's reference in the document: there is title, the legend and the sources, but it's
lacking the
date of the production of the document, and the
author (if anyone want to use this document, the date and the name of the author is very important for the references of the document).
Ricebug on 30/10/2014 at 12:53
What? Am I back doing college thesis papers again? OK. I'll put my name, date, etc. Be looking for the corrected doc next year.
