New Horizon on 10/12/2008 at 02:50
Quote Posted by Lord Gervasius
people are still playing thief 10 years after it was released. This is a testament to the replayability of the series. I HIGHLY doubt that darkmod will be dead in 3 years because the doom 3 engine will be outdated. I don't even think the doom 3 engine will be outdated.
TDM and in turn the Doom 3 engine, will only die if the community decides to let it die. Given the dedication of this amazing group, I don't see that happening. This is our gift to the community, it will be their baby.
jtr7 on 10/12/2008 at 03:13
Quote Posted by New Horizon
As of right now, since 'id software' has not yet made the source code public, if someone wants to help with TDM, play our 2 officially released beta missions, build maps with the existing assets, play maps built by fans with the saint lucia assets, or simply be prepared for our beta release in 2009....they will need to buy Doom 3.
Once again.
When 'id software' releases the
'full' source code to their Doom 3 engine, then and only then will it be possible to decouple TDM from the commercial game. This will require some work, as there are shared assets that will need to be replaced. Having the game in advance simply means people don't have to wait for us or some other enthusiastic individual to do that before they start playing or making missions.
'Tis what I thought. Thank you. :)
And a slap to all who think these tools and games will die. They will not die, but they will require evolution/adaptation or some "retro appreciation" company manufacturing older systems (yeah right).
EDIT: Hey, NH, I just saw your wiki edit. Thanks for having a look and making it better!
Judith on 10/12/2008 at 11:20
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
That alone is arrogant.
I guess I'm with the guys appreciating any kind of dedication for the community but the sheer diversity of interpretations of what Thief is forbids any pseudo-impartial judgement about quality or benefit.
Looks like I'm not alone in my impression, then.
Of course OpenThief isn't "without a sin" here, but I understand at least some of his reasonings - this is the way of thinking most modern game developers would present. That doesn't mean though, that this community will care about things like fluid physics or e.g. PhysX support, or keeping up with modern technology, as people are already supporting awfully outdated technology and are quite happy with it.
Unfortunately, for now the case of D3 engine sourcecode is still not
when but
if. Yes, Carmack has released his engines to the public before, but if my memory serves, with D3 he was to do it about a year ago. He didn't and it might be somewhat worrying. Looks like it pays off more to hire mod creators and collaborate to release a commercial product, like in case of ET:QW. So every "firm" statement about releasing the source code is a speculation or wishful thinking until it's done.
But what really makes me sick, is what Beleg is referring to. Communists were also saying: "why would you need anything from the West, everything you might want is already here" :p. Diversity is a good thing. You may find it hard to believe, but there are people in the world who don't like Doom 3 engine, hate working with radiant, or simply want to do something else Thief-related than participate in your project. There are also people who tried out your demo(s) and they might not like it too! Really!
But every time there's a sign a criticism on these forums towards your mod (reasonable or not, no matter, unfortunately) we've got DarkModPolice coming, with two most active "officers" already present in this thread. Sorry guys, but reasoning like "we're doing it with great dedicated team, and we've been making it for years, so: We. Must. Succeed" is a bit naive. You may but you also might not. The same thing goes for every project or FM in this community, e.g. people might like our mini-campaign, or may disregard it completely, that's their choice. All we can do is stay true to our goal and
have faith that there's something in it - we would be very grateful if someone appreciates that, but we cannot and we wouldn't really ask for more.
That's being honest and decent. Not your aggressive stance, where usually Sparrhawk becomes a "great defender", insulting anyone who dares to think in a different way, and NH becomes a pompous "drama queen" (I guess his education automatically kicks in), like every negative statement about DarkMod was an assassination of one of his children :nono:. You'd better spend this time actually working on the mod instead of spreading your propaganda of success. Finish it, and if it's good, it will defend itself with ease. More distance to yourself, to the world and to your work, please. And let people work on other projects if they like, for God's sake.
New Horizon on 10/12/2008 at 13:54
Quote:
Unfortunately, for now the case of D3 engine sourcecode is still not when but if. Yes, Carmack has released his engines to the public before, but if my memory serves, with D3 he was to do it about a year ago. He didn't and it might be somewhat worrying.
That is incorrect Judith. Carmack made an
'announcement' last year, that the source code would be released after the last commercial game hit the shelves, but he did not say it would be released last year. The last game using D3(idtech4) tech is Return to Castle Wolfenstein 2.
There was an interview with Carmack earlier in 2008, where he once again said that the D3 source code would still likely see release in 2009. So, in both 2007 and 2008, he projected 2009 as the source code release date. Of course, that is not a surefire guarantee...there are no hard guarantees in game development. If RTCW 2 is delayed for some reason, that would delay the source code release...but that's out of id's hands as RTCW 2 is being made by Raven Software.
There is no
'if' in the equation. The code will be released, 'when' they are able to release.
Judith on 10/12/2008 at 14:14
Well, looks like my memory doesn't serve me that well. That's certainly good news, releasing the source code, that is ;)
New Horizon on 10/12/2008 at 14:45
Quote Posted by Judith
...
You're zeroing in and spinning the situation into something that it isn't. As I said to Beleg, what is being rejected is the attempt to
'give' the community this
'amazing' project...when there hasn't been a line of code written for it. Do you know what that means? :D It means that it offers us no diversity, or benefit, because there is NO project. All there is to show is a website, and a classic Thief model dropped into an Ogre renderer demo. The original screen shots shown years ago were from a generic Ogre demo. This would be starting from scratch...again...and require maintaining two separate projects. If there had actually been something there, I would have been duly impressed...much as I am with OPDE...or Nightblade. Those projects are both amazing and we support them.
The major point being missed here, is that when the D3 source code
is released...the doors will open for the community. What does this mean for people who preferred Thief 3? Everything! While we don't officially support TDS style play in the main branch of the mod, anyone who chooses to do so after we release the full mod + D3 source code CAN support it. They will have ALL of our source code, and those fans can make their own variation of TDM...setup their own source code repository and make their own stand alone branch of the engine. They can add 3rd person, body awareness, whatever they want really. It might be possible for a diverging branch like this to be done in a way that it would allow main branch maps to be shared between projects. That would depend on the choices of the team to maintain compatibility. It's no doubt possible, and would open the world of FM's up to more players...that's for certain.
This will also allows sister projects of TDM to swap engine enhancements. If the main branch were to benefit from a major bug fix release, chances are that the changes in the sister branch would benefit from this too...and vice versa. The major groundwork will all be done.
THAT is the kind of diversity that is being promoted here, but of course it's being missed completely and regarded as selfishness...or policing. Initially, yes it might sound selfish...but the idea is that we're doing the ground work and providing a solid foundation for 'you' and the rest of the community. After that, the ball is in the communities court to do with the code as they please. Perhaps make 6 or 7 divergent projects based on the TDM source code...it doesn't matter because every one of those projects will benefit the other. The ideal...though perhaps naive...is to strengthen the community with a strong, common foundation...and not spread it thin. Diversity is GREAT, when it's done in a way that can benefit everyone.
It's like all the different strains of Ubuntu Linux. All based on the same core, but each one offering different benefits.
In any case, we're not trying to force anyone to use a strict set of tools, or to use them as we see fit. It's a matter of unity, rather than splintering the community off into identical projects that aren't able to help each other. In this case, unity will lead to the very diversity you accuse us of trying to kill.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go wash off this Drama Queen makeup, and take my Panzerkampfwagen for a drive through the schoolyard where kids are having way too much fun playing....cuz like, that's the way I roll bitches!
sparhawk on 10/12/2008 at 15:11
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
That alone is arrogant.
I guess I'm with the guys appreciating any kind of dedication for the community but the sheer diversity of interpretations of what Thief is forbids any pseudo-impartial judgement about quality or benefit.
I don't see that as arrogant, and it is no judgment of quality either.
It's simply practical. For every Thief version out there, it's more than unlikely that the editors and other stuff is compatible. So you can share of course textures and models and such, but that is still only a small part. So to create maps for multiple thief versions it means that a bunch of people with the neccessary skills have to learn the tools and the tricks to make good maps with that particular version. This takes quite a lot of time already. And after that, they can only teach those tricks to members of the same group. I don't see how the thief community would benefit from this split.
As a small example: People with a erally good skill in Dromed, can not just simply head over to make maps for TDS. They have to learn a lot before they become good at it again. Now if the same poeple want to map for TDM they have to learn yet another editor, so we already have three skillsets for three versions. How many should there be?
More of the same is not always better, that's my opinion. That's the reason why people are joining forces to work on a project. That's why there are standards in the industry, so that there is not always more of the same but only slightly different in detail.
sparhawk on 10/12/2008 at 15:24
Quote Posted by Judith
That's being honest and decent. Not your aggressive stance, where usually Sparrhawk becomes a "great defender"
The only reason why I jumped on this thread was because OpenThief was giving lies and missinformation left and right, on top of starting to insult poeple working on other projects then his own. You don't need a big memory 'cause you can simply read this thread from the beginning. I know why you are not really interested in this though.
Judith on 10/12/2008 at 15:55
You see, you're only confirming what I wrote. NH still refuses to see the fact, that there might be some people who just want to do something on their own, even if it would take years to finish. And in a few minutes again he starts throwing visions, like a priest of a new god, who is about to force out the Christianity :laff:. That's when one excites with his own words a bit too much. And Sparhawk as usual, knows better who am I and what I think - lovely :)
The problem with both of you is that you want to your obviously biased point of view to be understood, while you show no tolerance for anything else - and I'm not saying about simple fact of misinformation. Suggestion that "there's no use starting/continuing a project for there's DarkMod" is plain insolent and rude, period. Saying that DarkMod is or will surely be dead is quite rude too :]
I'm not saying that OpenThief's work is great or something, I'm really neither enemy nor friend here. But just like Beleg, I don't like your tone. And I think that speaking with this tone you're making more harm than a benefit to your project. Putting aside your bloated ego could help, really :)
