TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 106

Thread: The Dark Mod vs. T3 Editing Tools

  1. #1
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany

    The Dark Mod vs. T3 Editing Tools

    Since the Dark Mod thread is already quite cluttered with name calling and this stuff, I would like to repost Renzatics statement here to get some opinions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic
    Null's good news has brought about a flurry of discussions over on our IRC channel, some of us are wondering if it'd be wise to continue working on the FM platform when we can concentrate our efforts on a Thief-ready engine.

    I think the best way to approach it is to continue working on the mod, but incorporate our assets in with T3 as best we can. In other words all our textures, models, props, sounds...everything we make we'll set up so that it can be imported into the T3 SDK easily. That way it doesn't become a T3 vs. Darkmod issue, but rather a platform preference.

    There are definate advantages to working with Doom 3, the main being that the engine is so malleable that you can practically implement anything you want with ease. Half of the source code is available for everyone to play with, everything regarding the (surprisingly complex) AI to the very basics of gameplay are there to tweak to your hearts content.

    T3's advantage is that it's there, now, right in front of you ready to roll, immidiate Thiefy map gratification. While I doubt T3's SDK will be as open as Doom 3's (it's hard to say for certain without actually looking at the tools), it'll still be more than useable and probably blow Dromed out of the water when it comes to user friendliness.

    Jay Pettitt brought up the biggest concern...is the community large enough to work on both platforms? I think it is, if we do a good job with it then I can see people using us for their missions. But I wanna get everyone elses take on the matter, what do you think? Do you see a place for both Darkmod and T3 in the community?

  2. #2
    Member
    Registered: Jan 1999
    Location: Same place as the lost pens
    I could ruff things up abit and bring the idea of loyalty into the question...

    We pestered Eidos to release the T3 tools - perhaps it is only polite to use them first and foremost?

    I have always thought that the best Fan missions were those that focused on story and thiefy game play - I mean how many Thief TCs do you see out there? Dromed WAS thief and now the thief 3 editing tools should be thief (so long as they don't suck REALLY badly) - just cause something is easy doesn't mean it is worth doing! Thievery UT while amazing in its own right never struck me as "Thief" because i was really playing an unreal TC - I fear the same would be true for the Doom 3 TC. With Dromed Based fan missions you could lose yourself in the thief world all over again - a hammerite that was chasing was the actual model of a hammerite, with the Dark Mod it will (no offence) only be an artistic interpretation of a hammerite. (This all totally balances on the reimplementation of rope arrows, water and me getting comfortable will the thief 3 movement style Ė or hacking the crap out of it)

    Sometimes restraining the creativity produces the best results (consider Equilibrium AI keepers compared to the Keeper assassins from T3)

  3. #3
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven
    I could ruff things up abit and bring the idea of loyalty into the question...

    We pestered Eidos to release the T3 tools - perhaps it is only polite to use them first and foremost?
    So you would rather use crappy tools out of loaylity rather then good tools which have no background so far? I don't mean to say that the T3 tools WILL be crap, because we don't know how they work and what we will be able to do with. Just being curious as to the statement itself.

    I have always thought that the best Fan missions were those that focused on story and thiefy game play - I mean how many Thief TCs do you see out there?
    I think the TC problem is rather one of the engine. So far DromEd performed quite well and there was not really a reason to do a TC. After all there are not THAT menay modable engines out there which have the capabillities that a Thief game would need, so the question never before became an issue. D3 has all the features that will be required and it is extremly modable. Since we had to go on the assumption that the tools will never be released, this was the logical thing to do.

    Dromed WAS thief and now the thief 3 editing tools should be thief (so long as they don't suck REALLY badly) - just cause something is easy doesn't mean it is worth doing!
    Doing a D3 TC is not really something I would call "easy". Quite on the contrary it is a full featured game development project and you need a lot of people to work on it. As it is we already have quite a numberr of capable people and still we have need for more.

    Thievery UT while amazing in its own right never struck me as "Thief" because i was really playing an unreal TC - I fear the same would be true for the Doom 3 TC.
    I don't think the you can compare TUT with The Dark Mod after all. TUT is focussing on multiplayer while Dark Mod focus on single player. And of course we all want to have the Real Thief Atmosphere(tm) and we have a lot of discussions going on to achieve and keep that.

    With Dromed Based fan missions you could lose yourself in the thief world all over again - a hammerite that was chasing was the actual model of a hammerite, with the Dark Mod it will (no offence) only be an artistic interpretation of a hammerite. (This all totally balances on the reimplementation of rope arrows, water and me getting comfortable will the thief 3 movement style Ė or hacking the crap out of it)
    I think T3 movement style could also be implemented in D3. And of course. One thing that we (especially I as the lead programmer) will try to achieve is, all the features that were missing in T3.

    To me the most criticism on T3 is:

    1. Atmosphere is lacking.
    2. No rope arrows.
    3. No swimmable water.
    4. Ragdoll animations are simply humouristic at best (to say it politely).

    In that order.

    As to 1 I'm absolutely confident that we can achieve this. Fomr what the artists produces so far I must say that it has more of the distinct Thief atmosphere than T3 ever had. Just look at the screenshots at http://www.mindplaces.com/darkmod/gallery.htm and compare them to T2 screenshots and T3. I guess the speak for themselve.

    At 2 I don't know yet if we can do it, but I'm a programmer and my opinion is that the machine must do what I want it to do, and not the other way around. Since we can describe the behaviour of rope arrows and how they should work, I'm confident that we can implement it as well.

    And for 3: I already have some hints as to how to implement it. I'm pretty sure that we can support it.

    4 is no real issue in D3.

    Of course I don't want to promise to much because it will hurt credibillity if we can't keep it, but I to my current knowledge it should be possible.

    Sometimes restraining the creativity produces the best results (consider Equilibrium AI keepers compared to the Keeper assassins from T3)
    That's right.

  4. #4
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2004
    Location: Pandemonium
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparhwak

    To me the most criticism on T3 is:

    1. Atmosphere is lacking.
    2. No rope arrows.
    3. No swimmable water.
    4. Ragdoll animations are simply humouristic at best (to say it politely).
    Will the levels be size of those in T1/2 having implanted all the details and real time shadows in D3 engine? I think small levels is the most criticized point about T3 so far.

    As its knows Rope arrows didnít make into the game because of Physics engine. D3 also has workable physics engine, so if that can be tweaked to implement rope arrows, cant rope arrows be implemented using T3 Editor? (assuming deveopers couldnt work hard on this due to time constraints even if it was possible) Of course we can know this only when tools are released, but if its possible, then how D3 engine is more advantageous in this particular aspect?

    The default animation effects of RagDoll are funny, but using .ini tweaks, the "bouncing" effect can be reduced very much and it looks respectable if not still very accurate.

  5. #5
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Location: On my bicycle \o/
    I've kind of had a go at shifting us back to the Darkmod thread, everyone has called a truce. Its safe to tread there again.... It would be nice to keep darkmod stuff from spilling out uncontrolled into the ttlg fora.

  6. #6
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Aditya
    Will the levels be size of those in T1/2 having implanted all the details and real time shadows in D3 engine? I think small levels is the most criticized point about T3 so far.
    Level size is limited by D3 limitations. The original D3 levels are also not so big (at least the ones I have seen so far) and use loadzones, but they have covered it up a little bit better so that they are not THAT obvious. But I think that the engine can handle large levels without a problem as this shouldn't affect framerate anyway. Development of D3 for XBox is unrelated to the PC version so there is no built-in memory limitation on the PC side as well.


    As its knows Rope arrows didnít make into the game because of Physics engine. D3 also has workable physics engine, so if that can be tweaked to implement rope arrows, cant rope arrows be implemented using T3 Editor?
    D3 and T3 are quite different engines. So I can't really say that we can implement rope arrows in T3 just because we may be able to do it in D3. In D3 I know that scripting can be used for various effects. For example they used it to let Impdemons climb walls. If the can do this with scripting, then I don't see a real problem with scripting rope arrows, because Imps climbing walls would also have an issue with physics if that were the case. So far we know only that T3 developers tried it (they really did unless they laid false trails what I don't really believe) and didn't manage it. Since I don't expect a full featured SDK for T3 I have no big hopes for rope arrows and swimmable water. Especially when considering that there already mails from developers who essentialy said the we will not be able to fix some things with the editing tools alone (like the wall hugging bug)

    (assuming deveopers couldnt work hard on this due to time constraints even if it was possible) Of course we can know this only when tools are released, but if its possible, then how D3 engine is more advantageous in this particular aspect?
    D3 has powerfull scripting included. AND the most important aspect. D3 was developed with modding in mind. D3 was developed as an engine that will be sold for game development on a professional basis. This means that it is more customizable by design already, and that means a lot for development.

    The default animation effects of RagDoll are funny, but using .ini tweaks, the "bouncing" effect can be reduced very much and it looks respectable if not still very accurate.
    The ragdolls are a nuisance. Not realistic and of course you could get used to it. But still it adds up. It's not a big issue, but it is one of many.

  7. #7
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2004
    Q: Climbing gloves?? Cos having them AND rope arrows would be very cool.
    I just hope D3 will allow levels that make use of them (rope arrows and/or gloves), the city of TDS only had the odd bit that was climbable and cool.

    EDIT: I just saw the new screenies. THEY ARE NOT BLUE! THEY LOOK NICE!
    Babies have I can yours? ;p
    EDIT: AND BRICKS! YAY!
    Last edited by Bob-R-ctor; 26th Oct 2004 at 10:47.

  8. #8
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-R-ctor
    Q: Climbing gloves?? Cos having them AND rope arrows would be very cool.
    I don't really think that we should support climbing gloves. I'm not sure if having them along with rope arrows might disrupt gameplay a lot. Then again, it is mostly in the responsibility of the author to give you approriate tools for it's level.
    If we can do swimable water, then climbing gloves are pretty much in the same direction.

    I just hope D3 will allow levels that make use of them, the city of TDS only had the odd bit that was climbable and cool.
    Personally I didn't really like them.

    EDIT: I just saw the new screenies. THEY ARE NOT BLUE! THEY LOOK NICE!
    Babies have I can yours? ;p
    EDIT: AND BRICKS! YAY!
    Good.

  9. #9
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2001
    Location: Marlboro, MA, USA
    I just want to say that I REALLY want to see the Dark Mod continue!!!

    You guys have done a fantastic job so far, getting started very well it seems, and I can clearly see some great advantages of the D3 engine, especially it's future scalability and power. PLEASE don't give it up, as I'd love to be able to try out BOTH editors when the time comes
    The Keep for Thief 1 and 2 FMs, Shadowdark for Thief 3 and Dark Mod FMs

  10. #10
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2003
    Location: On my bicycle \o/

    thanks dude...

  11. #11
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Komag
    I just want to say that I REALLY want to see the Dark Mod continue!!!

    You guys have done a fantastic job so far, getting started very well it seems, and I can clearly see some great advantages of the D3 engine, especially it's future scalability and power. PLEASE don't give it up, as I'd love to be able to try out BOTH editors when the time comes
    Don't forget Linux support! One of my major points.

    ...

    Among many.

  12. #12
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2004
    Location: Prince Edward Island, Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by sparhawk
    Don't forget Linux support! One of my major points.

    ...

    Among many.
    Yes, Linux is definately on my plate as well. Dark Mod on Linux will rock.

  13. #13
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2003
    Location: East Coast Elite :D

    Keep up the good work!

    Even with T3 editing tools comming out, I still like the idea of the Dark Mod. It looks more like thief than T3 did. I hope you guys dont give up on this. If you get it to a working level, you can expect a donation from me
    DONT GIVE UP I WANT ROPE ARROWS! Oh and the screen shots from the Dark Mod look fucking fantastic. It blows T3 out of the water tome.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by aditya
    The default animation effects of RagDoll are funny, but using .ini tweaks, the "bouncing" effect can be reduced very much and it looks respectable if not still very accurate.
    Quote Originally Posted by sparhawk
    The ragdolls are a nuisance. Not realistic and of course you could get used to it. But still it adds up. It's not a big issue, but it is one of many.
    Not to mention, the tweaks that are pointed out in the Tweak Guide to 'very much reduce' the bounciness of ragdolls are actually for sound, not ragdolling (the Tweak Guide thread should be updated to reflect this). The file name in question is T3PhysicsSound.ini, and the fields adjacent to these values include volume and pitch. Clearly it has nothing to do with ragdolls. Any perceived change is the result of suggestion and/or imagination.

    Quote Originally Posted by komag
    I just want to say that I REALLY want to see the Dark Mod continue!!!
    As do I.

  15. #15
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by BEAR
    Even with T3 editing tools comming out, I still like the idea of the Dark Mod. It looks more like thief than T3 did. I hope you guys dont give up on this. If you get it to a working level, you can expect a donation from me
    Account number is on its way.

    DONT GIVE UP I WANT ROPE ARROWS! Oh and the screen shots from the Dark Mod look fucking fantastic. It blows T3 out of the water tome.
    Yes. Tha'ts also my opinion, but I may be a bit biased there.

    Buit it is really motivating to see the community support. I have many good projects seen getting down because of lack of community support. It helps keep the devs motivated.

  16. #16
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2004
    Location: Pandemonium
    Quote Originally Posted by SneaksieDave
    Not to mention, the tweaks that are pointed out in the Tweak Guide to 'very much reduce' the bounciness of ragdolls are actually for sound, not ragdolling (the Tweak Guide thread should be updated to reflect this). The file name in question is T3PhysicsSound.ini, and the fields adjacent to these values include volume and pitch. Clearly it has nothing to do with ragdolls. Any perceived change is the result of suggestion and/or imagination.
    What about these 2 lines?

    BounceForceMin=0
    BounceForceMax=2

    Dont they reduce bounciness of bodies?

  17. #17
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Location: Toronto, Canada
    I tried that tweak, and it had no perceptible effect on my ragdoll problem...I still got the spineless yoga poses on a regular basis.

  18. #18
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2004
    Location: Pandemonium
    I am not sure, but I set the value BounceForceMax to 1. At any rate, it definitely reduced the bouncing for me, not in huge way, little yet noticeable.

    Edit: Taken from Minimalist Project v1.2 description,

    - Bodies don't bounce as much when thrown.

    So, bouncing CAN be reduced and its not a indivisual suggestion/perception.
    Last edited by Aditya; 26th Oct 2004 at 13:43.

  19. #19
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2002
    Would it ever be possible to have a Darkloader type program that could be used to load up any FM, classifying them either as Thief 3 or Doom 3 compatible? I mean the current Darkloader does that for Thief 1/ Thief 2 so it seems to me at least to be pretty much the same principle...if that would work then designers could use whichever tools they preferred with no concern about how the FMs would run.

    The idea of the Dark Mod being far better than the official T3 editor though could potentially be a rather embarassing possibility though!

  20. #20
    As stated, for the following reasons, it seems to be an incorrect tweak:

    -ragdolls still do spinebreaker yoga deaths,
    -it's bounded by sound settings, e.g., Volume and Pitch,
    -and the setting is in the file 'T3PhysicsSound.ini', as in, the physics of sound (propagation, bouncing, etc).

    Man! Somebody sure likes his boldface tag.

  21. #21
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Oli G
    Would it ever be possible to have a Darkloader type program that could be used to load up any FM, classifying them either as Thief 3 or Doom 3 compatible? I mean the current Darkloader does that for Thief 1/ Thief 2 so it seems to me at least to be pretty much the same principle...if that would work then designers could use whichever tools they preferred with no concern about how the FMs would run.
    Should be pretty easy to do that. After all you can just determine if a pk4 file is used or not. And calling Doom3 is easy, as you can specify the mod on the commandline. But we wanted to implement a drakloader like interface in-game, as we expect to have much FMs for it to warrant that. Design is already in progress on that.

    The idea of the Dark Mod being far better than the official T3 editor though could potentially be a rather embarassing possibility though!
    Not to me.

  22. #22
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2004
    Location: Pandemonium
    Quote Originally Posted by SnaksieDave
    As stated, for the following reasons, it seems to be an incorrect tweak:

    -ragdolls still do spinebreaker yoga deaths,
    -it's bounded by sound settings, e.g., Volume and Pitch,
    -and the setting is in the file 'T3PhysicsSound.ini', as in, the physics of sound (propagation, bouncing, etc).

    Man! Somebody sure likes his boldface tag.
    In my original post I stated simply that bouncing can be reduced to an extent. I dont want to argue about tweaking WHICH file it can be done (as I am not sure of it, need to look again in .ini files carefully) I actually modified my files comparing them to Minimalist Project .ini's and it seemed to have some effect on bouncing, just how the project claimed to be. I faintly remember that probably it was this "BounceForceMax" line, but not sure. What matters is that it can be done and I am not the only one to say so.
    Last edited by Aditya; 26th Oct 2004 at 14:18.

  23. #23
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2003
    Location: United Kingdom
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-R-ctor
    EDIT: AND BRICKS! YAY!
    Throwable one's you mean? Hmmm...

    *Puts throwable house bricks into City FM*

  24. #24
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2004
    Location: Prince Edward Island, Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by SneaksieDave
    As stated, for the following reasons, it seems to be an incorrect tweak:

    -ragdolls still do spinebreaker yoga deaths,
    -it's bounded by sound settings, e.g., Volume and Pitch,
    -and the setting is in the file 'T3PhysicsSound.ini', as in, the physics of sound (propagation, bouncing, etc).

    Man! Somebody sure likes his boldface tag.
    It does lessen the bouncing, but it's not related to the yoga deaths. I don't know why it's called PhysicsSound, but it does indeed lessen the bouncing when the ragdolls hit the floor, with it tuned up higher they tend to wiggle and bounce on the floor a lot more.

  25. #25
    NH, you use this T3PhysicsSound.ini change for Minimalist? I just pushed the bouncing values up to 5 and 8 respectively, then up to 20 and 50 respectively and see absolutely no difference at all. I'm not running Minimalist, but could you tell me what settings you use for those two values?

    If only a dev would speak up about this - I'm quite firm on my stance for the reasons given, and will be so until one can explain why settings for ragdoll physics - logically, and most likely handled by a completely different module - would be contained side by side in a tiny (1kb) INI file for sound settings, with no mention of 'ragdoll' at all.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •