qolelis on 13/8/2007 at 10:51
Thank you, Sparhawk! You wrote exactly what I was thinking.
Zillameth on 13/8/2007 at 15:02
Quote Posted by OrbWeaver
No offense, but I don't think you know what you're talking about.
Funny you say that, because I'm a professional programmer and a professional designer at the same time (well, kind of; the company I'd been working for lately was kind of shitty).
I also speak from experience, because I had some very unpleasant conversations with programmers while doing my job. The example with decision tree is what really happened one day, only the AI in question - an end-of-game boss - used an HFSM (which isn't as self-explanatory as decision tree, and it would take a few sentences to explain it). A programmer decided he could create this HFSM all by himself, but he didn't really have any idea of how the AI should behave, so he just made it change states randomly. And of course fighting the end-of-game boss turned out to be no fun.
Note that I'm mostly talking about upstart companies. Things are probably very different in older studios, simply because they are old and experienced. Also, system design and project analysis are part of academic education of an IT specialist. Which basically means they teach you about programming and about software design as well (and much more). Which in turn means someone who works as a programmer should at least realise there is such thing as design.
For some reason, though, they often don't. Maybe that's because design of a computer game is quite different from design of a database system.
OrbWeaver on 13/8/2007 at 15:48
Quote Posted by Zillameth
I also speak from experience, because I had some very unpleasant conversations with programmers while doing my job.
It sounds like you were working with people who were just bad programmers. There is nothing inherent in being a programmer which renders one incapable of understanding the larger design issues, as you suggested in your original post; rather the traits you describe (inflated view of one's own capabilities, implementing a poor solution rather than asking for help, etc) are common in any field.
New Horizon on 13/8/2007 at 16:07
Quote Posted by OrbWeaver
It sounds like you were working with people who were just bad programmers. There is nothing inherent in being a programmer which renders one incapable of understanding the larger design issues, as you suggested in your original post; rather the traits you describe (inflated view of one's own capabilities, implementing a poor solution rather than asking for help, etc) are common in any field.
I have to agree. Our programmers on TDM are completely aware of the design issues and have been nothing short of spectacular.
Springheel on 13/8/2007 at 21:15
Quote:
What about a remake of TDS?
I can't fathom why anyone would want to remake TDS. Even if you could legally do it on a different, superior engine, what would be the point? It's not like the plot is extraordinary, and the levels are tiny. Sure it would be nice to see the maps without loading zones, but is it worth all the colossal effort just for that? Unlike remakes of T1 or 2, the visual improvements gained by using a new engine wouldn't be huge. It just seems like a massive amount of effort for very little payoff.
That said, I would be curious to see a "what TDS *should* have been" kind of map, where someone takes The Dark Mod and redesigns one of the TDS maps with a much larger, more detailed version. For example, what might the Kurshok mission have looked like if it wasn't a few meters below the city docks and the size of a small church?
Of course, there would be some legal issues to circumvent.
june gloom on 13/8/2007 at 22:47
Quote Posted by Springheel
I can't fathom why anyone would want to remake TDS. Even if you could legally do it on a different, superior engine, what would be the point? It's not like the plot is extraordinary, and the levels are tiny.
maybe remake is the wrong word. more of a redo. in other words, doing TDS the RIGHT way. i had no problems with the plot (though it deserves some expansion.) but the maps obviously need to be enlargened. i think making the city map one huge thing with lots of things to do (and new things to do every night) could be very worthwhile. i think the reason the original city sequences failed was because after a while you just ran out of things to do and it was more stuff that you had to work around just to get to the next mission. by keeping it interesting and fresh, it could be as fun as, say, lorgan's web.
here would be, IMO, some things that would improve the nightly city sequence.
* make it larger. much, much larger. make each neighborhood huge, with different qualities to each (i.e. the old quarter would be full of winding alleyways and decaying infrastructure, while audale would be nice and clean and there are always (very courteous) city watchmen on patrol.
* if there must be load zones, make them non-obvious. like, say, a door that, when you try opening it, a message pops up telling you that that door leads to another area.
* make the city interesting every night. there should always be something going on. in addition, there should be plenty of houses and mansions that you can break into for extra cash.
* more people! i can easily see garrett standing in a crowd of people as they move to and fro at, say, a market, picking pockets and nobody is the wiser.
* more connection with the original thief games. the places you go in the original thief (such as assassins) should be visitable.
i'm not saying that the ENTIRE city should be painstakingly built- for a number of reasons. one, it would inevitably increase the chance of canon conflicts. two, it would be far too much work for what's ultimately not that important to the main game. three, i'm not entirely sure current technology is capable of handling a GTA-style thief, complete with all the graphical bells and whistles we expect.
but making the neighborhoods larger and more interesting would be a big help.
imperialreign on 14/8/2007 at 01:34
defi the city sections could have been larger, the missions could've been larger, we could've had rope arrows, and blah blah blah
I honestly thought TDS was good, and still has a lot of potential, but, alas . . .
I also agree with going how T2x went. Keep the Thief universe intact, but develop a different, believable main character. It doesn't even have to be in "The City". Discussions here on TTLG have lead to a kind of 'agreement' that the Keepers and Hammers aren't specific to The City. It's quite possible to go after a completely different cultural style in a different City, with different architecture, different denizens, which would present for completely different obstacles and hurdles to deal with. What's considered valuable in The City might not be so somewhere else . . . and who's to say that another city doesn't have a different religious faction that has completely different quirks than the Hammers? Or maybe a city that's run by Pagans? The ideas are endless.
I agree, also, that as of the closing of T3, Garrett should be laid to rest (except for the FM's :thumb: ); any further reference to him in another possible sequel should only be done in mentioning his name in a book, scroll, etc.
If our fanbase wanted to start pushing for our own T4 (I don't think legally we could utilize the Thief 4 title), I honestly believe The Dark Mod running on the Doom3 engine would be the perfect engine to work with, and I think it's plausible a full campaign could be done with it. Plus, the Doom3 engine has fairly minimal system requirements, still looks beautiful even when playing at minimum specs (thanks to OpenGL), and still runs fairly well at minimum specs, too. If TDM would be in the same boat as Doom3 itself, it would open TDM to be more accessible to more users, as compared to how horrible TDS runs at minimum. Only downfall would be that you'd have to actually own a copy of Doom3, but prices are relatively low now . . .
RavynousHunter on 14/8/2007 at 04:36
Itd be a bitch to do, but if we were to make a fan-made "Thief 4" (i know thatll NEVER be the name, just a placeholder), we could make our own engine, itd take longer, but again, wed get what we want. I realize what im asking : a fuck-ton of time, work, frustration, etc, etc, etc... But if it were to move into the planning/making/doing-shit phase, Id be glad to offer what little assistance i could, maybe in the concept/idea department, as I do consider myself a programmer, but I know Im nowhere NEAR good enough, and would most likely just get in tha way.
I think if this were to move forward, wed need our own forum tho, and website.
Ok, getting waaaay ahead of myself here, but I would like to see a "Theif 4", maybe not in the story sense, but more in the whole concept of "not being a uber stealth tank" and stealing shit instead of just killing the baddy or dismantling the evil corporation. :thumb:
imperialreign on 14/8/2007 at 04:56
Well, I'm more than willing to do what I can to help, also - if there was enough support here to move forward with it. I mean, it took how long for T2X to finally be released? I'm sure our fan community here wouldn't mind another 5+ year wait for what would hopefully be a great project.
My skillz as a programmer have fallen by the wayside years ago, so I'm certain I probably couldn't be any help there. Last thing I ever programmed was some mods for Quake and Duke Nukem 3D . . . . . . . damn, just saying those names again makes me feel quite old!! :D
But, I would be entirelly willing to help with mission design and planning (lot of experience here with older games), concept sketches, or whatever else I might be able to do.
New Horizon on 14/8/2007 at 05:28
Quote Posted by RavynousHunter
Itd be a bitch to do, but if we were to make a fan-made "Thief 4" (i know thatll NEVER be the name, just a placeholder), we
could make our own engine, itd take longer, but again, wed get what we want.
It took five years for the Dark Engineering guild to make Thief 2X on the existing dark engine...an engine that doesn't require normal maps, or high poly models.
With a fan made project, you would be looking at a LOOOONNNG time, probably six or seven years.
Why do that, when The Dark Mod will be finished, and the D3 Engine will be open sourced in a few years? Once it goes open source, the community will have its own engine. The reality of the D3 engine being open sourced in a few years hasn't really registered with a lot of people yet. I don't think a lot of people truly understand the significance of that. It means, FULL source code for the D3 engine. Think of the possibilities.
