deadman on 10/2/2006 at 20:48
Quote Posted by New Horizon
Hmmm, walk me through what you did. The new system is manual, meaning you have to select the 'lockpicks' from inventory and hit the 'use' key.
Yeah, I gathered that from reading through the thread. I guess you can tell how little I've played Thief 3 (after beating it once) that I don't recall the default bindings, eh? :joke:
Well, after I followed your suggestion, "I" worked with the GenChest. For some reason, I just get a locked sound on Basket. One out of two ain't bad? Also, I didn't add any property other than Locked > blsLocked to either lid, so I've no clue why one works and the other doesn't.
Quote:
Definately shouldn't be blank.
I'll check this out by running my regular Thief 3 installation. I did do a clean install of T3 recently. All I can think of is a problem caused by not having it patched to 1.1, which I just haven't done out of laziness. Doesn't T3Ed use its own executables anyway (making this an irrelevant observation)?
Are you going to say anything about the HUD elements, or will I have to speak louder? ;) You can always make the argument that "because it's my release, my preferences go into it," except I'd still disagree, or prefer a separate installation to fix the schema issue. Ideally, it'd be great if you could have some custom installer that allows the end user to check or uncheck various options (HUD elements, lockpicking interface, guard fatigue, etc.). Otherwise, I really would suggest including a readme in the package created upon installation, going over the various changes and detailing how to change things back to T3 defaults (unless it's an issue of replacing the assets Thief uses, in which case we'd have to be given instructions on where the originals are). I hope your view is to try to help fix any issues I'm having (which I'm thankful for, don't doubt it) and then talk about this, rather than ignoring it entirely.
deadman.
bukary on 10/2/2006 at 21:41
Quote Posted by deadman
Ideally, it'd be great if you could have some custom installer that allows the end user to check or uncheck various options (HUD elements, lockpicking interface, guard fatigue, etc.). Otherwise, I really would suggest including a readme in the package created upon installation, going over the various changes and detailing how to change things back to T3 defaults (unless it's an issue of replacing the assets Thief uses, in which case we'd have to be given instructions on where the originals are).
Yes, it really would be GREAT! :angel:
I've played with T3EnhancEd last night. I love all the tweaks... except new (retro) HUD (including the lack of visual representation of lockpicking). I will probably get back to the original T3Ed and try to find some information about how to implement all those tweaks that I like (inventory keys and lockpicks, larger smesh window, fixed wallhugging, disabled autoblackjack, overweight and drunk guards fatigue, holy water arrows, sound tweaks). It would be great if someone put instructions about these tweaks in one thread. :thumb:
Top of my wishlist: T3EnhancEd with original HUD (I want the gears and the tumblers!)... One can only dream... ;)
BTW, what tweaks made 3rd person view impossible? Movement tweaks? (I usually don't press V, but I'd like to have that possibility.)
deadman on 10/2/2006 at 23:15
Quote Posted by bukary
Top of my wishlist: T3EnhancEd with original HUD (I want the gears and the tumblers!)... One can only dream... ;)
BTW, what tweaks made 3rd person view impossible? Movement tweaks? (I usually don't press V, but I'd like to have that possibility.)
Greetings, bukary. Been a while ;) You know, I made this confession before, but I'll say it again. Although I'm as old a fan as anyone, and wanted Thief 3 to be "conservative" in terms of changes, I really grew to enjoy the third person view. I didn't use it all the time; it's true that many times one just doesn't have the tactical advantages of first person (nor the immersiveness, but that's a given), yet there were still times when I'd switch out of the blue. It's cool just to watch Garrett sneak around sometimes, plus you get a much better picture of where he is in relation to his world. More of a Splinter Cell feel, obviously, but like anything else, the view has it's perks.
As for disabling it, I can't be sure, but it could be as easily uncommenting a line in the ini that allows it.
Like you, I also enjoy the gears in the hud. Some things, like the loot value pop-ups and huge loot glint I could do without, but I do like the feel of certain elements. I certainly have nothing against the minimalist project, but I also don't think someone should necessarily be implementing all these things in what amounts to an "enhanced" editor. Hopefully someone makes both our dreams come true and tells us how to change them back, if we can ;) It may partly be silly to whine about hud elements and such when this is just the editor (and we each can have entirely separate set-ups in our main Thief 3 installation folder), and maybe that's the response we'll receive.
New Horizon on 10/2/2006 at 23:27
Quote:
I hope your view is to try to help fix any issues I'm having (which I'm thankful for, don't doubt it) and then talk about this, rather than ignoring it entirely.
Hmmm, I didn't ignore you, I addressed the hud issues, right above your post. ;) As I said in the installer notes, what you see...is what you get, with T3EnhancED. It's not going to appeal to a wide audience, and I'm quite content with that.
Custom installer...definately not an option guys. Sorry. For every customizable option, it would mean that the 'player' patch, would require the exact same optional components in order for the mission to be playable on their system. My steadfast opposition to any further tinkering, is to keep it simple...for my sanity, those who want to build classic style missions and the gamers who wish to play them.
The current installer is simple. To complicate things with checkboxes would be a hellish nightmare and require several more months of working on it. Changes like, guard fatigue, hud elements, and lockpicking are partially done in the gamesys...meaning the gamesys would have to be opened within a hex editor or some custom application and overwritten. The configuration variations would be a headache.
In all honesty, it is far easier for you to copy the things you like
into vanilla T3Ed. :) I would be far more receptive to helping you out with that, than unmaking the last two years of my life. As I said though, I haven't documented the changes...so I'm as helpless in some areas as you are. I can figure out how I did something more quickly though, so don't be afraid to ask.
At any rate, definately easier to add to regular T3Ed...than undo all the changes. I've removed to many things in some cases and you would just end up having to rebuild certain things.
For third person view, I think it's in the t3camera.ini. Just look for third person headings that inherit from firstperson.
On top of all that, my work in Dark Mod is picking up and going into full production. Minimalist and T3EnhancED were two things I
'had' to get off my chest. I simply have to move on, there is not other way about it.
deadman on 11/2/2006 at 17:59
Quote Posted by New Horizon
I sympathize, but that wasn't why I included the classic style light gem and hud. I included it because this is intended to be a 'classic' themed editing package. It was never intended for a wide audience. It was developed to cater to 'classic' Thief fans, who had desired a logical evolution of the look, feel and gameplay of the original Thief games. They didn't get that with TDS, and I hope this brings them closer to it.
I guess I don't understand the reasoning behind this, then. Doesn't it make more sense to have the player patch their hud/gamesys stuff in a minimalist package rather than in an editor? I don't know anything about packaging this stuff for "FMs" yet, but it still makes sense to me to release things in a so-called "vanilla" state. Even with the non-HUD changes, the "enhancements" to AI fatigue, lockpicking, the wall hug issue, for instance, those seem somewhat separate; there's bound to be much more dissension on hud elements than the other stuff (I could be wrong).. One person might want 9 out of 10 things classic, while another is the opposite, etc. etc. (which, I think, is why we have a tweak package with different options).
I think you've spoken about this before with the player patch (which is yet to be finished, right?), but why make even more steps for FM players to go through before they can load something up and play it? The one or two T3 FMs I've played were loaded up in GarrettLoader and executed lickety-split; I'm assuming I won't be able to use GarrettLoader with T3Enhanced FMs, or at least not until I apply a patch you're working on?
To me, it makes as little sense as including the modified Garrett skin, along with every other re-skin John P worked on, boosting up the download size, in an FM, when it should be
optionally downloaded separately. Maybe you don't see the similarity, but I'm just scratching my head at the logic of this.
I would've done things is my point (I suppose). As I said above, I see hud changes and things like working schema files as entirely unrelated, and perhaps wouldn't have quite the balls you do to release something tailored to me :laff:.
Quote:
In all honesty, it is far easier for you to copy the things you like into vanilla T3Ed.
I guess
bukary and I will have to go that route, then. Of course, this is all a moot point; in all likelihood I won't release anything anyway (oh, don't be so pessimistic, self...) :p
ascottk on 11/2/2006 at 19:07
Quote Posted by deadman
To me, it makes as little sense as including the modified Garrett skin, along with every other re-skin John P worked on, boosting up the download size, in an FM, when it should be
optionally downloaded separately. Maybe you don't see the similarity, but I'm just scratching my head at the logic of this.
When I was working on Krellek's Labyrinth I had two installs of t3ed (one with custom textures, etc. and one vanilla install). When the vanilla install stopped working I had to go to my custom install to finish the fm. In order to get Labyrinth playable on a vanilla game install I had to include the enhanced textures or the fm would not play.
Hardly
anything is optional with t3.
New Horizon on 11/2/2006 at 19:58
Quote:
I guess I don't understand the reasoning behind this, then. Doesn't it make more sense to have the player patch their hud/gamesys stuff in a minimalist package rather than in an editor?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. The 'player' doens't have to download the editor at any point, only the FM author needs the editor. The patch will bring their 'game' install, up to EnhancEd level, without them doing so much as pressing...'next' on the installer. ;) The system I'm using compares changed file versions against the original 'vanilla' files. It extracts the differences and stores them in the automated installer, making for a much smaller download. They will only need to download the patch once and it will also be uninstallable. When the time comes, it may be possible for the Garrettloader to run the patch automatically if it's in a specified directory.
Quote:
I don't know anything about packaging this stuff for "FMs" yet, but it still makes sense to me to release things in a so-called "vanilla" state. Even with the non-HUD changes, the "enhancements" to AI fatigue, lockpicking, the wall hug issue, for instance, those seem somewhat separate; there's bound to be much more dissension on hud elements than the other stuff (I could be wrong).. One person might want 9 out of 10 things classic, while another is the opposite, etc. etc. (which, I think, is why we have a tweak package with different options).
As I was saying earlier, some of the changes to the hud are stored in the gamesys, along with fatigue, lockpicking, wall hug bug...etc. That means some parts are .ini related..other parts are stored directly in the game sys. T3 is not friendly to Mod, what I released is the best I could achieve. I also achieved some changes by hacking things around a bit, because they were hardcoded. The lockpicking for example, had to be hacked around to avoid having the 'New Skill' sound and popup message, every time they were activated by my custom script.
Providing a simple patching system for the player is easy compared to other alternatives. It will help keep the FM's at a reasonable size since the foundation is already in place for them. FM authors will only have to provide their own custom content. If that means they have made extra changes to the gamesys, then they will include that too.
You'll see what I mean when you fully complete a mission and package it.
deadman on 12/2/2006 at 00:10
Quote Posted by New Horizon
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. The 'player' doens't have to download the editor at any point, only the FM author needs the editor. The patch will bring their 'game' install, up to EnhancEd level, without them doing so much as pressing...'next' on the installer. ;) The system I'm using compares changed file versions against the original 'vanilla' files. It extracts the differences and stores them in the automated installer, making for a much smaller download. They will only need to download the patch once and it will also be uninstallable. When the time comes, it may be possible for the Garrettloader to run the patch automatically if it's in a specified directory.
The point was, installing the patch for T3EnhancED makes the changes to their hud/gamesys, correct? My question was, didn't it make more sense to make them install the minimalist project or tweaker rather than include it in your patcher/editor release? I suppose I'm not understanding how a hud is related to in-game tweaks, like fatigue, lockpicking, etc. If I'm understanding correctly, the patcher won't only make their machines compatible with enhanced FMs, but change the look of Thief as well, and I again question the reasoning behind that. It's about integrating
look with
function, and I believe they're two separate things.
As you say, when you try to please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody, but I believe people might be more picky when it comes to hud stuff as opposed to in-game functionality. Then again maybe there will be many who, after patching their system and installing an FM, complain about "Where did the lockpicking go?" or "I'm bummed out I can't outrun this guard!". Could it be similar to the DVD wars where you end up with products that are incompatible with one another? I'm wondering how consistent it might feel if one gets acquainted to certain functionality playing a non-enhanced FM, and then gets things switched around on them for enhanced ones.
Granted, you didn't modify a whole lot, but writing just spontaneously brought up that question of consistency. I guess we'll have to hope if we really wants the default on something we pick something that's ini related and not otherwise (because, if we want to play the FM, we'll need to live with it). It seems there's no easy answer to all this, but it's probably true most won't mind the subtle changes and will be too happy playing new content to care much.
It's too bad a tweaker/patcher can't be made that can alter any existing gamesys for game tweaks, so this dissension would never come up (separate editor/game from tweaks).
bukary on 12/2/2006 at 09:34
Quote Posted by deadman
The point was, installing the patch for T3EnhancED makes the changes to their hud/gamesys, correct?
Hmmm... I've never thought about this. If the patch makes the changes to player's HUD, then it was a really bad idea to build T3EnhancEd that way. :nono: I don't think many players will be very fond of this.
It's a pity, because T3EnhancEd has lots of very useful and great tweaks. It's a pity, because NH has put a lot of work into something that
could be used by many more people...
ascottk on 12/2/2006 at 17:18
If NH listened to the community like Kingers did we probably wouldn't have T3EnhancED so I applaud NH for this fantastic effort. Quite frankly I don't understand why the HUD is so bad because if a player gets emmersed enough the HUD will not matter. It's only a tool & tools should be transparent to the user like a good sound engineer. You should hear the performers & not the loud speakers. Instead of "hey, that sounds great" the audience should go, "hey, that's a great performance".
