193 Antworten in diesem Thema

[Shaughn78]

I am cautious about both.

**edit** Figured I should put my vote at the top: Patch - No, Source Code - A very cautious maybe-yes **

As a builder I know the headaches of a new patch. All the toolset plugins will need to be updated to work. Lots of their creators have moved on to toher things. Members have been updating older plugins that have been abandoned, but it would be a huge workload and could render a number of valued tools non-functioning.
A patch will also create new bugs and glitches in community made modules. After every patch we would generally have to go into our content and correct various issues. Again, many builders have moved on and their content may not get updated. Do we want to risk potentially causing bugs in many of the great games that this community has built?

While a patch would be useful it has a potential to cause some issues community content.

Source code again may be useful, but a lot of control would be needed. Just look at the vault now how many different class packs are up there? This opinion has the ability to completely fracture the community. If multiple unofficial patches are created, due to builder priorities, this will greatly limit gameplay.

While I don't want to sound overly negative, I do want to see this game grow. I would say no to an official patch, but would being interested in the source code with control. I trust the members of this community more to create a product that will both improve the game, while causing the least amount of conflict with existing content.

Bearbeitet von Shaughn78, 18 August 2011 - 12:15 .

[bealzebub]

Source code.

I agree with Shaughn 78

Shaughn78 wrote...

 I trust the members of this community more to create a product that will both improve the game, while causing the least amount of conflict with existing content.

I think we would be better off having people who care do the work, than a company who just wants to do the least amount of work necessary to get paid.

[GhostOfGod]

Hmm. Well I guess first of all I'd have to ask, what all would a new patch fix that isn't already fixed/hacked by the community? And then what else, if anything, would the new patch add besides just fixes?

If the source code were released I think we'd see a greater amount of possibilities in the long term.

Really I just want ActionSit fixed.

Bearbeitet von GhostOfGod, 17 August 2011 - 06:39 .

[rjshae]

After reading the above comments, I'm leaning toward agreeing that neither one may make much business sense. Licensing of code can be tricky and expensive, if only because lawyers would be involved.

phpeachykeen's suggestion sounds better to me; just release enough information to let gamers reverse engineer some of the functionality and devise enhancements.

Bearbeitet von rjshae, 17 August 2011 - 07:04 .

[steelfire_dragon]

final patch and release the code....

[Dorateen]

rjshae wrote...

 if only because lawyers would be involved.

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
~Shakespeare

Harumph!

[tlantl]

Releasing the source code would help in fixing some glaring problems with hard coded conflicts and inconsistencies, How much damage this would inflict is the question though.

I don't see how releasing obsolete code would cause any harm since no one is using it or planning on using it in any future games.

[The Fred]

I would be happy if they just gave use a fix so that you don't need SoZ to play custom classes... and I guess they could increase the number available whilst they're at it.

[Berliad]

I'm only recently back in these parts, so I'm hardly up on what's been going on.

...but is releasing source code even remotely feasible? Obsidian may be "done" with the project, but I'd guess that there are all kinds of proprietary systems within the source code that may be used in future projects. Some of it might even come from other companies, like Bioware(??). Short of proving themselves to be awesome people, I'm not sure what Obsidian/Atari would stand to gain from this. And I do see intellectual property that they would lose exclusive control over. They also could potentially lose some of the small earnings they are gaining from selling their game on Steam and elsewhere, because someone could theoretically just post a version of the game for download for free.

I think it'd be great if it happened, but what little I know of this would lead me to think that this is a non-starter...

[foil-]

E.C.Patterson wrote...

I just vote "no" on sending any enthusiast in timeout at this stage.

Seconded.  In fact, there may be some people in the NWN1 community that could offer some input/experience if he posted the information there as well.

Also, after reading the following from Shaughn78, I'm convinced he has the most practical solution to prevent too many problems:

"Source Code - A very cautious maybe-yes"

Now whether I think its possible is a whole other can of worms and if not, maybe its best to be content with what we have and continue to build on it like has been done for the several years now.  I would just really love to see some new walking animation

Shaughn78 wrote...

I am cautious about both.

**edit** Figured I should put my vote at the top: Patch - No, Source Code - A very cautious maybe-yes **

As
a builder I know the headaches of a new patch. All the toolset plugins
will need to be updated to work. Lots of their creators have moved on to
toher things. Members have been updating older plugins that have been
abandoned, but it would be a huge workload and could render a number of
valued tools non-functioning.
A patch will also create new bugs and
glitches in community made modules. After every patch we would generally
have to go into our content and correct various issues. Again, many
builders have moved on and their content may not get updated. Do we want
to risk potentially causing bugs in many of the great games that this
community has built?

While a patch would be useful it has a potential to cause some issues community content.

Source
code again may be useful, but a lot of control would be needed. Just
look at the vault now how many different class packs are up there? This
opinion has the ability to completely fracture the community. If
multiple unofficial patches are created, due to builder priorities, this
will greatly limit gameplay.

While I don't want to sound overly
negative, I do want to see this game grow. I would say no to an official
patch, but would being interested in the source code with control. I
trust the members of this community more to create a product that will
both improve the game, while causing the least amount of conflict with
existing content.

Bearbeitet von foil-, 18 August 2011 - 04:53 .

[GhostOfGod]

As far as controlling the release of the source code. Is it possible that those few whom the code is released to could be made to agree to only work under "one flag" so to speak. They can call it NWN2 CPP(Community Patch Project) or something. With one person in charge. Someone who has proven themselves to be helpful and professional like one of those dunniteowl has already suggested. Seems like if that part was forced as a condition of the release of the source code then it could make things pretty simple for community updates.

Bearbeitet von GhostOfGod, 18 August 2011 - 08:40 .

[foil-]

GhostOfGod wrote...

As far as controlling the release of the source code. Is it possible that those few whom the code is released to could be made to agree to only work under "one flag" so to speak. They can call it NWN2 CPP(Community Patch Project) or something. With one person in charge. Someone who has proven themselves to be helpful and professional like one of those dunniteowl has already suggested. Seems like if that part was forced as a condition of the release of the source code then it could make things pretty simple for community updates.

And they would likely be doing it for free.  Although setting up a donation account for them to use on hardware, software, or martini requirements would go a long way to at least compensate them for their effort (wholey community funded).  OE would be getting free slave labour. What would they have to loose except a better product, good community relation reputation, and possibly a pool of young programmers that they could assess and recruit from.  It would be an Atari Neverwinter Academy.

Bearbeitet von foil-, 18 August 2011 - 10:31 .

[E.C.Patterson]

Berliad wrote...

I'm only recently back in these parts, so I'm hardly up on what's been going on.

Great to see all these "old" faces return. Welcome back Berliad.

[barfubaz]

GhostOfGod wrote...

As far as controlling the release of the source code. Is it possible that those few whom the code is released to could be made to agree to only work under "one flag" so to speak. They can call it NWN2 CPP(Community Patch Project) or something. With one person in charge. Someone who has proven themselves to be helpful and professional like one of those dunniteowl has already suggested. Seems like if that part was forced as a condition of the release of the source code then it could make things pretty simple for community updates.

Hrmm this could possibly be done I think, NDAs and agreements more akin to a contractor.

I believe this (or something close to it) has already been done in the past.

- Bar

Bearbeitet von barfubaz, 19 August 2011 - 12:30 .

[Eguintir Eligard]

The source code would only be as good as any documentation included.

Regardless, I vote source code because I highly doubt another patch would fix the retarded choppy movement and warping bug INTRODUCED by patches around 1.21 and which has made me quit using the game outside the toolset for 2 years running.

[AncientWolfgr]

I'm with dun on all fronts...

dunniteowl wrote...

I vote either one.

My priority would be:

1) Source Code released to members of the Community already shown to be making improvements to the game.

2) Failing that, in the alternative, a finalized 1.24 patch which includes and/or incorporates the work that Community members like Kaedrin, painofdungeoneternal, Skywing and others have done to improve the overall level of gameplay and options.

If models are considered at all, I would only ask that Obsidian would go back and apply tint maps that work for interior tiles, walls and items that currently cannot be tinted.  All the models already on the Vault are -- already on the Vault.

Explication:
If the code were released, the issues many have with the game could be addressed in a relialbe and responsible manner through Community efforts, championed by those that have already proven they have the 'chops' necessary to do this level of work in a professional manner.  I would trust that thoes provided the code would not be hasty or frivolous when it comes to choosing whom they would supply that code to in order to make the gaming experience more robust and flexible.

Having the source code could allow those members of the Community the necessary level of access to allow them to integrate and/or remove restrictions that they have found fixes and workarounds for.  Additionally, the code would provide folks like these Community members the necessary knowledge to make even better and more robust tools like an improved DM Client, possibly allow for more classes, more weapons, horses and other things that, without the code, we are left to muddling through and doing the best that can be done without access to the underpinned code.  With the code, things could actually be FIXED and I mean really, truly fixed to make the game do more than it does now and to make it more like we envisioned it should have been upon release.

And of course, if that isn't possible, I would hope that we could convince the Powers That Be that a final 1.24 patch should be released for both the Mac and PC versions of the game, including the powerful scripting and fixes that folks like Kaedrin, Reeron, RPGplayer, painofdungeoneternal and others have pushed out that goes well beyond simple workarounds and improvements to the game.  I would hate to see those fixes get completely toasted due to a final patch and then have to have those folks go back to the drawing board.  That would definitely suck big time.

dunniteowl

[nicethugbert]

Whatever Skywing wants.

[Arkalezth]

As others have said, in order of priority:

1) Source code.
2) Patch, if it doesn't screw things up and it adds something.

That said, I don't have much hopes put on neither (specially the first).

Edit: DNO, you could create an actual poll if you want.

Bearbeitet von Arkalezth, 19 August 2011 - 05:41 .

[Banshe]

I vote either one.

[foil-]

Banshe wrote...

I vote either one.

That's how I voted in the last election!

[dunniteowl]

Hate polls.

[azaz1234]

1- patch
1.5 - info
2- source

it seems downright irresponsible to leave a product as it is when it has SO many bugs. fix the bugs! THAT should be the patch. there are movement bugs, feats that don't work, camera bugs -- just to name a few. these need to be fixed, and they most likely could be -- w/o breaking plugins and other community-developed content. it's usually 'enhancements' that end up breaking things.

once the bugs are fixed, a certain amt of info [such as that proposed above re- the toolset, header info, symbols, etc.] would be a welcome addition and likely not incur the Wrath Of Lawyer$.

the optimist in me likes to believe a CEP-like entity could function well if source code were released, and, hey, firefox and other major open-source applications seem to be doing well, so from a logistical standpoint it doesn't seem impossible. i guess my big question is, what makes this eventuality seem like a real possibiltiy? have obsidian or atari even implied someplace that they're willing to do that? if not, it's only so much pipeweed.

but, yes, PLEASE fix the bugs.

[motu999]

Priorities:
1st: Source Code
2nd: Info about engine data structures
3rd: Patch, but ONLY IF compatible with "good" community content.

Source-code should be released to a small group (of say < 10), which controls the development process. This group should be open for new members (or old ones leaving). Whoever enters the group should be put under an NDA. No source-code (or products derived from it) should be allowed outside the group.

Information about the engine's data structures could be distributed to a larger (even open) group: Anything developed with this information would be either a new module (which uses the most recent game version) or a new plugin (a la NWNX, that patches the most recent game version). As standalone units these modules / plugins will be compatible with the most recent game version; they might not be compatible with other modules / plugins, but that situation is not new.

One would have to think how to make releasing the source/info/patch attractive for a company that wants to earn money. The extra money they can gain (by increased sales of the original NWN2) is IMO negligible. IMO the most important issue here is, how to ensure that any work done by the community wont hurt their sales on other (future) RPG-projects.