423 réponses à ce sujet

[The Amethyst Dragon]

I am considering doing something that will make me unpopular with one or two people.  Something that I would not normally think about...taking a NWN project out of the hands of the person "officially" in charge of it and making changes.

What I have been putting serious though into, is taking the CEP and bringing it back to life as the Community Expansion Pack version 3 version 2.60 (and onward).

I am, as always, a busy guy.  But I am still active in the community, I do know how to merge almost anything into a working hak package (tilesets & palette categories being my weak points), and I happen to have admin access to the existing CEP forum, CEP email account, and CEP account on the new Vault.

I would not normally consider the drastic step of taking a project out of someone else's hands, but the existing CEP officials have not been seen online in many months on their own server's forum and haven't bothered to log into the CEP forum in over a year.  And they do not log in here, the most active forums for the NWN community.

So...that's it then.  The 2nd mate is fomenting mutiny against the missing ship's captain (Barry_1066) and 1st mate (Malishara).

Arrr.

Modifié par The Amethyst Dragon, 09 mars 2014 - 05:21 .

[3RavensMore]

Ohhhh, now you've done it. ((backs off to watch the fireworks))

Good idea though, and a dragon should be able to handle a bit of scorching after all.  From a very minor member of the community, you get my vote.

Modifié par 3RavensMore, 13 janvier 2014 - 09:24 .

[henesua]

Wow. I am surprised, TAD, but pleasantly.

I put forth the idea of doing this last year, and received some unfriendly responses so lost interest in doing this at the time.

I have some ideas about how a CEP should be organized and would be happy to talk to you about this. Can't say I have time to dedicate to this, but organizing custom content is really easy.

[Shadooow]

If this is community project, the community that is we should have an influence of the project direction. I dont think CEP2 fullfils this requirement imo. Therefore I dont see a problem with a CEP3 and I think we could really use this, I see more and more PWs with CEP2 haks melt into their own haks often just to make easier use of it (sorting the content allows easier adding probably or idontknow).

Unfortunately, I think you now have to support all those bad decision because of backwards compatibillity reasons...

Better to start with a plan how it should look and work like.

Modifié par ShaDoOoW, 13 janvier 2014 - 10:23 .

[T0r0]

All feelings aside, CEP is a necessary evil that unfortunately is too deeply rooted in NWN. Hence why I personally chose the route I took in my small project.
That being said, I cannot fathom the timesink involved but you're no wide eyed hatchling, so no need to harp on that.
Whats your gameplan/objective ?

[Michael DarkAngel]

Grab hold of the reins, and let's go for a ride!!!

While I may not be good for much else and I don't have a lot of time to spare, I can help out on the tileset side of things.


 MDA

[Nevercallmebyname]

I'd be the first volunteering to help with this idea... If I was on my other computer.

[Bannor Bloodfist]

AD, great idea, but maybe, just maybe you should consider a complete re-name, IE instead of CEP3, make it ECP1 and be done with it. Expanded Community Project 1, based off old/antiquated materials, with vastly improved xxx.

If you were to take over CEP itself, I can practically guarantee that someone from the older folks will eventually create a serious issue with the name and/or content. However, if you completely rename the project while continuing the base theme, there should not be a real issue with it from my humble opinion anyway.

There were/are likely some items in the defacto-cep2 that are technically "owned" by the cep team(actual files/mdls that were created by their team not including any 2da edits as editing the original bioware 2da is already accounted for as public), however, 98% of what the rest of the content is/was has already been released to public domain and should have no issues.

<snip>

Removed various un-needed statements.

Good luck with your project, but I already see folks having issues with it down the line as the posts go.

Modifié par Bannor Bloodfist, 14 janvier 2014 - 11:06 .

[The Amethyst Dragon]

I'm not exactly sure of the plan yet.  I've just really started thinking about it since I pretty much made the decision this morning to start conspiring here with the rest of the crew (aka, all you other NWN community members).

I'm considering several broad ideas at the moment.

A) Continuing on with the same structure/progression of the existing CEP (v2.4)...using all the same haks and materials and just updating things as material is added.

Use all the CEP2.4 haks, but add a new CEP3 haks on top.  Backwards compatibility would be up to individual builders because I'm considering several optional "top" haks.

B1) "Standard CEP" - top hak "cep3_tophak.hak"
- just like existing version...contains CEP 2da files that reference existing CEP 2.4 content & newer CEP 3 content

B2) "CEP over Q" - top hak "cep3_top_cep_q.hak"
- CEP 2da files merged with Project Q 1.7 2da files, Q lines renumbered to work around CEP lines.
- requires: correct top hak to be used, CEP haks above Q haks in hak list
- downside: requires extensive item/creature/placeable appearance fixes for earlier Q-using modules if builder uses this option

B3) "Q over CEP" - top hak "cep3_top_q_cep.hak"
- CEP 2da files merged with Project Q 1.7 2da files, CEP lines renumbered to work around Project Q lines.
- requires: correct top hak to be used, Q haks above CEP haks in hak list
- downside: requires extensive item/creature/placeable appearance fixes for earlier CEP modules if builder uses this option

B2 & B3 would also use a merged .tlk file.  They would also both go to Q-style 3-part shields...the NWN toolset and game engine is remarkably smart on this one, automatically picking the same-numbered "bottom" part for shield blueprints that were previously single-part items.



For hosting/downloading, I'm thinking just having the files at an entry at the new Vault, compressed as .7z files (for smaller downloading).  Basically, CEP3 would start out as CEP2.4 with smaller "update" downloads for the newer stuff.  Not going to use a syncing program, just basic "download the new and overwrite the old", since there are folks (such as myself) that would rather have simple than snazzy.  Download options at the start could be "CEP 3.0 for those that already have CEP 2.4" and "CEP3.0 for those that don't have CEP 2.4".

I'd also make sure to keep a "2da lines changed each version" files, just to make merging with other custom content easier to track for folks like myself.




I'm also thinking that a series of polls as we go along would be helpful in making decisions, since the community is more than just me.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

As far as naming, I think I'd stick with CEP, for a couple of reasons.

1. There is content in there that was specifically given to the Community Expansion Pack (such as the C.R.A.P. and CCP materials). Keeping the name of the project, I can state that the material is still being used by the CEP, rather than coopted by another project.

2. People recognize the CEP and many know what it contains.

3. I want to, as much as humanly possible, retain backwards compatibility with CEP 2.1 to 2.4. The name rather implies that such is the case for the "default" CEP3.

4. Jumping to version 3 keeps the name, but clearly marks it as an update from version 2.4 and signals that there might be operational changes with "new management".

Modifié par The Amethyst Dragon, 13 janvier 2014 - 11:29 .

[The Amethyst Dragon]

Besides new materials going in as additions to CEP, I personally think we should open up older CEP content to updating with improved models/textures (while retaining 2da data and basic appearances/colors for them so that nothing breaks or descriptions don't become outdated just because of a model change.).

What do y'all think of that?  Definitely a departure from the old standard of not changing anything already included.

Modifié par The Amethyst Dragon, 13 janvier 2014 - 11:35 .

[Estelindis]

Did not see this coming at all! It's just a hunch, but I think that fewer hackles may be raised by this move than might have been in prior years, just because the game needs to be kept alive. Good luck, Amethyst Dragon.

[henesua]

I think it would be better to leave behind the need for CEP 3 to be compatible with CEP 2, but to have a parallel 2da and SET project retained from CEP 2 enables compatibility. For example the CEP 3 team could release a top hak like you mention above which allows CEP 3 to work with CEP 2 modules, thus making a transition easier. But it would be better to entirely rethink the organization of CEP, and to rethink what CEP does. Meaning new HAK names, new packaging, and an entirely new vision.

A couple points to get started
(1) CEP should work modularly like Project Q does rather than monolithically. So each CEP Hak can be taken on its own and just work - plug and play. Tileset HAKs, Phenotype/Clothing HAKs, Items, Creatures etc.... Or you can take all together if you desire. This is a superior design on all counts.
(2) CEP should focus on the critical content involved with character compatibility between modules before bothering with any other content. Phenotypes, Clothing/Body Parts, Items etc... And all of this should be organized to be compatible with Project Q.
(3) No overrides of default assets or potentially player optional content should be included. Instead all overriding content should be packaged in Patch haks and set up for players to install at their option. In addition the overriding patch HAKs could be themed for different styles. A modern patch HAK. A gothic patch HAK. A low fantasy medieval patch HAK. Etc... In each case you only use one patch HAK, but the look of the override is different. Other optional stuff like portraits, sounds, music etc.... should be handled as a subset of the CEP project and reorganized to be more useful and normalized (each portrait should only have one standardized name for example).
(4) CEP should consider theming its content as well, so that not all of it need be used at the same time. CEP Modern can be added to the CEP base for example.
(5) CEP should lend itself to customization and extension by end users as well as widespread community involvement. Documentation should be moved to a WIKI that community members can create accounts in and edit. Reserved lines are coordinated with others and published. And so on.

[kalbaern]

I was just reading the last few posts over on the CEP forum (made one of my own), then headed over here to see what juicy bits folks were working on still that I could add to my PW's haks next.

*sticks two cocked pistols in his belt, a cutlass in his teeth and grabs a rope to swing over*

I'm sure you know where I stand on this. Before seeing your post here tonight, I was going to PM you about this very topic. Under your leadership, I think you could gather quite a diverse and talented group to answer the call and ressurect the CEP. I also agree with adding merging options to make use of both the CEP and Project Q together.

Personally, I'd like to see the ball picked up right where CEP 2.4 left off and fix what is broken in it first, then finish or replace missing entries from the appearance lists and finish the last of their tileset fixes.

I'm still getting my own feet wet when it comes to modelling, but merging or creating haks, 2DAs and TLKs I can handle pretty well. I here for your use or abuse whenever.

[3RavensMore]

As a builder, what AD has said so far is very appealing -- creating a new iteration of CEP, while maintaining as much backward compatibility is possible. As possible is the key word I think; some incompatibility, if documented, would be fine. A complete reorganization and re-thinking of CEP as henesua suggests sounds far more like an all new project redone from the ground up. It would have no real relation or compatibility to CEP as it is now, and while that does have its appeal, sounds like a far larger project that what's AD suggested. Far larger projects have a habit of never seeing the light of day... Just something to consider.

Modifié par 3RavensMore, 14 janvier 2014 - 12:51 .

[The Amethyst Dragon]

3RavensMore wrote...

As a builder, what AD has said so far is very appealing -- creating a new iteration of CEP, while maintaining as much backward compatibility is possible. As possible is the key word I think; some incompatibility, if documented, would be fine. A complete reorganization and re-thinking of CEP as henesua suggests sounds far more like an all new project redone from the ground up. It would have no real relation or compatibility to CEP as it is now, and while that does have its appeal, sounds like a far larger project that what's AD suggested. Far larger projects have a habit of never seeing the light of day... Just something to consider.

It's possible to take both approaches at the same time.  It would just take some more busy-work to get and keep organized.

"Classic CEP 3" - use the CEP 2.4 haks plus CEP 3 "new content" and "top" haks above the existing CEP haks.

plus

"Modular CEP 3" - the existing content shuffled into new, modular haks based on content type, then using the same 2da files as the CEP 3 "top" haks.  Technically still backwards compatible...the existing content would still all be there if module builders choose to swap in all the modular haks in their module if they used CEP previously, since all the content would still be there.  It would just mean a new larger download for them and their players.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

And yes, multiple people have basically called for this type of action for a while. I did not support it before because it did look like there was still work happening on the CEP. However, after almost another year and a half since that time, and at least two (or is it three now) years since the last update to CEP...I couldn't sit idly by any longer.

Even if this ends up being just a few updates more (which I hope it isn't), it's still much more progress than we've seen.

[KlatchainCoffee]

Not an expert here, but it would be nice to see CEP in a better organised state, so there may be something to Henesua's idea if arranging the content in a modular format is not too difficult or too big of a 'mammoth' to tackle. Could a top hak really make it backwards-compatible with previous CEP incarnations?

Also, I like the idea of some of the poorer models being updated - and Q-compatibility, of course.


I would love to help out with this, though not sure I can do much more than test.

[3RavensMore]

Ahhh!  That sounds even better. 

[Hekatoncheires]

I gave up on CEP years ago for the same reason I gave up on my PRC aspirations; the bloat was unmanageable for me. However, I recall the time when it was -the- piece of custom content. Having a more streamlined, clean CEP would work out well for the community .

[meaglyn]

I like this idea a lot. The modular version especially seems like an excellent thing. I can be available to help as needed.

[Tarot Redhand]

I too like the modular approach. However, I wonder if it isn't time to cull some of the older content that is way past its sell-by date at the same time? To have a leaner, but higher quality compilation like the original CEP was supposed to be. Mind you there is one word that strikes fear into my heart. Documentation. Currently appalling. There isn't even a catalogue. And before anyone asks - NO I am not volunteering. *I* know just how much work it takes when you know what it is you are describing. When it is by someone else (OK Rolo when you get back from the flu, you are excepted), Eeeeek!

TR

Modifié par Tarot Redhand, 14 janvier 2014 - 02:26 .

[Bluebomber4evr]

I don't think it's a good idea to cull content, as that would break compatibility with earlier versions. Yes, there's clearly some content that should never have been added, but it's simpler to just ignore that stuff and not use it in your module/server.

[TheCapulet2]

This gets my seal of approval. After reading through all the CEP drama last night and touching on it on the CEP forums, I'm glad to see some real action, and by someone we can all trust to do something awesome with the project.

[henesua]

Tarot Redhand wrote...

I too like the modular approach. However, I wonder if it isn't time to cull some of the older content that is way past its sell-by date at the same time? To have a leaner, but higher quality compilation like the original CEP was supposed to be. Mind you there is one word that strikes fear into my heart. Documentation. Currently appalling. There isn't even a catalogue. And before anyone asks - NO I am not volunteering. *I* know just how much work it takes when you know what it is you are describing. When it is by someone else (OK Rolo when you get back from the flu, you are excepted), Eeeeek!

TR

This is why I suggest using a Wiki that the community can use for documentation, and project management. This spreads the work load out, and includes the entire community in the project. Doing so would bring the Community back to CEP which has been sorely lacking for far too long.

Also I must say that I am underwhelmed when I hear an interest in continuing to work with CEP 2 but calling it CEP 3. I think that is a mistake. If this is just about breathing life back into the existing CEP project, then do another point release of CEP 2. Thats fine. Some movement is better than none sure.

But do not call it CEP 3. The name CEP 3 should be reserved for a new direction with the project.