423 réponses à ce sujet

[The Amethyst Dragon]

I added my idea for a possible new logo.  Feel free to add your own.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

Still looking for volunteers to spend some time pulling creature appearance credit info into the excel file I linked to 2 posts before this one.  Packaging the documentation with CEP would be nice, I think.

 

I'm working on 2da files a little today, and came across an inconsistency that I'd like to fix.  For creature appearances, some models in the toolset include a reference to the source in the appearance name, such as (CODI), (WRM), etc.  Many, many others do not.  Same goes for some placeables and other things where the appearances show up in a drop-down in the toolset.

 

So, the question is, keep the source references in the appearance drop-downs, or remove them so they just appear in the credits documentation?  If we keep the source references, I'd like to get them added to other content included in CEP.  If we don't, the info will still be available, but I'll remove it from the appearance names just to be consistent.  I posted a simple poll on the wiki in regards to this to get community input: http://nwncep.wikia....i/Various_Polls

[Bannor Bloodfist]

Still looking for volunteers to spend some time pulling creature appearance credit info into the excel file I linked to 2 posts before this one.  Packaging the documentation with CEP would be nice, I think.

 

I'm working on 2da files a little today, and came across an inconsistency that I'd like to fix.  For creature appearances, some models in the toolset include a reference to the source in the appearance name, such as (CODI), (WRM), etc.  Many, many others do not.  Same goes for some placeables and other things where the appearances show up in a drop-down in the toolset.

 

So, the question is, keep the source references in the appearance drop-downs, or remove them so they just appear in the credits documentation?  If we keep the source references, I'd like to get them added to other content included in CEP.  If we don't, the info will still be available, but I'll remove it from the appearance names just to be consistent.  I posted a simple poll on the wiki in regards to this to get community input: http://nwncep.wikia....i/Various_Polls

 

Since this is NOT a project I am helping with, you can obviously take my opinion as just that, an opinion, and do with it as you wish.

 

I am one of those that NEVER deletes data, unless absolutely necessary.  That has been the issue with the old CEP in the past, they would have folks willing to add the data, but others chose to just delete it because it pointed out the facts that not everything was covered.  In this particular instance, you have "additional" data that is easily read by the end user, right from the start, instead of having to dig into a huge credits.txt file to find the information.  Most of us, wouldn't take the additional time needed to find that data, at all, much less if it required looking through hundreds or thousands of lines of boring text in a readme type of file.  Here, you have at least some of the extra crediting information already laid out for you... why delete it?  Yes, it does point out that other bits do NOT have that extra information, so you could handle that in other ways, either by adding that additional data in for those items missing it, ignoring the fact that extra data is missing for those bits that do not have it, OR removing all of it.  The removal would mean that the data is effectively lost forever, as no one wants to dig back into a huge project and attempt to ADD back in data that once existed.

 

Anyway, good luck with the project, do as you see fit.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

 

Since this is NOT a project I am helping with, you can obviously take my opinion as just that, an opinion, and do with it as you wish.

 

Aha!  But you are helping with this project.  Right now, by giving your thoughts and opinions on it!

 

I am one of those that NEVER deletes data, unless absolutely necessary.  That has been the issue with the old CEP in the past, they would have folks willing to add the data, but others chose to just delete it because it pointed out the facts that not everything was covered.  In this particular instance, you have "additional" data that is easily read by the end user, right from the start, instead of having to dig into a huge credits.txt file to find the information.  Most of us, wouldn't take the additional time needed to find that data, at all, much less if it required looking through hundreds or thousands of lines of boring text in a readme type of file.  Here, you have at least some of the extra crediting information already laid out for you... why delete it?  Yes, it does point out that other bits do NOT have that extra information, so you could handle that in other ways, either by adding that additional data in for those items missing it, ignoring the fact that extra data is missing for those bits that do not have it, OR removing all of it.  The removal would mean that the data is effectively lost forever, as no one wants to dig back into a huge project and attempt to ADD back in data that once existed.

 

Anyway, good luck with the project, do as you see fit.

 

Well said.  And your well thought out response to my request for input means I will weigh your opinion more heavily when the decision is made.

 

As far as the data being lost, I'd still have it in the excel file I use to edit and generate 2da files (new info is currently going into 3 new column at the end that record which CEP version the content is added in, the creator name/handle, and the Vault URL the content was downloaded from), and will include it in the CEP documentation.

 

Those source columns are why I was asking for one or more folks to go to the CEP forum and pull in that source information from the "Bestiary" thread, since many of the creature model sources are documented there, just not in a single handy column formatted file.  And if I get that information, it's not difficult to whip up a formula in excel to get the creator names added to the appearance drop-down automagically.

 

 

 

Now, speaking of content creators...if you have content in the CEP already and your name isn't already showing in the toolset appearance drop-downs, send me a PM with the content that's yours so I can get you into the documentation and possibly right into the actual 2da files.

[Shadooow]

There's a point of what Bannor says, but I voted no regardless. The credits in comments are imo better choice. If the source will be also in the excel file the better.

[Malagant]

Having the post-appearance name credit doesn't bother me as much as the "[CEP23]" that was added as a prefix. I have no issue with the descriptors like (Dynamic), [Unique], [Mounted], etc. Back when I used to build off of CEP, I invariably always removed the [CEP23] and [CEP24] to keep everything relatively alphabetical. It just seemed an unnecessary addition.

 

In this particular instance, you have "additional" data that is easily read by the end user, right from the start, instead of having to dig into a huge credits.txt file to find the information.  Most of us, wouldn't take the additional time needed to find that data, at all, much less if it required looking through hundreds or thousands of lines of boring text in a readme type of file. Here, you have at least some of the extra crediting information already laid out for you... why delete it?The removal would mean that the data is effectively lost forever, as no one wants to dig back into a huge project and attempt to ADD back in data that once existed.

 

It the data remains in or is added to the credits documentation (which I would figure is included with the package), I'm not sure how that equates to "lost forever". It's still there, it's just been moved to a convenient place. Sure, the drop-down is convenient enough but, from a pragmatic viewpoint, most of us veterans are already familiar with who made what of the more popular models and I would venture to say that many newer people using the package probably wouldn't care enough to find out where anything came from, not to mention some of the longer descriptor names edge that credit from visibility on the drop down list anyway.

 

I would think someone not wanting to be bothered with reading through thousands of lines of text, PDF pages, or a spreadsheet is probably intelligent enough to click on "Edit"/"Find", type in a word they are looking for, and click "Find Next". Since I haven't memorized the appearance line of every creature or placeable model in the CEP, I frequently have to use this method to avoid scrolling all the way through a currently possible 6275 lines of 2da, and not once have I asked myself why they didn't also add the appearance.2da line in the appearance drop-down so I could avoid the extra 3 clicks to find that one line.

 

For this reason I also voted no because, if I go to look for a resource on the drop-down, I'm not all that concerned with who to give thanks to or who's defunct website to not visit that no longer exists and prefer a more clean presentation. If I want to know who's credited then it's no more trouble for me than having to find a particular resource within a 2da, something people are more likely to do than seek out a credit.

[Pstemarie]

One thing I was thinking of doing for Q 2das is moving the drop down index (we use [Q] and some others) to the end of the name. That way it restores the alphabetical listing and still has the credit in the menu listing. You could do this for CEP easily enough too.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

Having the post-appearance name credit doesn't bother me as much as the "[CEP23]" that was added as a prefix. I have no issue with the descriptors like (Dynamic), [Unique], [Mounted], etc. Back when I used to build off of CEP, I invariably always removed the [CEP23] and [CEP24] to keep everything relatively alphabetical. It just seemed an unnecessary addition.

 

I've already removed that particular text for when the next version of the CEP comes out.  It annoyed me as well.

 

One thing I was thinking of doing for Q 2das is moving the drop down index (we use [Q] and some others) to the end of the name. That way it restores the alphabetical listing and still has the credit in the menu listing. You could do this for CEP easily enough too.

 

Yup, mostly alphabetical is the way to go.  Any source/credit info will/would go at the end of the appearance names. Certain "tags" would remain at the front for a few (such as (Dynamic) and [Mounted]), but I'm a fan alphabetical and organized.  I wish we could do the same with tails and wings, but that can't happen without a toolset modification.

[Shadooow]

Actually the CEP23 and CEP24 tags were quite usefull to see the new content added in new version... Quite good feature to say - though maybe a tag [New] at the end of the name would be enough.

[FunkySwerve]

Actually the CEP23 and CEP24 tags were quite usefull to see the new content added in new version... Quite good feature to say - though maybe a tag [New] at the end of the name would be enough.

Agreed. Made it easy to find newer content, for those of us who have been using the set for years. I'm not too fussed by the removal now, either, though, since the difference between the old and the new is far less than it used to be - it's all 'old' now.

 

Might want to put a prefix on the next set of added materials, though.

 

Funky

[Zarathustra217]

Personally, I'm not a fan of the prefixing either. When you are building something, you are usually focused on acquiring the right content, independent on whether it's old or new.

 

If we just make sure to document all the new creature and placeable appearances in a text file, people can always check that if they want to see what's new. Perhaps we could even make sure that the demo module included more explicitly showcased the new content. The existing demo-modules seem more oriented toward players than builders, who really just want a quick overview of the new stuff available.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

If someone has started going through that forum link I gave (for all the appearance credits), no need to continue.  Decided to just do it myself and I've got them all from those posts.  Still a bunch of creature appearances that don't have the creator/URL, but it's quite a start.

 

Placeables, on the other hand, I've only gotten through ones that were referenced in the 2.2 to 2.3 documentation included in the CEP.  All the NWN2 stuff from thegeorge, plus a few other ones.  So, step right up and volunteer folks.

 

I'm putting all of this information into an excel file to make it easier to add to appearance names or to just copy and paste back out for a website table or plain text.  Don't want plain text myself, since it's easier to organize if I've got it right in the same excel worksheets with the actual 2da data.

 

I'm leaning toward including the creator(s) names at the back end of each appearance name in the toolset, since it would be really, really easy for me to add and would not change the alphabetical order of things.

 

Spoiler

[Bannor Bloodfist]

<snipped>

 

I'm leaning toward including the creator(s) names at the back end of each appearance name in the toolset, since it would be really, really easy for me to add and would not change the alphabetical order of things.

 

Spoiler

It is sooo sad that the toolset itself did not provide such a way of organizing things.  Life would have been sooo much better for everyone, user and builder, content creator etc.  Oh well, as the old saying goes "if wishes were fishes we would never go hungry..."  Speaking of food, I think I better go fix my meal for the day... been up for almost 24 hours and all I have had is 5 large mugs of sweetened coffee... not good for digestion or healthy thinking either ...

[Rolo Kipp]

<inserting his foot...>

 

I do really like the idea of merging Q with CEP.  I'd be interested in making it at least *three* of us stubborn, er, dedicated souls investing in this.

In fact, I'm interested in talking, or at least exploring the possibility, so long as we maintain the memorial conditions (primarily thinking of CTP Generic Doors), of incorporating the CTP tilesets (with the exception of CTP Babylon).

 

I feel very strongly about returning the CEP to an open community project. I feel very strongly about reducing the "fragmentation" from non-compatible but very desirable community projects. And I feel very strongly about continuing the work of the CTP.

 

I have offered before, mostly in passing, but I offer again to provide dedicated forums for major community project development: CEP, Project Q, CTP, CCP

 

I may be an absent-minded old wizard (TAD, did you finally get those files for Dark Sun? :-( ), but I think time has shown my dedication to... us :-)

 

<...in the narrow, dangerous place between frame and door>

[Lazarus Magni]

*Hugs Rolo*

[Lazarus Magni]

*Rolo says "eww... get away from me you weird looking cat."

[Lazarus Magni]

*Hugs Rolo harder* Love you m8. Keep doing your thing.

[Lazarus Magni]

P.S. Looking forward to CEP 2.5 or 3.0 whatever it is called. If it comes out, I will certainly advocate for installing it on our server.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

I have been working on this as time permits.  It's not the fastest project in the world...but there is progress going on.

 

The last few days I've been working on content additions (mainly placeables and creature models) that have been voted on, and I've fixed/recompiled a few older models that needed it  In many cases the process looks like:

1. download the content

2. extract content from archives/haks

3. convert tga textures to dds

4. rename files when there are conflicts with existing content

5. strip animations from models that don't need them and supermodel them to virtually identical models to cut down on file sizes (useful for appearances that share everything except a texture)

6. compile the models (sometimes after running through CleanModels for problem ones)

7. edit 2da file(s)

8. document content creator & source URL

9. update the 2da changelog and poll pages on the wiki

 

So, a lot of what previous CEP people have done, but we just didn't hear about it. 

 

And when 2.60 is released, then I get the joy of merging new/updated 2da lines into my own PW's ones, with lots of shuffling since I'd already used a bunch of "CEP_RESERVED" lines (since before I started this little mutiny I assumed CEP was just dead and would have no future use for them).

[The Amethyst Dragon]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and give an ETA on CEP 2.60 as 2-3 months from now...so sometime between mid-July (when my kids go back to school after a short summer of driving me further into insanity) and early September (when I turn 39).

[Tim.G]

if you turn 39 in September and NWN came out in 02 then NWN was out when you were in your twenties ( a mere youth).  If you can survive one more year and play into your forties then you will have had NWN as a source of joy for three of your decades.  Not too shabby for what some would call "a computer game".  Real life intervenes constantly but brief windows reflect back to a simpler time slaying skeletons in some obscure dungeon or another...

[The Amethyst Dragon]

if you turn 39 in September and NWN came out in 02 then NWN was out when you were in your twenties ( a mere youth).  If you can survive one more year and play into your forties then you will have had NWN as a source of joy for three of your decades.  Not too shabby for what some would call "a computer game".  Real life intervenes constantly but brief windows reflect back to a simpler time slaying skeletons in some obscure dungeon or another...

I'll be using this game in one form or another for a very long time in the future.  I'm a D&D guy, and there is no other game that can compare to NWN (besides NWN2, which my older laptop can't handle) where I can make up adventures and customize things like I want (modify the gui, add and modify landscapes, add completely new and original art assets, add new classes, completely remove existing lore (my game isn't in the Forgotten Realms), customize treasures and creatures, etc.). I can foresee using it years from now when my kids are all grown and out of my house (14 years, 3 months to go...) to still play D&D with them from afar.

 

So, yeah, when it comes to D&D on the computer, I've been way more than spoiled by BioWare's (and the community's) Neverwinter Nights.

[Verilazic]

Omg, this is so awesome what you guys are doing.

 

Sorry for jumping into the middle of this without a clue, but where can I go to get a clue and find out how I might be able to contribute? My time and skills are very small, but every little bit helps right? I'll just read through the whole thread, but I figured I should ask first if there's someplace I should start or that has everything summed up. Time is precious after all.

[Gruftlord]

hello, i was thinking about releasing a few patch-hak files, with content i collected from various sources. they contain creature and city reskins, cep armor models, AD Weapons and things like this. while i can claim no credit for the original work, i took great care to make everything as conflict free as possible, and even made a custom cep file, that resolves conflicts with the current cep (e.g.: creature overrides, that do not match with current cep creatures: i put overrides for the cep creatures into the cep2custom file).

 

so while i did this for myself, and enjoy using it (it makes reinstalling an ease, and my NWN never has looked better), i thought others might like it as well. Why i post this here is this: did this project collect some sort of list of custom content, that may be rereleased under certain conditions? i think if i had to track down all authors, of which i used content myself, to see what i could release and what not, it may not be worth the effort. but if the CEP3-project has collected such a list already, i might give it a look.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

I do not know of a list of content that CEP has used or has permission to use that also includes permission for others to rerelease.

 

I am working to add credit and source URLs to the documentation for the new version. Some of the contents' creators are still around, some are not, and contacting creators that have left the community could be difficult if someone doesn't know their email address(es)...the old Vault "email the author" function broke quite a while back and will never be fixed.