423 réponses à ce sujet

[Rolo Kipp]

<frantically rewinds...>

Eh? What?!
Go, team, go! <the old man is saying he's one of those who has your back, big purple>
I said that <*raven raspberry*>

<...the fresh, ink-smudged scroll to the beginning>

[Wall3T]

i use a customized version of cep 2.3 to be honest. back when CCP had a compatibality with cep i kept the .2da list (removed it basically) and added my own content with a fresh cep module. That way i can always have people download just the custom haks, and not any extra cep.

im sure im not the only one who does this, but it allows me to add content that i want without having to wait for a new cep release. So actually i still "technically" use cep 2.3 and no intentions of upgrading.

As everyone says, the team has been very defensive about the work they do (in the past at least). As understandable, they been accused and bitten several times. We as a community seem now to demand that the old team step down, since it appears they wanted to ignore us.

I honestly feel that Project Q was produced as a result of this, even though there goal is set on a different path (quality over quantity, etc). Were all responsible for what happens to our community. Im all for a new cep update, whatever happens we all have your back TAD

[henesua]

o0Kye0o, I see Project Q and CEP as entirely different animals.

Project Q is a group for artists to create things specifically for. Its a group of artists working on a high quality set of assets with the intent that they work together as a cohesive package aesthetically.

CEP is entirely different in that it is an effort to collect and organize all of the community's work into a single package. In this CEP should be much more a task of organization, and nothing in it should thus be exclusive.

Modifié par henesua, 14 janvier 2014 - 08:56 .

[The Amethyst Dragon]

oOKyeOo: I personally use a lot of haks for my PW...CEP2.4 + Project Q 1.7 + around 10 of my own haks crammed full of my own work and others' stuff not found in the big hak projects.

I added CEP quite a while after my WP got started, so I've already had to renumber 2da lines and stuff from CEP to move it around my own stuff. Then I later added Project Q, and that required moving a bunch of the Q stuff around both my stuff and the CEP stuff (both stuff I moved and stuff I didn't).

My 2da files, particularly appearance.2da, are a huge mash-up of information from multiple sources. Even now, I "fill in the holes" as I make or add new content for my players.

The great thing about a CEP upgrade...I will make sure it stays backwards compatible so that those players that download the new version can still play your module/server. I'm planning right now to keep the old hak structure (the "classic" version in my tentative plan) as the main download, simply adding new/updated content to the existing works so that the "default" CEP installation means automatic backwards compatibility with no extra work from builders.

No removing anything from CEP that someone may have already built with.

[Pstemarie]

<Just clearing up a misconception>

The creation of Project Q had nothing to do with CEP. It was and always has been about providing an outlet for the creativity of the artists involved. I was there at the beginning when Project Q was just this crazy idea Lord Rosenkrantz had and I can tell you that the only time CEP came up in the conservation was when we were talking about how NOT to do things.

EDIT - The text in italics is MY personal experience with Project Q's initial stages and does not reflect what may have been said to other members of the Community in conversations I was not privy to. Much of what I know from meetings was conveyed to me through LR and not from direct involvement in said meetings.

Project Q is about quality and creating a unified aesthetic look for the game without ramming game mechanic changes down people's throats. That's why Project Q will never include custom classes, new spells, etc. If you want that, use the Grimoire, ShadowM's HR Ruleset, or PRC.

Modifié par Pstemarie, 15 janvier 2014 - 01:53 .

[The Amethyst Dragon]

henesua wrote...

o0Kye0o, I see Project Q and CEP as entirely different animals.

Project Q is a group for artists to create things specifically for. Its a group of artists working on a high quality set of assets with the intent that they work together as a cohesive package aesthetically.

CEP is entirely different in that it is an effort to collect and organize all of the community's work into a single package. In this CEP should be much more a task of organization, and nothing in it should thus be exclusive.

The CEP team has added new content as well as collected it over the years, and had made updates to some older content (problems with some models and such).  So it's not been just collecting/organizing for many a year.

That "CEP-made content" is what the old team might make a fuss about (besides the whole "CEP belongs to Barry" claim) as we progress.  And I would venture to say that if it comes to having to sacrifice something, work that was exclusively made by Barry_1066 and Malishara would be cut from newer haks (but not older CEP files).

[The Amethyst Dragon]

Pstemarie wrote...

That's why Project Q will never include custom classes, new spells, etc. If you want that, use the Grimoire, ShadowM's HR Ruleset, or PRC.

Though it's been requested of CEP (several times) over the years, I don't think new spells, classes, feats, skills, etc. are a good idea for CEP, either.  In fact, I think it's a really bad idea.

Almost anything scripted like that is pretty much gauranteed to cause tons of bugs and/or headaches, and such things should really be coded individually for any module/server using them.  Then, what happens to the poor module builder that isn't experienced with 2da editing that just wants to use CEP, but doesn't want to allow a bunch of new/unbalanced-for-that-module/unknown spells and such?

Modifié par The Amethyst Dragon, 14 janvier 2014 - 09:23 .

[henesua]

The Amethyst Dragon wrote...

henesua wrote...

o0Kye0o, I see Project Q and CEP as entirely different animals.

Project Q is a group for artists to create things specifically for. Its a group of artists working on a high quality set of assets with the intent that they work together as a cohesive package aesthetically.

CEP is entirely different in that it is an effort to collect and organize all of the community's work into a single package. In this CEP should be much more a task of organization, and nothing in it should thus be exclusive.

The CEP team has added new content as well as collected it over the years, and had made updates to some older content (problems with some models and such).  So it's not been just collecting/organizing for many a year.

We're talking about different things here, TAD.

I made the distinction above between CEP and Q to clarify the purpose of the CEP project. In my view we should be focusing on organization of content so as to make it available in a comprehensive package. Creating new content exclusively for CEP is contrary to the original mission of the project and is NOT in the best interests of the community.

[Rolo Kipp]

<hesitates a little...>

I disagree slightly, though I agree far more than dis-.

Community Expansion Project.
My take (always *been* my take, even before it was ever called the CEP :-P ); Community created assets to expand the utility of Neverwinter Nights. Er, 1.

If (and I am absolutely thrilled it looks like we are) we are talking about a new initiative to revitalize community created expansion to NwN1, honestly, I think the distinction of new content versus existing content is rather moot.

As I have said <and muttered and whined> what we really need is a working package manager that will allow access to each asset individually and *not* force gigabyte downloads down anyone's craw (they particularly tend to stick in my little Starbucks pipeline, er, craw). What Pain of Dungeon Eternal was working on and what Merricksdad describes are both utilities toward this goal. <time to bring it back to the ot, boss>

I'm not really wandering off topic here. A CEP v3.0 is a great and overdue idea. Considering The Amethyst Dragon has personally generated nearly as much neat new stuff as the previous CEP team *collected* I can't think of anyone better to spearhead this. But I think, in the planning, we, *all* of us still interested die-hards, need to look at where we want NwN1 to go and how we're going to get there. And I think that means more than just collecting a new and bigger batch of assets. I think it means designing that collection to work with a real package manager that will allow old mods to *upgrade* to new content. Not designing the package to be ever more complex as it does the whole contortionist job of trying to remain backward's compatible, but to make the tools for the backwards mods to take advantage of new content. If they wish.

In my super-secret j project, that is what I'm aiming for. The tools to make old content work, not the increasingly absurd job of making new stuff work with content no longer supported.

So. That said, I'm going to be in this thing, one way or another. But I don't care to waste time on backwards compatibility (more power to you, TAD!). I haven't cared about CEP's newest incarnations since I discovered Blizzard IP in their stuff, requiring me to scrap 3 months of work. Those guys are *serious* about protecting their WoW IP!

In other words, just put me on the focus group working on tools and maybe a few assets and don't bother me with ancient history :-)

Edit: To agree with TAD here; I also do not think CEP is the place to game-play modifications. It is the place for assets. My opinion.
Edit 2:

henesua wrote...
...In this CEP should be much more a task of organization, and nothing in it should thus be exclusive.

Yeah, I agree with that.

<...before jumping in>

Modifié par Rolo Kipp, 14 janvier 2014 - 10:22 .

[Killmonger]

Thereby: any cross content from sources like WoW should be excepted from the future CEP and placed into a "use at own risk" hak

My takes for the other issues:
A trifecta of joyous community involvement

Q > quality. Codi, DLA and others <Only superior detailed content for user's needs
CCC > general content creation <A proving ground for ideas related to a monthly theme (aka "fun")
CEP> Legacy and accredited content adapted and codified into modules for future new user's

Those that aspire to exceptional detail could be designate Q
Contributions to a theme for education and fun are often CCC
Works that are accredited, that actually expand the useful scope of Nwn, are placed into Legacy for any future user in CEP (perhaps the reason that we continue to vote)
Other content works are because of an author's own motivations and could be considered (by the community at large) on an individual basis for inclusion into the Legacy compendium.

The Cep has a role to play for the future, but only if it remains relevant to our continued sense of Nwn gaming evolution. (Therefore backward compatible and modular)

[Wall3T]

i agree with killmonger. There is still possibly some content in the cep that perhaps got integrated without its creators permission as well (i could be wrong on that though, i just remember it was an issue during 2.2 to 2.3). or any liscened content. i see no reason it couldnt be included within the update, but as a separate source material for anyone to use.

and for everyone else yeah i kinda know the difference between cep and project q the ccp and cmp are also entirely different projects as well. but ill still view them as a package similar to the cep. in the respect that its easier for me to understand it that way.

Modifié par oOKyeOo, 14 janvier 2014 - 11:31 .

[FunkySwerve]

Pstemarie wrote...

<Just clearing up a misconception>

The
creation of Project Q had nothing to do with CEP. It was and always has
been about providing an outlet for the creativity of the artists
involved. I was there at the beginning when Project Q was just this
crazy idea Lord Rosenkrantz had and I can tell you that the only time
CEP came up in the conservation was when we were talking about how NOT
to do things.

I call horsedroppings. I was in one of the initial meetings where Q was discussed. I also brought in acaos, in order to discuss the possibility of an full-on community patch, rather than just a hak. The amount of  pure vitriol and contempt directed at CEP was what cause me to bail on further discussions.

Furthermore, and as I have pointed out before, the introduction of a competing good in a marketplace of this kind (rivalrous goods where part of the value of the good is breadth of use) is a net loss, so the creation of Project Q by its nature had repercussions for any and all other community packs, though not nearly as bad as I initially feared, based on comparative downloads. And yes, I get that you couldn't do everything you wanted to do and remain fully CEP-compatible.

That said, I admire Q's work. I'm really not looking to stir up that particular hornet's nest again, but I'm also disinclined to let that particular claim go uncontested.

As to the topic of the thread, I would personally prefer to see CEP make a resurgeance, since it's still by far the most commonly downloaded hak. I wasn't thrilled with the decision to include non-cc-related content, like the spawning system, but the CEP is still incredibly useful to the community. I'd also like to see the updater revivified, and I've discussed it with acaos in the past, though we're both too busy at present to do much about it.

Funky

Modifié par FunkySwerve, 14 janvier 2014 - 11:57 .

[henesua]

FunkySwerve wrote...

Pstemarie wrote...
I was there at the beginning when Project Q was just this 
crazy idea Lord Rosenkrantz had and I can tell you that the only time
CEP came up in the conservation was when we were talking about how NOT
to do things.

I call horsedroppings. I was in one of the initial meetings where Q was discussed. I also brought in acaos, in order to discuss the possibility of an full-on community patch, rather than just a hak. The amount of  pure vitriol and contempt directed at CEP was what cause me to bail on further discussions.

There's no contradiction in either of those statements. More importantly I think its better to let old battles go as we move forward.

FunkySwerve wrote...

I'd also like to see the updater revivified, and I've discussed it with acaos in the past, though we're both too busy at present to do much about it.

I think shifting these efforts toward what Pain and Merrick are working on could be more useful. Any possibility of that?

[Killmonger]

There is a fourth component fundamental (ok, "a tetrad of joy") that also deserves attention:

Scripted Assets

We all will need to consider the great importance of NWscripts
ShadowW's tireless work (and the 1.7patch team) needs to be acclaimed.
The original programming had many loose ends which needed to be rationalized

I am not (yet) a good scripter, but the systems that are now available are tremendous strides from the original Nwn. The CEP systems are somewhat of a mystery and need to be made more accessible and mainstreamed into legacy use (Traps for an example).
I am not the person to lead a unified scripting initiative but the CEP contains many useful scripts which have been updated and surpassed by other individual authors in the last two years+.

We must not overlook "the magic" that ties all this wonderful other content together.
There are just too many systems which are disparate and need to be aligned (?, mapped per se)for ease of use for newbies, even just some realistic documentation and/or description of the Cep's scripts would be useful. Going forward, some framework for the future expansion of the "basic scripts" needs to be exposited.

[Proleric]

I tend to agree that CEP, Q and CCC serve different purposes, so maybe better to focus on CEP in this discussion. That doesn't preclude CEP from selecting content from CCC (or Q, where licensing permits), just like any other content source.

[Pstemarie]

FunkySwerve wrote...

I call horsedroppings. I was in one of the initial meetings where Q was discussed. I also brought in acaos, in order to discuss the possibility of an full-on community patch, rather than just a hak. The amount of  pure vitriol and contempt directed at CEP was what cause me to bail on further discussions.

I can't comment on what LR may have said about CEP to other people and in discussions I was not privy to. I also won't deny he had considerable contempt for CEP, but MY understanding has always been that Project Q wasn't created because of CEP. It was more an alternative response to the apparent lack of artistic direction and cohesiveness in CEP.

I do agree that its kind of a moot point and really off-topic. Best to keep the discussion to CEP and its future incarnation...

The most blatant problem I see at the moment is one of scope. You guys seem to be heading in so many different directions at once that it's hard to keep track - CEP2 reincarnation, CEP3, utilities to merge content, compatibility packs...

My 2-cents - stick to one thing, be it CEP2 update or a new CEP3. Forget maintaining compatibility with other projects such as Q. Let individual builders worry about what they plan to do if they want to use CEP with Q or CEP with CTP and so on. When the initial work is done, go back and revisit the side roads.

Modifié par Pstemarie, 15 janvier 2014 - 01:55 .

[Tiberius_Morguhn]

I'll venture to throw my hat in the ring to help with placeables and what-not. I stopped upgrading at CEP 2.1 for my own projects. I know that the CEP has several of my older works and I can assist with updating those, as well as updating/fixing other placeables and adding content.

[Michael DarkAngel]

Pstemarie wrote...

The most blatant problem I see at the moment is one of scope. You guys seem to be heading in so many different directions at once that it's hard to keep track - CEP2 reincarnation, CEP3, utilities to merge content, compatibility packs...

I believe this is the round-table discussion point of the process, and the community at large is voicing its opinions on what needs/should be done.

That shouldn't be silenced. It needs to be written down, organized, distributed to the available volunteers and tracked accordingly.

It's true, not everything voiced is needed right away...  Not everything voiced will get done...

But the opening discussions should not be limited to any one area at the onset.


 MDA

[Bluebomber4evr]

Killmonger wrote...

There is a fourth component fundamental (ok, "a tetrad of joy") that also deserves attention:

Scripted Assets

We all will need to consider the great importance of NWscripts
ShadowW's tireless work (and the 1.7patch team) needs to be acclaimed.
The original programming had many loose ends which needed to be rationalized

I am not (yet) a good scripter, but the systems that are now available are tremendous strides from the original Nwn. The CEP systems are somewhat of a mystery and need to be made more accessible and mainstreamed into legacy use (Traps for an example).
I am not the person to lead a unified scripting initiative but the CEP contains many useful scripts which have been updated and surpassed by other individual authors in the last two years+.

We must not overlook "the magic" that ties all this wonderful other content together.
There are just too many systems which are disparate and need to be aligned (?, mapped per se)for ease of use for newbies, even just some realistic documentation and/or description of the Cep's scripts would be useful. Going forward, some framework for the future expansion of the "basic scripts" needs to be exposited.

I think it is best to leave scripted assets in some sort of optional hak, or better, an erf download, if scripts are included at all. The CEP's scripts have not always been that consistently great for performance, and a bunch of unused scripts will just take up space on a large PW server. (Note this is not a slam to the stuff you listed above, just talking about the scripts included in past incarnations of the CEP).

Over at PotM, we tossed all of the CEP's scripts in favor of our own stuff, but I can see the appeal of an optional script download for things like the old placeable traps from the CEP 1 or the C.R.A.P. stuff.

Modifié par Bluebomber4evr, 15 janvier 2014 - 02:27 .

[Wall3T]

Proleric1 wrote...

I tend to agree that CEP, Q and CCC serve different purposes, so maybe better to focus on CEP in this discussion

i mightve had something to do with that :innocent:,but it presents a point i wanted to do. everyone is starting to get worked up and defending these projects. which is always a logical emotion, but Is it a good idea to update or make a new cep? i made my stand to say i will, but are we ready for it? what happens when/ if the cep team were to re emerge and stake legal claims?

maybe we could come up with a list of things to prepare ourselves for such an event, and maybe HELP THE AMYTHEST DRAGON get this going! instead of fighting over whos better than who or "clearing up misconceptions". lets do that on another topic please

[The Amethyst Dragon]

Pstemarie wrote...

The most blatant problem I see at the moment is one of scope. You guys seem to be heading in so many different directions at once that it's hard to keep track - CEP2 reincarnation, CEP3, utilities to merge content, compatibility packs...

My 2-cents - stick to one thing, be it CEP2 update or a new CEP3. Forget maintaining compatibility with other projects such as Q. Let individual builders worry about what they plan to do if they want to use CEP with Q or CEP with CTP and so on. When the initial work is done, go back and revisit the side roads.

Agreed.

My preference would be to just start updating CEP.  Call it version 2.6 (Barry_1066 supposedly had a version 2.5 in the works) or something instead of 3.0, whatever.  Getting too ambitious and completely reworking the CEP will just leave many builders in the dust.

[Pstemarie]

Michael DarkAngel wrote...

Pstemarie wrote...

The most blatant problem I see at the moment is one of scope. You guys seem to be heading in so many different directions at once that it's hard to keep track - CEP2 reincarnation, CEP3, utilities to merge content, compatibility packs...

I believe this is the round-table discussion point of the process, and the community at large is voicing its opinions on what needs/should be done.

That shouldn't be silenced. It needs to be written down, organized, distributed to the available volunteers and tracked accordingly.

It's true, not everything voiced is needed right away...  Not everything voiced will get done...

But the opening discussions should not be limited to any one area at the onset.


 MDA

Well said and true. 

Sometimes I forget I'm not dealing with the bureaucracy at my workplace. At my work, when someone makes a proposal, the administration appoints a committee to analyze it to death. Then, by the time the committee is done with its analysis no one remembers what the original proposal was. So what do they do next? Appoint a second committe to analyze why the first failed. Yes, I work for a government agency - the Dept. of Education to be exact.

Modifié par Pstemarie, 15 janvier 2014 - 02:50 .

[Pstemarie]

The Amethyst Dragon wrote...

Pstemarie wrote...

The most blatant problem I see at the moment is one of scope. You guys seem to be heading in so many different directions at once that it's hard to keep track - CEP2 reincarnation, CEP3, utilities to merge content, compatibility packs...

My 2-cents - stick to one thing, be it CEP2 update or a new CEP3. Forget maintaining compatibility with other projects such as Q. Let individual builders worry about what they plan to do if they want to use CEP with Q or CEP with CTP and so on. When the initial work is done, go back and revisit the side roads.

Agreed.

My preference would be to just start updating CEP.  Call it version 2.6 (Barry_1066 supposedly had a version 2.5 in the works) or something instead of 3.0, whatever.  Getting too ambitious and completely reworking the CEP will just leave many builders in the dust.

Seems like you have a solid direction in mind, my friend. I say roll-on! 

[henesua]

The Amethyst Dragon wrote...

My preference would be to just start updating CEP.  Call it version 2.6 (Barry_1066 supposedly had a version 2.5 in the works) or something instead of 3.0, whatever.

I think thats a great idea, TAD, and why I suggested it here and on the WIKI. CEP 3.0 needs to be discussed quite a bit before that work begins.

I created a page on the wiki called CEP 2 fixes in the hopes that people would start looking at what needs to be done to "complete" CEP 2.

[The Amethyst Dragon]

henesua wrote...

I created a page on the wiki called CEP 2 fixes in the hopes that people would start looking at what needs to be done to "complete" CEP 2.

Look at that...already starting progress.