33 réponses à ce sujet

[Morbane]

So I have been seeing some really awesome CC, scripting solutions, innovative work-arounds, and general theatrical creativeness these days.

 

But is the community's lust for "breaking" the engine resulting in overly complicated approaches and solutions?

 

Is the skill level exceeding the thrill of making the engine purr instead of roar?

 

I see thread with people keeping NWN2's back against outside-of-the-community criticism with statements equating to what the basic engine is capable of and a fully patched game's capabilities in vanilla mode.

 

So, is this creating roadblocks?

 

Or is it simply a renaissance of hyper-advanced NWN2 modders and the real architecture is yet to come? 

[Loki_999]

Well, i don't think the game engine has ever "roared".  But i'm one of those modders who tends to try and do new and innovative things with the engine.

 

The only thing i'm really wary about are:

 

1) Large complicated areas - because they are severe framerate killers for anyone without high end equipment, and can really contribute to lag

 

2) Scripts with too many/large loops that can fall afoul of TMI.

 

Otherwise, the engine is your playground.

[kamal_]

Im not sure I inderstand the question.

[BartjeD]

I think the question is whether custom content is beginning to reach the limits and is trying to force solutions and work arounds, or instead that better ways have been found, work arounds which do not feel forced. And then he is asking why, whether the skill of developers has grown so much over time, or whether it is something else.

 

It would probably be easier if we had an example to base this on. Were you thinking of a specific project Morbane?

[Tchos]

I don't really understand the question, either, or what these things are that you're referring to, Morbane.  Is BartjeD's interpretation correct?

[Morbane]

I just troll around lately - there are tonnes of examples - but to summarise:

 

AI - when will it be good enough? Scripting around hard-coded parameters seems an obsession

 

Encounters - How many ways can there possibly be to spawn them and not be doing the same thing but with more elaborate scripting?

 

Scripting around 2da editing - whhhy? lol thats what they are available for, ya? (oh no, another file to add to my hak... meanwhile 200 gigs of CC)

 

Making everything uniform across all projects - content that is - not other stuff. helpful, sensible in general (for new comers), but just not necessary for a good adventure - this one seems to be what i meant by "resulting in overly complicated approaches and solutions" it just seems to say that one unifying theory is really necessary - when we ideally imo would just pick the amalgam apart and take the useful bits.

 

ya - another opinion - i was just feeling analytical 

 

i digress because i have been writing for 6 hours in a novel and have had 6 large cups of coffee and its 1:42am - 

 

Morbane<-- sans plot anymore

 

 

BartJeD's got it right

[Kaldor Silverwand]

Scripting around 2da editing - whhhy? lol thats what they are available for, ya? (oh no, another file to add to my hak... meanwhile 200 gigs of CC)

 

Not sure if this is a reference to my SoZ Crafting Plus in which I modified the SoZ crafting scripts to work around the many bugs in the crafting 2DA files. But since the shoe fits...

 

I think the idea of modifying the standard 2DA files just doesn't scale well. There have been many times that people have gotten themselves hung up because they downloaded something that had a modified 2da file in it and that affected other modules they were playing or found that they had to merge files to play something else.  That just isn't something that typical players will be comfortable doing. They just want to play. Modifying 2da files is an obstacle.

 

When I started looking closely at the SoZ crafting I found that while the whole thing is controlled by a few scripts, which is nice, the accompanying 2das were very poorly done. Honestly I do not know how they got through any QA testing at all.  But since I was enhancing the scripts anyway it was a fairly simple matter to add smart code that corrected most of the 2da issues (for example, using standard case conversion functions to get around case inconsistencies in the 2da files).

 

Other folks have taken the opposite approach and modify the 2da files and leave the code alone.  Since the code is also buggy and needs to be modified anyway I don't really see the benefit in the approach of modding the 2das.

 

So, there it is.  I'm not sure if my SoZ Crafting Plus is being used anywhere outside of my own modules anyway, although I believe there was a PW that was using it at some point. But I am still going to endorse it as a simple way to add SoZ crafting into a campaign without requiring players to modify the standard SoZ 2da files.

 

Regards

[Tchos]

I still have those plans for your Crafting Plus that I told you about before.

 

Anyway, my only reason for being stingy with which 2DAs I edit is because I have to ensure my edits don't get overridden in my module by an outside mod like Kaedrin's (by putting them in a hak, which increases the difficulty for non-modding players to do things like merging), and optionally build in support for mods like that.

[Kaldor Silverwand]

I suspect now that Morbane was inspired by the discussion about modifying the spells.2da here.

[Loki_999]

Ah, well, in that case, one reason is that as we are free to edit many things to out liking, we all tend to do everything our own way, unless there is something available that matches what we want.  And because most of the stuff is basically free to use (sometimes authors request permission, but not usually) then we beg, borrow, steal, or just reinvent whatever we want.

 

However, that 200Gb you mention mainly comes from models, textures, or areas, all of which are quite heavy in terms of disk space. 2das and script? Meh, loose change compared with the others.

[Tchos]

I just want to know what the roadblocks and theatrical creativeness mentioned in the OP are, and what constitutes breaking the engine.

[kamal_]

Intentionally breaking the toolset is a phrase I posted not too long ago, so I think it's a reference to that.

More later, it's Friday! Wheeeee!

[Morbane]

I certainly was not taking a poke at the work people have done. Especially not modding the OEIs. I did however reference "recently" and "hak" rather than override. There is no specific example - just the trends as i perceive them.

 

silly analogy: would you use oil paints in a coloring book - it might be really cool when it was done. what i am trying - ever so failingly - to say is:

 

Effort vs outcome - is it still in proportion? Is all that breaking (yes a recent reference - not an accusation) and rewiring really generating that much of a difference? (this line excludes modelling - because, ya - awesome stuff to all)

 

I am just looking for honest responses - I have no intention of starting an argument - that always ticks me off when ppl pop in just to stir the pot.

 

I suppose it is a NWN2 toolset existentialism thing really. 

[Morbane]

I still have those plans for your Crafting Plus that I told you about before.

 

Anyway, my only reason for being stingy with which 2DAs I edit is because I have to ensure my edits don't get overridden in my module by an outside mod like Kaedrin's (by putting them in a hak, which increases the difficulty for non-modding players to do things like merging), and optionally build in support for mods like that.

 

Well, Kaedrins can be included into a unique set of 2da's - easily from my perspective - just use the version you like and build on that - i do know there are others but isnt it possible that every mod might not be necessary for any give module? It just seems implied that all of that content *must* be included, simply because it is considered really really good - but does that one story require it, or is the builder forcing it to fit into his/her plot?

 

again, this is just peeling things back for a moment. it is not intended to be a jibe or complaint or the ilk.

[Morbane]

ok i admit it; my writing binge hinges on existentialism in the current part of the story i'm onto this weekend 

[kamal_]

TLDR: Hardcoding is bad for a modding environment. People should work on what they want to.

 

Hardcoding is bad:

The trap interface is hardcoded. You can implement a gui interface for the traps, but can’t change the underlying mechanic. One of the things I wanted to do for Crimmor was introduce specific types of thieves tools that would only have a bonus against certain types of traps, for instance glass coated tools for dealing with acid traps and rubberized tools for electrical traps. In official PnP sourcebooks, these types of trap specific tools exist. The problem is that the remove trap action is hardcoded into the game engine, so there was no way to hook into it to make items for specific trap types. I suppose one might argue that having trap specific tools is just too much detail for people, but that is beside the point that I, as a modder, wanted to include trap specific tools, but I couldn’t because I ran into hardcoding. NWN is about being able to set up the world you want, and hardcoding something prevents you from doing that if you want to change something that is hardcoded.

 

On coding around 2das. I view this is making things easier for new modders and allowing greater compatibility. Many new modders are loathe to touch 2das for fear of breaking stuff, so a self contained system that can just be dropped in is more palatable. Also by avoiding 2das it helps ensure compatibility with other work that would be modifying the same 2das as the one’s people are coding around. For instance if I make a Sword of Awesome with custom special abilities that requires modified 2das to work, then the Sword is specific to my module and a character who got the sword can’t continue to use it in their next adventure. Sure you could drop those 2das in the override to make the Sword of Awesome work in another module, but what happens when that other author modified the same 2da?

 

Scripting around 2das does mean you need a few extra scripts, but those are so tiny as far as size goes compared to anything else it’s basically a negligible increase in hak size. You are trading a very small increase in module size for builder ease of putting things together.

 

I particularly try to avoid using tlk files, and when I alter systems I remove tlk references. I do this because the tlk is even more scary than a 2da for modders, the tlk is basically hardcoding as far as most are concerned. In SoZ the trade system uses tlk file references for the descriptions of the trade location. (“The city of Leilon is known for its great apples”). As a result if you wanted to change the descriptions (“Leilon is known for great oranges”) you had to edit the tlk. I changed the system so instead of a script referring to a 2da that then referred to a tlk line, the script references the already existing constants script for the system where possible. This removes the abstraction layers and makes things easier for the modder to modify things since things are in one location, they don’t have to check to see if what they want to change is in the constants, the 2das, or the tlk.

 

There would also be compatibility issues with tlk editing, for instance a custom tlk would make your work not compatible with Kaedrin’s work, annoying the people who like to play with that.

 

Uniformity: If you are referring to the master 2das and their associated content, these are structured such that you don’t have to use the gigs of content. All the content is included as appropriate in the package, but things are set up that if you don’t want some of it you just delete the associated folders. So for my tileset package, if you don’t want RWS Citadel but do want everything else, just delete the folders for Citadel. This gets back to the “why doesn’t NWN2 have a CEP” question. We now have a defacto set of master 2das for the major areas people want to modify, creatures, placeables, tiles, and all are set up in a modular fashion. I think the community is better now about making sure our work is 2da compatible/reserved as well.

 

People should work on what they want:

Modders certainly aren’t doing this for fortune and groupies. If someone wants to make a cooking system, so what? It makes them happy even if I don’t care about cooking systems. If someone thinks the game needs a cooking system and it makes them happy to code one up, go for it! It doesn’t make me happy… until next month when I discover that I really do need that system to make the adventure I want.

 

I think the “break” language in the original post may be referring to something I said awhile back about trying to break the toolset in various ways to see what would happen. It makes me happy if I can figure out how to do something that I was told “couldn’t be done”. Crimmor came about because a forum poster said an interesting module without combat “couldn’t be done” (I made them be a beta tester for their insolence J ). Adding jumping and the ability to change the wind for trees were likewise “couldn’t be done” things.

 

By poking at the edges we sometimes manage to extend the tapestry we have to work on. “What would happen if I tried to use a placeable as a tile” became the ability to use tiles as placeables. MokahTGS made her sky islands by using terracoppa to tear up the terrain sheet in unexpected ways. SGK73 used kivinen’s tools to figure out how to take one area’s walkmesh and apply it to another area, resulting in snow drifts, quicksand, and Crimmor’s plot critical Evercarpet magic item.

[Eguintir Eligard]

The stuff that breaks the engine is already inside it and I wish we had anything we could do about it.

 

Characters warping back to where you started walking from if you use keyboard movement instead of mouse

Ghost floating over triggers (thanks to the above)

character mode / keyboard being unusable because the PC keeps jerking to the left every time you stop walking

Painfully unresponsive AI (Infinity games and dragon age show you what a real AI does when you command a party to attack your target)

Visual effects totally ignore the delay amount so that they all explode/go off in one giant cluster **** rather than the careful sequenced event you planned.

 

As for doing more effort than you need... absolutely people have gone overboard. I almost got an aneurism listening to a post of two members putting in days and weeks of work to make torch lights go off or something like that... I swear some people like to put in work for works sake even for a minimal ambient return. I prefer to put big effort into the big bangs... and small into the small. But then again I work two jobs. Even if I didn't, there are other things in the world I like to do, so yes in my opinion effort is overstepping output in some cases. But what concern is it? If people want to do that it's their right. Personally as a player I would like to see it result in longer or more depth to the game play than a few ambiances I probably won't notice but again, not my call.

[Morbane]

However, that 200Gb you mention mainly comes from models, textures, or areas, all of which are quite heavy in terms of disk space. 2das and script? Meh, loose change compared with the others.

 

exactly 8D

[Morbane]

TLDR: Hardcoding is bad for a modding environment. People should work on what they want to.

 

Hardcoding is bad:

The trap interface is hardcoded. You can implement a gui interface for the traps, but can’t change the underlying mechanic. One of the things I wanted to do for Crimmor was introduce specific types of thieves tools that would only have a bonus against certain types of traps, for instance glass coated tools for dealing with acid traps and rubberized tools for electrical traps. In official PnP sourcebooks, these types of trap specific tools exist. The problem is that the remove trap action is hardcoded into the game engine, so there was no way to hook into it to make items for specific trap types. I suppose one might argue that having trap specific tools is just too much detail for people, but that is beside the point that I, as a modder, wanted to include trap specific tools, but I couldn’t because I ran into hardcoding. NWN is about being able to set up the world you want, and hardcoding something prevents you from doing that if you want to change something that is hardcoded.

 

On coding around 2das. I view this is making things easier for new modders and allowing greater compatibility. Many new modders are loathe to touch 2das for fear of breaking stuff, so a self contained system that can just be dropped in is more palatable. Also by avoiding 2das it helps ensure compatibility with other work that would be modifying the same 2das as the one’s people are coding around. For instance if I make a Sword of Awesome with custom special abilities that requires modified 2das to work, then the Sword is specific to my module and a character who got the sword can’t continue to use it in their next adventure. Sure you could drop those 2das in the override to make the Sword of Awesome work in another module, but what happens when that other author modified the same 2da?

 

Scripting around 2das does mean you need a few extra scripts, but those are so tiny as far as size goes compared to anything else it’s basically a negligible increase in hak size. You are trading a very small increase in module size for builder ease of putting things together.

 

I particularly try to avoid using tlk files, and when I alter systems I remove tlk references. I do this because the tlk is even more scary than a 2da for modders, the tlk is basically hardcoding as far as most are concerned. In SoZ the trade system uses tlk file references for the descriptions of the trade location. (“The city of Leilon is known for its great apples”). As a result if you wanted to change the descriptions (“Leilon is known for great oranges”) you had to edit the tlk. I changed the system so instead of a script referring to a 2da that then referred to a tlk line, the script references the already existing constants script for the system where possible. This removes the abstraction layers and makes things easier for the modder to modify things since things are in one location, they don’t have to check to see if what they want to change is in the constants, the 2das, or the tlk.

 

There would also be compatibility issues with tlk editing, for instance a custom tlk would make your work not compatible with Kaedrin’s work, annoying the people who like to play with that.

 

Uniformity: If you are referring to the master 2das and their associated content, these are structured such that you don’t have to use the gigs of content. All the content is included as appropriate in the package, but things are set up that if you don’t want some of it you just delete the associated folders. So for my tileset package, if you don’t want RWS Citadel but do want everything else, just delete the folders for Citadel. This gets back to the “why doesn’t NWN2 have a CEP” question. We now have a defacto set of master 2das for the major areas people want to modify, creatures, placeables, tiles, and all are set up in a modular fashion. I think the community is better now about making sure our work is 2da compatible/reserved as well.

 

People should work on what they want:

Modders certainly aren’t doing this for fortune and groupies. If someone wants to make a cooking system, so what? It makes them happy even if I don’t care about cooking systems. If someone thinks the game needs a cooking system and it makes them happy to code one up, go for it! It doesn’t make me happy… until next month when I discover that I really do need that system to make the adventure I want.

 

I think the “break” language in the original post may be referring to something I said awhile back about trying to break the toolset in various ways to see what would happen. It makes me happy if I can figure out how to do something that I was told “couldn’t be done”. Crimmor came about because a forum poster said an interesting module without combat “couldn’t be done” (I made them be a beta tester for their insolence J ). Adding jumping and the ability to change the wind for trees were likewise “couldn’t be done” things.

 

By poking at the edges we sometimes manage to extend the tapestry we have to work on. “What would happen if I tried to use a placeable as a tile” became the ability to use tiles as placeables. MokahTGS made her sky islands by using terracoppa to tear up the terrain sheet in unexpected ways. SGK73 used kivinen’s tools to figure out how to take one area’s walkmesh and apply it to another area, resulting in snow drifts, quicksand, and Crimmor’s plot critical Evercarpet magic item.

 

this would be a "yes" to the effort vs outcome question

[Morbane]

The stuff that breaks the engine is already inside it and I wish we had anything we could do about it.

 

Characters warping back to where you started walking from if you use keyboard movement instead of mouse

Ghost floating over triggers (thanks to the above)

character mode / keyboard being unusable because the PC keeps jerking to the left every time you stop walking

Painfully unresponsive AI (Infinity games and dragon age show you what a real AI does when you command a party to attack your target)

Visual effects totally ignore the delay amount so that they all explode/go off in one giant cluster **** rather than the careful sequenced event you planned.

 

As for doing more effort than you need... absolutely people have gone overboard. I almost got an aneurism listening to a post of two members putting in days and weeks of work to make torch lights go off or something like that... I swear some people like to put in work for works sake even for a minimal ambient return. I prefer to put big effort into the big bangs... and small into the small. But then again I work two jobs. Even if I didn't, there are other things in the world I like to do, so yes in my opinion effort is overstepping output in some cases. But what concern is it? If people want to do that it's their right. Personally as a player I would like to see it result in longer or more depth to the game play than a few ambiances I probably won't notice but again, not my call.

 

this would be a "no" to effort vs outcome

 

1:1

 

..............................

[Tchos]

Well, Kaedrins can be included into a unique set of 2da's - easily from my perspective - just use the version you like and build on that - i do know there are others but isnt it possible that every mod might not be necessary for any give module? It just seems implied that all of that content *must* be included, simply because it is considered really really good - but does that one story require it, or is the builder forcing it to fit into his/her plot?

 

Speaking only for my work, the module neither requires it, nor do I force anything from it to fit into the plot.  I support it when I can because people like it, and it wouldn't affect my module one way or another, except that sometimes people ask if my module is compatible with Kaedrin's.  This way, I can say "yes".

 

Effort vs outcome - is it still in proportion? Is all that breaking (yes a recent reference - not an accusation) and rewiring really generating that much of a difference? (this line excludes modelling - because, ya - awesome stuff to all)

 

For me, absolutely.  I don't do things if I don't think they're worth the effort.  I start with the idea of what I want to do, and I find a way to make the game do it.  It used to be a challenge, but now I think I have a pretty good idea of what can be done (nearly anything).  Others prefer to start with what the game easily allows, and work within that framework, which is another valid way of working.

 

If someone thinks the game needs a cooking system and it makes them happy to code one up, go for it!

 

That's what I was talking about when I said I had plans for Kaldor's Crafting Plus.

[Morbane]

2:1 effort vs outcome

 

[Tchos]

If you want to further plumb the depths of existentialism, ask what is the purpose of the existence of the modding tools.

[kamal_]

If you want to further plumb the depths of existentialism, ask what is the purpose of the existence of the modding tools.

Moddito ergo sum?

[Lugaid of the Red Stripes]

For my own part, I've put a great deal of effort into changing the AI and "how encounters are spawned", and I sometimes feel I'm pushing the engine to places it just doesn't want to go, but in doing so I've had many a pleasant hour scripting and playing, and I've come up with some gameplay experiences that just weren't possible with the vanilla scripts.

 

I can't really say, though, if all the effort was worth it.  All I know is that it seemed like fun at the time.