Blastfrog's shitty suggestions thread

[Wrkncacnter]

This thread is meant to serve as a central place for Blastfrog's suggestions, so they can more easily be ignored.

[Blastfrog]

Uh huh. And what's your problem with me? My suggestions are quite sensible, actually. I'm honestly quite irked by your insulting tone.

They're separate threads so that discussion on particular aspects may remain focused. I don't care if these changes aren't overnight, I just wanted to open discussion about them, is all.

I'd prefer to see this thread deleted. It's unnecessary and downright rude.

[General Tacticus]

Wrk, ridiculing people for requesting basic features like FOV options is kinda counterproductive. How is anyone supposed to prioritize what to work on if nobody gives input on what needs improvement?

to be fair, some of the feature requests could be merged into fewer threads, but further clogging up the board doesn't get you anywhere. Unless you just want to watch the world burn, of course.

[Windbreaker]

Unless you just want to watch the world burn, of course.

ding ding ding

[General Tacticus]

If thats what gets you off, I guess...

[treellama]

We used to have a whole section of SourceForge for feature requests which made them easy to ignore. Now that's gone and look what happened.

Don't be mad at Wrk for trying to help the developers!

[Blastfrog]

You've gotta be kidding me. My suggestions are not worth ignoring. I'm not sure that ignoring user requests is a good attitude to have.

There's a lot of ideas I have, but I only posted those that I feel would genuinely benefit the end-user.

[RyokoTK]

You realize that these suggestions are extremely non-trivial to implement, would require a significant amount of work and probably would entail major changes to how the engine operates at the most fundamental levels, right?

Aleph One as a project isn't trying to have every feature possible.

[Blastfrog]

I thought what I suggested was mostly trivial, except for the mouse stuff. I'm not asking for stuff like slopes, or floating polygons (called 3D floors in Doom-based engines). I'm asking for a more solid end-user experience by tweaking existing features (again, not counting the mouse stuff).

The FOV thread for example, would involve removing a broken option (trivial AFAIK, just treat the flag like it's on, no real behavior change necessary) and exposing the FOV as a config option instead of a script option (perhaps slightly less trivial, but I can't imagine it being too much work).

The software rendering stuff, I want old options that used to be there to be restored. Unless the software renderer has changed in a significant way leading to the removal of those options in the first place, I imagine this to be trivial.

[General Tacticus]

Honestly, I'd have thought that FOV options would have been a higher priority than ruining the save interface. especially considering how trivial it actually is.

Having mouse-look that doesn't suck seems like it would be worth the time, even if other things need to be put on the back burner. It isn't a feature, it is bare minimum functionality. (And the #1 thing every zdoom player I have met complains about. (like seriously, it is a huge turnoff for most people)

[RyokoTK]

I thought what I suggested was mostly trivial, except for the mouse stuff. I'm not asking for stuff like slopes, or floating polygons (called 3D floors in Doom-based engines). I'm asking for a more solid end-user experience by tweaking existing features (again, not counting the mouse stuff).

The FOV thread for example, would involve removing a broken option (trivial AFAIK, just treat the flag like it's on, no real behavior change necessary) and exposing the FOV as a config option instead of a script option (perhaps slightly less trivial, but I can't imagine it being too much work).

The software rendering stuff, I want old options that used to be there to be restored. Unless the software renderer has changed in a significant way leading to the removal of those options in the first place, I imagine this to be trivial.

Aleph One is open source. If you think it's so trivial, fork the project and do it yourself.

[treellama]

My suggestions are not worth ignoring.

Well! You clearly don't know how development works (used to work--case in point!) on this Free software project, you obviously don't understand how the engine works at a technical level sufficient enough to inform your suggestions, and in my opinion you don't have a great grasp of the overall user base either. So, respectfully, unless you can actually implement any of your suggestions, I don't see any reason to address them.

If you can, you know where to send patches.

[Blastfrog]

As for the grasp on the userbase, I'm more concerned with expanding the userbase to include more people outside of the Marathon community. Mouse control that isn't objectively bad and an FOV slider are two things that would vastly improve this.

And no, I'm not much of a coder type (I can code a little bit though), so I'll admit ignorance on how trivial this stuff would actually be. I do feel I could understand detailed explanations of why they're non-trivial. Mind informing me how my suggestions are non-trivial? I'd legitimately like to know.

And perhaps I may attempt a fork, if I can muster the motivation to.

[patrick]

I'm I'm I I'll I I me my I'd I I

[Blastfrog]

I'm I'm I I'll I I me my I'd I I

Oh, right, that one time there was a major problem with the engine crashing. That totally wasn't worth reporting at all, right?

I'm getting sick of the antagonistic attitude some people have around here. No wonder this place is so small.

[patrick]

you want it to be one way

but it's the other way

[PerseusSpartacus]

I agree with Blastfrog - the Pfhorums have been made quite ugly by the rude and childish behavior of certain individuals, particularly irons and W'rkncacnter, with no small amount of support from others such as RyokoTK. Yes, maybe Blastfrog's suggestions were not the best. Yes, maybe he didn't realize that to meet such recommendations would require a titanic amount of work. But that still is no reason whatsoever for the insulting response he has been given - an appropriate response would've been to professionally explain why his suggestions are unrealistic.

So, please, in the name of civility, just stop.

[treellama]

you want it to be one way

but it's the other way

Was starting to worry you 4GOT

[Blastfrog]

I found a coder who is likely willing to implement my suggestions. Treellama, are you willing to accept the "virtual mouse" and FOV config option features if they are done well?

Note that the virtual mouse would in no way alter the existing gameplay mechanics, but instead act separately and would drive the original mouse mechanics to go to the target position as quickly as possible.

[philtron]

I can't tell what's sarcasm or what's sincere on these forums anymore. I've reached the point where everything I read on here doesn't seem real and everyone just seems like an actor in a play. Have I become Clique now?

[treellama]

I found a coder who is likely willing to implement my suggestions. Treellama, are you willing to accept the "virtual mouse" and FOV config option features if they are done well?

Note that the virtual mouse would in no way alter the existing gameplay mechanics, but instead act separately and would drive the original mouse mechanics to go to the target position as quickly as possible.

Mouse maybe, if done well. What you describe sounds like it will be even boatier than what's there, but after all my attempts to explain the issue, perhaps the only way you'll understand is to experience a third party fail firsthand.

FOV config, probably not. FOV in Marathon is traditionally under the control of mapmakers.

[treellama]

Have I become Clique now?

You founded CLIQUE.

[Blastfrog]

I was thinking the FOV setting would be a base modifier. Mappers defined FOV would still take effect, proportionally scaled by the user's modifier.

I firmly believe that FOV is something the users should have control over, and this is a common view among the general gaming community.

If the user wants the intended experience, they can keep the modifier at the default. They should not be forced to keep the default, however, that's up to them if they want the intended experience.

I don't want to come across as demanding or assertive, just stating my view in the hope that you might be willing to consider the reasons for user control.

Consider that the limit vertical view option already provides a degree of user control in this regard.

[RyokoTK]

Did you know that you can just write an MML script that controls FOV?

FOV is presumably not an option in the game because of the existence of a powerup that changes FOV. But you can put an MML script in your Aleph One folder like such:

Code: Select all

<marathon>
  <view>
    <fov normal="##"></fov>
  </view>
</marathon>

The default value is 80 but you can put in whatever you'd like.

You can also give yourself a toggle-able fisheye effect with <fov tunnel="##"> and totally cheat in multiplayer.

[Wrkncacnter]

Did you know that you can just write an MML script that controls FOV?
You can also give yourself a toggle-able fisheye effect with <fov tunnel="##"> and totally cheat in multiplayer.

I knew you were cheating. You probably learned this from the infamous cheater, Bobwithkeycard.