Discuss game development here, from a distinct game project to an accessible third-party mutator, down to the interaction and design of individual units if you like.
<emilio> is 1944 Liege V2 a new mod
<[S44]Nemo> map
<emilio> this is what it says in the info page
<emilio> Alright hereÔÇÖs a little masterpiece (all 90 MB of it) that was designed specifically for spring 1944 (yes ÔÇô this is a mod, try it sometime). The Map includes a village in the middle surrounded by hills and has a river flowing through it with 3 crossings along the way.
<[S44]Nemo> nixa means S44 is a mod
So for clarification:
smoth Oct 13, 2008 wrote:Spring started as an engine to run content(units etc) from TA. It is an engine with no specific game but many games you can play. It is a very flexible engine.
Spring has mods and games.
Mods: modification of the game.
Games: Projects that have all of their own content created from scratch. Most of the spring games are in progress because games take a long time to develop.
*A: What most people here call *A would be the projects like, CA, Xta, NOTA, BOTA, BA, SA, you see the pattern I am sure. They are all TA mods, meaning they are based on the game total annihilation. There is some controversy to this because the content was stolen from TA but most of us own TA so we don't care.
However, some of the devs wanted to argue that spring was using "mod"ules.
smoth wrote:correct, but the standing idea among the devs and a few of the spring people is that mod can also mean Module. For some reason they believe that the term will some how acquire a new meaning just because they wanted to be different. This whole thread will not change anything as the concept is dead set to them and frankly I am doing little more the repeating posts I have made in the past. It is just all pointless. Still I manage to post here, like a moron, each time this thread happens.
yes, to gamers mod means modification.
I have always felt this was just a lazy excuse to not rename the /mods/ dir and frankly... mods and maps really can go in just /content/ Feature request maybe?
anyway...
smoth wrote:because, mod is mod. When players come here they know that mod means modification.
I argued that the projects should all be called "packages" or "content packs" but no one has opted to end the confusion.
as I have said before, right now people see spring.. they think it is TA and see that most of the stuff is TA then they see a bunch of mods, most of which are ta mods and assume that mod means modification.
I feel strongly that spring would be more appealing if it could be described as an engine with several games and mods running in it versus an engine with several mods.
esp with the general assumption that spring is TA engine 2.0. It was that mass assumption that started my crusade against the title mod and moder.
that is why independent content packages should be called games and all of these heavily derived *a projects should be called mods.
Personally, if we're talking about the semantics of it all, since functionally from the engine's POV they're all the same... then it's probably most accurate to use 'mods', 'fangames', and 'games', depending on the legal status of the project. Those are all safe, non-offensive titles (imo) which accurately describe them and don't demean anybody's work.
It's not appropriate to refer to them as if they're all the same thing, imo, but feel free to use whatever language you want.
Argh wrote:Personally, if we're talking about the semantics of it all, since functionally from the engine's POV they're all the same.
ergh.... argh, what the engine calls them and what the players call them NEED to be different. The terms exist to differentiate a concept and if the players have no way to differentiate they will get confused.
I PROMISE that if you called pure a MOD people would constantly ask you what game do they need and why should they pay for your mod.
I'd call them all games. Balanced Annihilation is a game. Just because it's a modification of another game doesn't mean it's not a game. If I have a table and I paint it blue, it's a modified table but it's still a table. The fact that my change to it was a small modification is just confusing the issue.
I am not so much worried about if people want to call BA a game... although it is an AA mod, it doesn't require dependency so therefor it seems pretty reasonable to call ba a game.
The main thing is calling spring projects "mods" is problematic as it conveys two things:
1: The player needs to acquire a base game to play it. (see first quote)
2: The project is secondary to something else and in a player's eyes, that makes it less valuable and the perceived value of something does have an effect on it's desirability.
If I wanted to I could put my gundam files into springs base file, rename spring.exe to grts.exe and change the icon... for what? So you didn't see it as a content package run by this engine? in doing so I would effectively assert my project's own self importance and it is not something I feel cool with,
left over convention knorke, a bit of vestigial crap.
yar. We have to understand that the end user does not see what is going on internally. Also we cannot fight that which has become the established vernacular, while it may be a new convention that engines call the content packs internally mod... we cannot fight what has become the idiom.
well, technically all spring games are this, aren't they? For example games for the halflife engine all use their own modified .exe files.
So there is a difference, not in complexity or originality of the gameplay but how it works.
the end user does not see what is going on internally
To a point, he does. If you copy supergame.sd7 into your springfolder its imo more correct and less confusing to say "add a game-module to spring" then to say "install a spring engine game."
(yes, there are some installers but they do the same basicly)
so does the term game. Also, I represent the noobs:
noob downloads the game grts.sdz.
noob is confused: how i run this? Oh, its an archive. I'll unpack it. Wait, no .exe inside? Must be broken, thats so gay.
noob downloads the gamemodule grts.sdz
noob knows: its a module, i will need something to install something to run this game. oh, there is the download for the spring engine. noob is happy.
gundamRTS might have an installer but most other spring games do not.
spring is like lego, modular. usually games are more like playmobil.
I am saying its excactly the opposite of "rename spring.exe to grts.exe" or "highjack people's spring." For example i didnt like when some version of pure that came with its own installer and .exe messed up my spring settings.
knorke wrote:noob downloads the game grts.sdz.
noob is confused: how i run this? Oh, its an archive. I'll unpack it. Wait, no .exe inside? Must be broken, thats so gay.
paper thin.
the grts download page lists 2 files needed to play with the instructions. Don't strawman.
knorke wrote:noob downloads the gamemodule grts.sdz
noob knows: its a module, i will need something to install something to run this game. oh, there is the download for the spring engine. noob is happy.
WRONG-O. Noob does not know that MOD = MODULE... noob knows MOD means GAME mod.
Thank you come again. I am the one who had to explain that YOU didn't. You don't have to deal with noobs getting confused.
knorke wrote:spring is like lego, modular. usually games are more like playmobil.
I am sorry but the argument of "the user has to become educated to use this software" esp on things like actual lingo is not aceptable and would have you laughed at in any college classroom. As a developer it is your job to take the thought out, the end user has to learn enough as it is. This isn't about education it is about entertainment. Don't EVEN start the Edutainment debate.
knorke wrote:I am saying its excactly the opposite of "rename spring.exe to grts.exe" or "highjack people's spring." For example i didnt like when some version of pure that came with its own installer and .exe messed up my spring settings.
Which is why there is no damn installer for gundam.
I AM PUTTING THIS IN CAPS BECAUSE YOU ARE MISSING THE KEY ELEMENT AND I AM PISSED. THE END USER READS MOD AND DOES NOT THINK MODULE. MAYBE YOU DO BUT YOU ARE AN EDUCATED USER AND FRANKLY IT IS FUCKING STUPID TO ASSUME ANY INTELLECT ON THE PART OF THE END USER. K.I.S.S.U. I HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEIR CONFUSION. NOT YOU NOT THE DEVS.
There needs to be a name for the .sdz files, for example in the instructions on the evo-rts homepage its called "raw game data."
Well, imo that is just the same as "gamemodule." Or "gamepackage."
But if you call this files just games, noobs will be confused. "What kind of games requires the engine and lobby to be installed seperatly?"
For example: http://springrts.com/wiki/Gundam_RTS
"Here is the latest Gundam version 1.21" (=the link noobs click) links to a .zip that does not contain spring.exe
noob knows MOD means GAME mod.
So thats all he needs to know to see that these files will not run on their own and he will need an engine to run this mod/game?!
Also, everybody has to deal with this "noobproblem." Be it online in the lobby or if trying to play over LAN.
Ever since Doom, a package of content for a game engine has been called a "mod"... mostly because players aren't really familiar with engines that don't come bundled with a game. To them, a single engine-installation that runs multiple games is breaking out of a box they're used to. Calling it a "game" might make sense for things like Kernel Panic which comes as a stand-alone installer, but when it's a package you copy into the Spring Engine folders, calling it a game is counter-intuitive.
Obviously, that mentality is inaccurate and unfair to guys that have created packages that can be distributed as stand-alone games... but it's also perfectly reasonable to naturally use the terminology that is familiar to them.
It's a wash. Personally I'd focus on making all the official literature say "game" instead of "mod", but don't get grumpy when newbs use the wrong one.
@knorke - if you want to call the file something, call it a package. That's what it is, that's what people call it throughout the community. Calling it a mod is misleading, because mod, in the gaming world, is short for modification.
Mod = modification.
Any other definition is like if I walked up to a Chinese guy wearing damaged armor and called him a Chink. Yes, it _could_ be interpreted the other way, but most people are going to take the most obvious meaning.
OK, ok, I see where there are various issues here, not sure that we can all agree on some things, but here are my current thoughts.
TL:DNR version:
1. Words like "game" are mainly semantics. The status quo ante in the areas where legal stuff actually does matter is fine.
2. Spring still mainly fails at marketing.
3. If Smoth thinks the names of directories are a big deal, it's OK.
4. Installers / front-ends are a problem area; this is not new news.
1. There is a definite need to keep a line between "game" and "mod", for legal reasons. This has nothing to do with the engine at all, it's a legal distinction and some CYA.
Legally, the only difference between Gundam or SWS and OTA mods is that they're committing piracy, you guys are just infringing (in SWS's case, with the explicit blessing of LucaArts, and I'm sure Bandai is pleased with Gundam). That is why I suggested "fangame"- it is a in-between category, and it suggests positive values, i.e., fandom, behind the work being done. Anyhow, that was just a thought.
I think that, from the project's standpoint, it is entirely correct policy to make a distinction between Open Source, free-as-in-beer games, games that are, for whatever reason, closed-source in some respect but owned by the maintainers... and games that are not only closed-source but which cannot, legally, ever be opened by the maintainers.
Lastly, I don't have a problem with the Open Source games getting top billing, etc., that's entirely in accordance with the project's goals and I support that. IOW, the status quo on this issue is fine.
2. On the "Spring's a game" issue for newbies: this is certainly true, and it's a branding problem, largely caused by the Project's continuing poor marketing support. Spring, as a project, is doing a much better job handling branding for the engine. I really like the "About" text, for example, it's well-written and accurate. I like the icons, and other details we've used to enhance the branding for the engine. I think that has been pretty successful.
That said, it's one part of the larger problem, which is that we still haven't been able to broaden the audience. This has many different causes, some of which have been discussed, but many of them are, in fact, being worked on by various parties (SP support, campaigns / missions, better frontend UI, etc.).
However, the marketing support for games on this engine is still terrible. If the goal, as was stated, was to market Spring Project as an engine, I don't see that we've been very successful there, either. We haven't had an exceptionally large number of new people pick up the engine to develop their projects lately- I think that this is because we aren't providing the right marketing- i.e., "hey, wanna build a game? This engine rocks, and this is why you should invest your free time here".
And I still think the front page isn't being used for games to find an audience, like it should be, and has instead had all of the problems I predicted it would: low turnover of new content, favoritism and "filtering" that is biased against newbie projects (can't imagine a rough project looking for players while the content's still raw, people would whine that the screens look terrible, etc.). This dampens overall interest in the engine, imo, and makes the Project look less active and attractive. We all lose, when marketing is controlled by parties who really don't have a lot of interest in success, or know how to do it.
I think that it's fair to say that since I and Forb walked away from it, Spring's marketing has been largely moribund, without active leadership or effective effort.
I know that will cause some howling, but go look at the numbers, folks, and tell me that the indie games, free or not, have been doing really well, given the approach that was finally made policy. To have effective marketing, you need people who are talented and motivated, and the Project shot itself in the foot, as usual.
3. On the directory stuff... IIRC, doesn't Spring scan all sub-directories for game and map archives when building ArchiveCache, which uses explicit paths? So, if you wanna use a "game" folder, because that seems like the right thing to do, go right ahead. If you want an empty directory with that name in stock Spring installs, I think that's perfectly acceptable to me and to everybody else.
4. Yes, there are still multiple issues in terms of game installation, once games go beyond the fairly rudimentary one-archive approach. That is a complex problem, and due to certain design elements of the Spring engine, it's simply not possible to deliver a one-file game that is anything like complete in a commercial sense.
Getting further on that requires some fairly non-trivial coder time, and while there have been various things going on, not all of them public, most of these efforts have not been entirely successful, and I honestly wish that we could all act together on this and arrive at a common plan and platform.
That said, I am less than totally sanguine about this actually occurring, because it has to do with the other reasons why coders do engineering work here, besides being cool guys working on something awesome, and I don't currently see how to get everybody motivated and willing to work together. I've kinda lost track, but last time I checked, there were at least 4 projects to build UIs for people to do all-in-one-place things with Spring. All four use different languages, let alone openly-discussed goals and standards, and at least two of them aren't entirely public. I don't know whether it's worth spending what little political capital I have around here stomping around and trying to get people interested in an open discussion and some clear goals on this.
