Author Spring RTS Book-Packt Publishing

[knorke]

this is just automatic troll spam.
i even got an pm but nothing personal, the same text as here.

[Hobo Joe]

Yeah I did too

[hunterw]

lol

[SwiftSpear]

I'm still amazed this is going forward. It doesn't make any sense. First of all, Spring is not a very mature project, not to say that it's not good software, but it still has more than its fair share of holes and gimmicks, and that means its subject to quick changes, which could make any portion of an instruction book completely obsolete. Second, the developmental process is... not exactly simple. There are a lot of hoops that have to be jumped through to get everything working, things aren't all laid out in a logical fashion, etc.

But most obviously, Spring is small - very small. There's what, maybe 1500 regular players? 3000 semi-regulars? That's a pretty small number and that's an optimistic estimate. How many of those people are at all interested in development? 5%? 10%? Probably even less. Then considering the wiki, although it has holes, has a lot of the information needed, certainly enough to get someone started with developing for Spring, why would someone buy a book? How would a book make enough money off of this community to pay for itself? It would take a huge amount of time for whoever was writing the book, and they would PROBABLY never get paid for it, which means they might as well just write for the wiki, that way more people will read it rather than someone else making money off of their work.



If someone actually wants to do it, well more power to them. I just think it's a little(read:way way way) too ambitious and optimistic and pretty much a waste of time.

Spring is fun, albeit frustrating to work with at times. If someone has the passion and expertise to get behind this project, I fully support them.

I'll buy a copy :)

[knorke]

How many of those people are at all interested in development? 5%? 10%? Probably even less.

I would guess at least 50% of the forum users and long time players have at least tried making a map, widget, mod, model or other things.

[SpliFF]

Wow. Just wow.

Only this community could come up with a 6 page thread that can be accurately summarized in 3 sentences:

1: It's too early to write a book because things are changing too fast.
2: Shut up, it isn't. You suck. The book could be about ... other stuff.
3: Feed the wiki.

I mean come on. Can't you people just for once agree that AF is correct. You know Spring development, modding and even gameplay are moving targets. If you need any proof just look at the various tutorial and manuals floating around (including the unfinished one I wrote only a year ago) and ask yourself honestly whether you would still find the advice accurate and whether you'd find what the author intended if you followed any of the links.

I went through this process last year while starting modding / development and while writing my manual and I assure you that new developers will regularly run into obsolete (or disputed) information. Probably 25% of the information I dug up was still talking about TASpring and discussing legacy formats and limitations.

Can you really condone asking anybody to actual PAY for that? Can you guarantee a published volume would be any better? Can you even guarantee it won't be worse, since most printed publications are static or released in yearly updates?

Say this book was actually published a year ago and I bought it today, what am I likely to get?:

* A discussion of TDF when new mods are all using lua.
* A discussion of COB when new mods are using lua unit scripts.
* A discussion of startscripts, which have been replaced by lua onGameStart()
* A discussion of CEG where new mods are using shaders.
* A discussion of metal/energy resources which has become abstract.
* A discussion of s3o/3do and UpSpring where new mods may export OBJ from the authors 3d editor of choice.
* Missing and obsolete callins/callouts and functions.
* Inaccurate and incomplete discussion of LuaGaia and missions.
* Changes in system requirements.
* Gameplay changes for popular mods, breaking strategies.
* New units and widgets, also breaking strategies.
* New mods not discussed, old mods no longer being played.
* Discussion of lobbys that have changed beyond recognition or been replaced by new ones.
* Optimisation techniques that no longer work or decrease performance or crash.
* Limitations that no longer exists.
* Data tables (like armortypes) that are no longer correct or even used.
* Spring settings that have been added or removed.

I've actually purchased a LOT of computer books (around 70) and of those probably 68 are now so obsolete as to be useless. I have a $600 Win32 API library including an entire volume on obsolete GDI which makes a fine bookend on my bookshelf. I have a $200 indepth discussion of linux kernel 2.2 internals which I'm using to stop rats coming up a hole in my floor.

I have a rule of thumb I came up with myself regarding technical books. If more than 5% of the information is bad then the entire book is worthless, or worse than worthless. The issue is that as a reader you don't know which pieces of information are correct so you're forced to constantly cross-check everything you read against other sources or make costly mistakes. This means you actually have to have access to more reliable data which then means you're better off reading that other source in the first place before filling your head with crap.

The chance of a Spring RTS book being less than 5% inaccurate within 6 months of publication is nil. This would still be true even if the book talked about everything in sweeping generalizations (and who would buy that anyway?).

Face it guys. AF makes a good point and the rest of this thread is just wank.

[knorke]

who cares, its just funny that one of the longest threads in General discussion is one started by a spambot

[maackey]

ÔÖ½ rollin' trollin' rollin' ÔÖ® keep this spam thread rollin' ÔÖ¼

[Das Bruce]

Why the fuck are you a moderator?

[maackey]

I'm not allowed to make jokes?

[Das Bruce]

It would have been ok if you'd said that then locked the thread, you seem to grasp that it is no longer useful or relevent. What you ended up doing is perpertuating the bullshit.

[Forboding Angel]

Back off. It isn't a spambot. Packt is a legit publisher. That much is obvious from their website. Some more info that might be useful: http://www.trexreviews.com/archives/pac ... evolution/

[Jazcash]

Maybe it's just a very clever spambot that does some research and reads up a bit before making its post.

I think a community guide/fanbook would be a fun thing to work on. With a bunch of individuals who write up a bunch of stuff about a particular topic.

I'd be quite happy to write up a big strategy guide and tips, tricks and tactics guide book about the general basis of Spring
There's plenty to write about and even more if you include the out of game things to setup like widgets, keybinds, selection keys, spirngsettings/profiles etc.

Basically would just be a newb friendly version of the important stuff in the wiki + loads of new content. Something for people who are new to Spring to enjoy reading whilst increasing their knowledge of Spring.

[AF]

Legitimate companies have been known to be involved in bots and malware either directly or indirectly. Heck the people mostly funding the spam business through legitimate means, are doctors and herbologists buying the herbal remedies on sale in spam mail.

So lets look at the case:

Why has such an obvious blanket poll from someone who knows nothing about us, that has so little promise of getting anywhere, generated such interest from so many people who should know better?

Money

Directly or indirectly, the fact that its a commercial venture, and that authors could earn dosh, changes how we all view this. It clouds minds, and people don't want to loose this 'option', even though it isn't really an option. The time spent writting such a book would earn the author less than if they worked in mcdonalds for the same amount of time, only there'd be less food involved, and more people satisfied with the results (merely from there being more people).


As mentioned elsewhere, Packt are desperate, theyre not calling on spring, they're randomly posting this call for authors in every nook and cranny they can find. Its an epic mass mail. Find an opensource project. Spend a minute every few weeks starting threads and making posts. We're not alone.

Packt had the chance to squish all my points, yet their post didnt even acknowledge that people had replied to their thread. Not a single thing said could be linked directly to what anybody had said, in support of or against.

[Tobi]

In my opinion a better summary of this thread (and many others) is:

1) Random idea X is posted
2) Some people like it and are willing to investigate to form their own opinion
3) Some people don't like it and want to stop anyone who would like it at all costs (often 'because it's too early'), because presumably the time saved by not pursuing idea X will automatically be spent for idea Y, which these people happen to want.

I say if someone wants to write a book and thinks it's worth his time he should by all means continue. I say free docs > paid docs > no docs. And although working at MacDonalds will probably earn you more (or you must write extremely fast ), having written a book and having managed the accompanying planning/motivational/etc. issues has a lot more non-monetary value than having worked at the MacDonalds. (And btw, while writing such book you could easily work 40 hours/week at the MacDonalds if you like that )

(Just make sure if you write on a book that 1) if the book fails you retain the copyright on the text so you can continue on it as a free book and 2) if the book succeeds but no updates are made, you have the rights to publish it as a free book X years after the book release. On these points the default contract of packtpub differs if I recall correctly, so you may need to negotiate...)

[Peet]

the Spring Project appears to have expanded to other industries as well as literature:

[Caydr]

In that context, you should have "it's" not "its".

[AF]

Violating the logo spec I see

[Caydr]

Keep out of your mom's wallet AF, those things aren't for you.

[Neddie]

Enough.