Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The Modding Workshop => Topic started by: mjn.mixael on May 11, 2011, 01:06:53 pm
-
Opening Thoughts
Firstly, I want to be clear that I do not mean this as an attack against any one person or project. I simply feel that this needs to be said for the community to move forward. You are free to take it or leave it and I will think no better or worse of you or your project. I am absolutely not trying to start a heated argument or to split the community in two. If you read this and want to post something as short as ‘AMEN!’, don’t. I encourage this be taken with a grain of salt and that you honestly consider what I have to say and conduct yourselves in a respectable manner. I hope I don’t come across as arrogant or mean. That isn’t my intention. I simply intend to give a viewpoint.
‘Retail Compatibility’
Defined as building mods in such a way that they are able to be run on the retail executable. I am not talking about building the source code or MediaVPs in such a way that breaks retail missions or campaigns.
That Is So 2005!
I don’t know where Retail Compatibility started, however my guess is it continued in part because of FSO’s original instability. Why make a mod for an engine that crashes half the time? You can read about the history of FSO and SCP on the interviews board, I won’t go into it here. But the point is that I can understand making something work with the stable retail executable if the current FSO version is not reliable. So if we were having this discussion several years ago, I would be on a different side. However, thanks to the incredible efforts of the SCP team, we can rely on very stable builds! It isn’t 2005 anymore. 3.6.12 is a spectacular release and 3.6.13 is shaping up to be just as good.
If code stability is the reason for staying retail compatible, then I suggest you consider how far the code has come in the last 10 years.
Audience
I don’t know about you guys, but last time I loaded up retail I was more than relieved that I could turn it off and switch over to using new builds and new assets. Retail is severely limited by today’s standards both visually and gameplay ability. I’m going to reference Blue Planet, a truly fantastic piece of work that absolutely could not be done on retail. Period. Other mods like Wings of Dawn and Vassago’s Dirge are in a similar position. These are the mods that are setting the bar. These are the kinds of mods that are being played. More importantly, these are the mods that are bring people into the community and causing HLP to be noticed. There was an article talking about FSO a while back, and it used screenshots from Blue Planet: War in Heaven.
With that said, I want to consider the audience that the retail executable still has. Frankly, I want to suggest that it probably has an audience under ten people. But I have no statistical data on that. Considering what mods are the most popular and still being played, I’m willing to bet my hard earned cash that a staggering majority of people are not playing with the retail executable.
Capability
This needs no explanation. The capabilities of the FSO code are far greater than retail could ever hope to achieve. The types of gameplay that Blue Planet has achieved is a feat once again worth mentioning. However, I don’t pretend to ignore ST:R. A great mod that is fully retail compatible and quite fun. However, I can’t stand to look at it on retail. The visual improvement of FSO is reason enough to use it alone.
Moving Forward
Mods like Blue Planet, Vassago’s Dirge, and Wings of Dawn are truly pushing the envelope of what FSO is capable of. I could probably site Diaspora here as well as a host of other projects. People come here to HLP to play the newest and groundbreaking stuff we have to give them. Time and time again we see posts of new members talking about how awesome it is to see this old game they used to love being improved and how they can’t believe what we can do with it now. Think of everything we can do with FSO today on the latest nightly build. What can YOU do with it? What WILL you do with it?
When it comes down to it, we play FSO for fun. There are many elements that come into play with that. Story, Graphics, Gameplay, etc. Each have their use. With Retail compatibility, you have to strike Graphics completely. It simply can’t measure up to the beauty of the newer builds. Gameplay could probably be cut in half. There are probably some retail gimmicks and sexps that haven’t been exhausted yet, but in the end it’s a new story with the same old missions, just more of it. I know that can be fun, ST:R is a great example of it. But I believe it could have been better, if not truly exceptional.
If you truly want to push the envelope and make something worth mentioning in the same breath as some of HLP’s flagship mods, I truly believe that you have to join them in their philosophy of moving forward and not look back.
-
I agree with everything in this post, but I have to ask: does anyone do this aside from Goober?
-
FSPort, ST:R and what have you aren't really nothing more than straight conversion from FS1. Since retail FS2 is capable of anything that FS1 was, there was no need to drop retail compatibility. If you don't have missions that make use of FSO, there is very little reason to drop retail compatibility of mods that are FS1 conversions. The only real exception to this is ST:R, but if the design goal was to make it in the spirit of FS1, what do you expect? It is a sound design approach to add FSO capabilities through tbm files, like FSPort and ST:R does.
As long as it is done properly without debug errors. Fluid mediavps doesn't help, but there should be plans to make FSPort mediavps independent which solves that problem.
Now, the other mods. Does any one of them have retail compatibility anymore? With exception of the old ones like Derelict, Twilight and what have you. At least I don't know of any new(ish) mods that tries to keep retail compatibility with bloody teeth and nails. Hence I suspect this is directed at FSPort and should be addressed as such. The matter should be handled internally. But in the case of FSPort, I don't know what good it does.
If I am wrong, please name a mod other than aforementioned that is keeping retail compatibility. And I suspect that mods that aren't getting updated by anyone won't qualify, such as Derelict. If someone were to make total overhaul of Derelict, I don't see any reason to keep retail compatibility as long as the overhaul makes missions themselves use FSO features.
-
Thb i am struggling to understand what you are asking for?
- For mods the general rule is to build to the latest stable build, e.g. 3.6.12,
- If someone wants to play as retail all they have to do is use the retail exe so is not relating to FSO
- To be able to run the retail campaign the engine needs to be able to support retail code due to things like events, AI, etc changes in which would either badly unbalance missions or break them completely.
-
Actually, I think this should be moved to the FRED thread just because I feel that lots of beginning FREDders would try to keep retail compatibility. Just a hunch.
-
No. Making a retail-compatible mission is easy; just a matter of selecting retail-only sexps. However, what Mjn is talking about here is more an issue of modpack design. The retail limitations are much more painful there than on a pure FREDing level.
-
- To be able to run the retail campaign the engine needs to be able to support retail code due to things like events, AI, etc changes in which would either badly unbalance missions or break them completely.
He's not asking for any code or asset changes.
-
This is not directed at FSPort as that truly is an exception. There are mods aiming for retail compatibility but I am not at liberty to drag them in front of the community for a public debate. This is about of respect and knowing my place.
-
This is not directed at FSPort as that truly is an exception. There are mods aiming for retail compatibility but I am not at liberty to drag them in front of the community for a public debate. This is about of respect and knowing my place.
SCROLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
-
battuta, please read my opening thoughts...
-
At the end of the day it comes down to the preference of the mod creator/leader. With the need for FSO to maintain compatibility with the retail campaign building a mod to retail constraints will always be an option, perhaps not the wisest, but an option all the same and not something a person can be made not to do.
I think most people here would recommend to use stable build compatibility as a project goal but it can't be forced. If you are working with a project leader who is insisting on retail compatibility and it is causing you issues for your contributions all that can be done is to talk to the leader and explain the situation. If retail is still insisted then do the best you can within those limits but perhaps create an advanced option so users who prefer to use FSO can take advantage of the fact, especially with your contributions being visual dependent i can understand that retail compatibility can hamper the quality of your output.
-
battuta, please read my opening thoughts...
i'll be good i'll be good
-
At the end of the day it comes down to the preference of the mod creator/leader. With the need for FSO to maintain compatibility with the retail campaign building a mod to retail constraints will always be an option, perhaps not the wisest, but an option all the same and not something a person can be made not to do.
I think most people here would recommend to use stable build compatibility as a project goal but it can't be forced. If you are working with a project leader who is insisting on retail compatibility and it is causing you issues for your contributions all that can be done is to talk to the leader and explain the situation. If retail is still insisted then do the best you can within those limits but perhaps create an advanced option so users who prefer to use FSO can take advantage of the fact, especially with your contributions being visual dependent i can understand that retail compatibility can hamper the quality of your output.
The issue here isn't so much my personal contributions at all actually. More specifically, I see campaigns like Vassago's Dirge in the same light as movies like Star Wars. Where would the film industry be if we didn't continually push the envelope? And as such, I see sticking to retail compatibility in the same light as making a film today but only using film capabilities from the 50s.
More notably, I don't know how many people would care to watch a film made that way anymore. And this is where the bulk of my point lies. There are several mods that I very much want to see succeed, but I don't think that they can stand next to HLP's best while holding the retail compatibility flag.
-
Sorry, i miss understood your OP and i might still be on the wrong line here, if so i apologise again.
I suppose for some the enjoyment of mod making comes from challenging themselves. In terms of output I suppose it is harder to put the polish in compared to 3.6.12 compatibility and the visuals wont look as good if it is played that way but it still comes down to personal preference of the person(s) in charge of creating the mod and the ability for a mod/campaign creator to do as they please if inadvisable is one of the core principles of the community (just don't be surprised if you get jumped on as a result lol).
-
It accounts for much make than just visuals. There are hosts of sexps you can't use if you want retail compatibility. The secret in Vassago's Dirge for example. But you are correct. Mod leaders can do as they please. That's why I simple ask that they simply consider my points in light of the future and not the past.
-
Thb i am struggling to understand what you are asking for?
I don't get it either.
-
Actually, I agree MjnMixael. Trying to preserve retail compatibility
just because you run Windows 98 is silly, especially since anyone who knows of the mod, let's say FSPort, will know of the SCP as well. Also, I think there's some stuff in the mediavps that can't be changed for retail compatibility, although I'm not sure on this.
-
/me headdesks
This is stupid. FSPort maintains retail compatibility because it is nothing but conversion of FS1. FS1 did not have any FSO features, neither does FSPort. FSPort-mediavps is equivalent to FSU's mediavps. If a mod relies on something in fsport-mediavps, it is no longer retail compatible. If it doesn't, then it remains retail compatible while getting all the goodies delivered by fsport-mediavps.
Only when missions and gameplay utilized FSO features is it necessary to drop retail compatibility. But when those features do not change gameplay in any way, like mediavps, a mod can remain compatible with retail and still get all eyecandy from (fsport-)mediavps. Mods like Blue Planet cannot be retail compatible for the simple fact that their gameplay relies on features provided by FSO.
It would be hell lot of easier if FSPort wouldn't separate retail and mediavps assets, but its their decision and there is no reason why they cannot have both as long as they are dedicated on supporting both. FSPort has gotten ****loads of flak for having sub-par track record with mediavps and FSO compatibility, that is a separate issue altogether.
-
MediaVPs must preserve the Retail -feel- in so far as mission balance is concerned. If we changed out sexps for SCP variants, I doubt anybody would notice unless it broke the missions behaviour. And I prefer that the missions in the MediaVPs retain all the original data entry in the Retail missions, but for SCP specific features, we don't ";;FSO" tag them to hide them from the Retail exec. That is what playing with "no mods" is for, or at a minimum, with MV_Root (± MV_Effects).
Though, due the model complexities and the image formats now supported, there would be no realistic way that the MediaVPs could be made to run on the Retail exec. -Some- Enhancements could be provided, but they would be severely limited in scope.
And besides, the FSU/MediaVPs are purposed with utilizing SCP Enhancements when and where we can to the best that we can. Barring anything that would completely cause for a mission refactoring (though there is some debate as to how to "fix" some "broken" Retail missions)
Edit: And I fully support Fury's (ninja) post sentiments.
-
retail compatibility is something modders shouldn't be concerned about. everything about retail compatibility has always been about making the engine compatible with the retail data. not making mod data compatible with the retail engine. its lunacy to do that just on the grounds of bugfixes available in the newer executables, and the mod system. retail did not inform you of certain bugs in your tables. it also did not have any mod system to speak of, every retail mod involved vps in your root dir or files in your data dir, neither practice is acceptable for mod installation under the current engine. i cant really come up with a valid reason to make a mod that can run on retail. it would seriously cripple what you can do with the engine. install too many of those to the same fs dir and it will turn it into a convoluted mess in no time.
my advice here is to leave reverse compatibility to coders, and mod as close to the cutting edge as you can (just watch out for those experimental features that end up being so broke they get dropped).
-
(Considering I don't have much knowledge in this area, consider this an outsiders persective.) :)
‘Retail Compatibility' & That Is So 2005!
With the mods I've seen built and loved by the community (BP, WoD, etc), Retail doesn't seem to be 'needed' in a gaming sense. Retail would end up breaking these mods*1, could you imagine BP or WoD back in 1999?
And it seems that the stable SCP releases we use (3.6.12), are nearly the 'new retail' in some respects as WIP mods want 3.6.12*2 compatibility even though they are being constantly tested with newer nightly builds.
So IMHO here, the newest stable build is pretty much 'retail' in that sense. It is standard, though we would not be here without Retail.
Audience
As previously stated, I’m willing to bet my hard earned cash that a staggering majority of people are not playing with the retail executable.
, I would also agree.
I do admit however that I switch back to retail every now and then. To see what I first loved, and to see how far FSO has come from the original, the improvements, the gains. I dont stay very long though, maybe just the FS2 campaign and I'll be straight back 3.6.12
The Retail audience, I assume would be small. Most half decent machines should not be running integrated graphics, and should be able to run mediavps fairly well*3 without too many issues. But even then, to run basic mediavps. A major high-tech card is not really needed for that.
Capability
As I said, I see 3.6.12 as being the 'retail' standard. I dont normally see people wanting retail compatibility but 3.6.12*4 compatibility, being completely tested on recent nightlies as well.
Retail seems to be outdated in terms of what can now be done, with the new AI's, sexp's etcetc. While I dont know the full capabilities or compatibilities of these, I assume that they are difficult/impossible in regards to retail behaviour, and would cause quite a few problems*5
Moving Forward
The new code and improvements have pushed FS2 beyond what it could have ever achieved in Retail form, and it still survives and thrives more than 10 years later. Certainly that speaks something here.
But can we maintain compatibility with a game that old?, again IMHO, we will eventually run into the problem of Retail vs Open, and eventually Retail will only hold the community back as it pushes forward.
At the end of the day, I see Retail is Retail and Open/SCP/Mediavps are what everyone*6 wants, compares to, and will improve. The work done here could not have been done without Retail, but we can never change Retail. It always stays the same, and eventually it will not be in a position to help further the community.
*1 - Retail breaking the mod, not the mod breaking retail.
*2 - or the most recent stable build.
*3 - Not stating what graphical/media settings though.
*4 - or the most recent stable build.
*5 - Not just in terms of bugs/errors/crashes. But designs for development of mods/etc.
*6 - I don't speak for everyone, it is my opinion
(Again, I do not have knowledge of FS2 or any SCP code, I am not that knowledgable inregards to FREDding. I have played FS2 for quite a while, and am only a gamer in this sense. And I hope I have provided some sort of outside opinion that is not complete and utter trash).
-
Fury: I've already straight up said that this is not about FSPort, because that is an exception.
-
I've always been a pro ditch-retail-compatibility guy, but since FSO tends to handle very well retail as well as newer stuff, there's no need right now for me to complain about that policy anymore.
The only problem I see here is when new stuff needs to be implemented and coders refrain from doing so because It would break retail performance (and thus leave modders without the necessary tools to make cool campaigns real), in that case I guess the smart thing to do would be making a final retail-compatible build and then ditch the retail-compatibility rule, after all retail WILL never change so there's really no need to keep the FSO engine tangled with that burden.
I think MJN's main concern here might be the fact that retail compatibility is making his life as a modder hard as hell, you need to stick to stupid retail concepts about how things need to be done in order to work in FSO....when tools have changed, limitations have been breached, and newer and better methods have been discovered to make the same stuff 100 times faster and better....yet we still need to stick to the old ways of doing things because FSO will only work, or recognize your work if it's the retail-way.
-
Fury: I've already straight up said that this is not about FSPort, because that is an exception.
Then you should straight up say what this is about. Without knowing that, this topic serves no real purpose.
-
Rodo (and anybody else):
Yes, there can occasionally be issues with implementing things with regards to not wanting to break Retail Compatibility or the ability to process in a Retail fashion Retail data.
However, that doesn't mean that any feature that falls into that category will never see the light of day. It will just require more work to be able to implement it in such a way that it can be called when needed and otherwise not interfere with Retail in any way. Some of this is mitigated by Table settings or Launcher flags. At some point, there is hope that we'll have a "mod.tbl" or the like where things that differ (or would break Retail) can be set to use "alternate" code for those requests.
-NO- Feature is "Can't be implemented" in a permanent sense. It just may have other and/or more difficult requirements be fulfilled first before it can happen. And as always, it also requires having a coder that has the time, skill and desire to work on implementing that feature, and enough people to reliably test that feature once it's in.
In no way shape or form will or should "Retail Compatibility" from the Code point-of-view -ever- be a point of contention for getting something done. I do completely understand the fact that it can occasionally make a lot of things difficult and frustrating, but it doesn't make it impossible.
-
Then my only complain is now mute, thanks for the heads up Zacam :yes:
-
/me headdesks
This is stupid. FSPort maintains retail compatibility because it is nothing but conversion of FS1. FS1 did not have any FSO features, neither does FSPort. FSPort-mediavps is equivalent to FSU's mediavps. If a mod relies on something in fsport-mediavps, it is no longer retail compatible. If it doesn't, then it remains retail compatible while getting all the goodies delivered by fsport-mediavps.
Only when missions and gameplay utilized FSO features is it necessary to drop retail compatibility. But when those features do not change gameplay in any way, like mediavps, a mod can remain compatible with retail and still get all eyecandy from (fsport-)mediavps. Mods like Blue Planet cannot be retail compatible for the simple fact that their gameplay relies on features provided by FSO.
It would be hell lot of easier if FSPort wouldn't separate retail and mediavps assets, but its their decision and there is no reason why they cannot have both as long as they are dedicated on supporting both. FSPort has gotten ****loads of flak for having sub-par track record with mediavps and FSO compatibility, that is a separate issue altogether.
I wasn't talking about the FSPort in particular, but yes, it could benefit in a few ways by dropping retail compatability, one being they could use texture replacement for nameplates on Orions instead of having seperate pofs, which causes unnecessary table and HDD bloat from having the extra models, not to mention it's pretty messy. Another is a fairly considerable size reduction of the FSPort as a whole, as its planned restructuring would still require having both retail and upgraded assets that are not in the mediavps.
-
I think it would be good for mjn.mixael to post some specific examples of what he means by "retail compatibility". His first post is full of lofty rhetoric, but it's mostly generalizations that I don't think anyone disagrees with. I'm not asking him to point fingers at mods, but I do think some clarification and elaboration is needed, because I am not aware of any mod which is trying to remain runnable under the retail EXE except for FSPort. TVWP isn't; Scroll certainly isn't. In fact, even if a campaign didn't use a single custom-made asset, it would almost certainly use non-retail SEXPs.
Fury has done an excellent job explaining why FSPort remains retail-compaible, so I don't think I have anything to add there -- other than to tell everyone to disregard Hades, because he has demonstrated that he has no idea what he's talking about on this subject. (I should remind everyone yet again that retail-compatible does not mean retail-limited.)
I am curious, though, as to what mjn.mixael meant by his statement "I believe [ST:R] could have been better, if not truly exceptional" -- particularly since, as he is a member of the FSPort team, he is aware of the retail-compatible/retail-limited distinction, and also since he is generating some excellent non-retail-compatible content for both FSPort and ST:R.
-
So perhaps the trouble here is more one of mental confusion stemming from the existence of the retail executable itself, which is irritating MJN Mixael, and perhaps a lot of other people. I understand the urge to purge every older stuff and stick with the newest. Legacy stuff is always irritating.
-
So perhaps the trouble here is more one of mental confusion stemming from the existence of the retail executable itself, which is irritating MJN Mixael, and perhaps a lot of other people. I understand the urge to purge every older stuff and stick with the newest. Legacy stuff is always irritating.
Nope.
The trouble here has to do with the construction of mods.
-
So people build mods with mediavps in mind, afaik... what's the problem?
-
Not MVPs either, features of the engine.
-
Ok sorry, so people build mods with the latest engine versions in mind, afaik... what's the problem?