[Veers]

(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Retail seems to be outdated in terms of what can now be done, with the new AI's, sexp's etcetc.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).

[mjn.mixael]

Fury: I've already straight up said that this is not about FSPort, because that is an exception.

[Rodo]

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]

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.

[Zacam]

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.

[Rodo]

Then my only complain is now mute, thanks for the heads up Zacam

[Hades]

* Fury 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.

[Goober5000]

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.

[Luis Dias]

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.

[General Battuta]

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.

[Luis Dias]

So people build mods with mediavps in mind, afaik... what's the problem?

[General Battuta]

Not MVPs either, features of the engine.

[Luis Dias]

Ok sorry, so people build mods with the latest engine versions in mind, afaik... what's the problem?