Since Openclonk is getting more popular, and people start making objects and scenarios, I think it is time to get something like the CCAN for Openclonk. For me, the worst case scenario would be that people upload there stuff to existing platforms for Clonk Rage. The CCAN is already spammed with hundrets of bad entries, created by very beginners.
An archive network for Openclonk should in my opinion have the following features:
Additionally to the standard Openclonk file types it should also support things like text files or zipped folders.
There should be no file size limit.
No "Unter Niveau" Stuff. You could realize this either by having a seperate site for beginners, or some sort of testing new entries before they get visible to the public (if they are good enough).
Of course all the cool stuff the CCAN already has, like categories, voting system, sorting, .....
So, who wants to do it? :)
An archive network for Openclonk should in my opinion have the following features:
Additionally to the standard Openclonk file types it should also support things like text files or zipped folders.
There should be no file size limit.
No "Unter Niveau" Stuff. You could realize this either by having a seperate site for beginners, or some sort of testing new entries before they get visible to the public (if they are good enough).
Of course all the cool stuff the CCAN already has, like categories, voting system, sorting, .....
So, who wants to do it? :)
![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
Back when the CCAN was made, there were not so many games around that enabled the player to create his own mods with so much freedom. But nowadays, there are lots of games around that use some scripting language and common formats for their game content. In my opinion there is no need to reinvent the CCAN anew, I bet there is already free software around that could be used as a mod db*.Hmm, actually, what DO we need? I mean, wouldn't an extra section in this forum suffice for "unofficial" game content? Perhaps with some mwforum mod enabled (e.g. "Like"/"Post rating"). We have uploading files, uploading images and embedding them, formatted description, comment section, search function, rating/like,...
Our goal is anyway to include clonk-developers in the openclonk project itself.
I think I will open up a new section in the forum these days, move the 1-2 things that have been posted so far into that and we will see how it evolves.
* Hmm, what about moddb, for example?
![[gb]](/mwf/flags/gb.png "United Kingdom")
> I mean, wouldn't an extra section in this forum suffice for "unofficial" game content?
That actually sounds like a good starting point. No need to over-engineer everything from the start...
I was actually working on a concept for exactly this a while ago, if we do want a custom solution, we just are more flexible with that imho, and it doesn't have to be official "OpenClonk" or anything.It featured a "stackoverflow"-like point system with up- and downbotes. In principle its more or less like the old CCAN-Exp-System reinvented a bit simpler, and would also feature a clean main page with featured projects/rounds/objects, a developers section, Clonk dependencies, and maybe even engine integration. I might post it here sometime and/or implement it later on.
ala, some others and me once did a requirement sheet on "what would be needed if we decided to build such a system" (for example the dependencies you mentioned). Did we write that down somewhere, ala?If you feel motivated to start working on that we could try to get a small team for that task (I once started implementing that too) - not a team like "we will get this down in the next week" but more like a team "someone probably will be motivated and motivating at all times" :)
![[at]](/mwf/flags/at.png "Austria")
Having people develop lots of stuff when many things will still change will only cause frustration. We can still wait before thinking about such stuff. Also, as of today Arne enabled OC-Files for CCAN, afaik.
![[ca]](/mwf/flags/ca.png "Canada")
I agree. Holding off from a publicly available mod-database until we at least release the settlement update would be a good idea.>Also, as of today Arne enabled OC-Files for CCAN, afaik.
CCAN seems to have an almost entirely German userbase; it seems a better idea to have a separate OC mod-db, so as to focus on an international player and developer audience.
>Having people develop lots of stuff when many things will still change will only cause frustration.
Clonk has always been this way, even with big changes. Frustration was there of course, but the benefits outnumbered them - and most of the good entries got updates from time to time.
Those were mostly small changes. I'm talking about libraries, interfaces and functions changing completely. Like how half the GUI used in Scenarios is obsolete. (Flag-Buy-Menu, etc.)
Well the changes were pretty big in some terms, like GWE or some major gameplay changes (hit checks, pressure waves). And functions, variables, #strict and stuff were sort of libary changes. But yes, you're right somehow, because we had all the downward compability which we now won't have.
BUt still I think: Some incompatible scenarios which we would have to update or rewrite would be a small price to pay for some activity.
BUt still I think: Some incompatible scenarios which we would have to update or rewrite would be a small price to pay for some activity.
That is a pretty old request and has been planned through at least three times by different people :)If someone is looking for a open source solution: it would be cool if it supported some kind of dependency system (aka "This scenario needs pack XYZ")
The benefits of a new clonk scenario website would be enourmous. They effect overall quality ratings, classifications of types of scenarios, general overview of the big chaos that Clonk entries got tangled up in the last decade, and will be in the following - there is no one who knows even half the entries there. It helps newbies, gives assistance, directions and recommendations. It will provide better network play, and faster access for all of us. It could even help with scripting, if there would be buttons added to seek immidiately help in a developer forum and ask questions, the questions could be tagged - and script problems could be tagged with scenarios, in which they got solved etc. There is much to think and plan but...
..as long as opinions like this dominate the scene, nothing will happen.
..as long as opinions like this dominate the scene, nothing will happen.
> There is much to think and plan but...
There isn't. You can get a download site started in a few hours by installing an off-the-shelf forum software on a off-the-shelf webhosting server, and then start writing the software with the fancy features so that once there are more than a dozen downloads or so the first sorting features will be ready, and once there are enough people to help others your "help button" feature will exist. Or whatever else proves useful. But sure, as long as you believe that my opinion hinders you, it indeed will.
I understand that doing necessary work only if it is in high demand is a ressourceful approach for a developer to manage his limited spare time.
But new players and developers won't join the game if too much hassling is necessary for working and playing properly. I think it is a very solid approach to simplify anything for new players, to an overusual extend. Of course we wouldn't need such features, because we already know how to code C4Script, know the best CCAN entries, the specified packages, know how to edit registry entries, forward our ports etc.. - but it's not for us, it's for all those kids who don't do.
And to work on floating point stuff, parser improvment and such is of course very nice for long time development, but it doesn't provide anything to the players which we would love to be there.
But new players and developers won't join the game if too much hassling is necessary for working and playing properly. I think it is a very solid approach to simplify anything for new players, to an overusual extend. Of course we wouldn't need such features, because we already know how to code C4Script, know the best CCAN entries, the specified packages, know how to edit registry entries, forward our ports etc.. - but it's not for us, it's for all those kids who don't do.
And to work on floating point stuff, parser improvment and such is of course very nice for long time development, but it doesn't provide anything to the players which we would love to be there.
>And to work on floating point stuff, parser improvment and such is of course very nice for long time development, but it doesn't provide anything to the players which we would love to be there.
Yes. It only lays the groundwork for everything that's to come.
First whe need the basis to do stuff. Then we can build stuff on it. Building the basis will take longer and delay cool scenarios etc. but if we don't we'll just have a crappy game in the end.
While there is some obvious truth in building strong groundworks, it shouldn't absorb the entire project.
Like already pointed out: Investments in users pays out. Take the very userfriendly website chess.com, which is just about to absorb every chess website in the world wide web (about 2million users or something). People just come in big numbers if they can just enjoy and sit back - but if we give a crap about starting problems, they won't bother.
It's been damn hard keeping the CR community some sort of alive, and to outlive it completely would be nothing but foolish. The knowledge is their, the ideas are there - and the players know the game somehow. If we support cool scenarios etc, players might get ideas which will improve the game not in 10 years, but now.
Imagine if some kid would get a perfect idea which would solve a big clonk issue, like u-tubes. And he got it now, and we could dig it only because we can still adjust the groundwork to our likings.
Imagine doing 5 years of quiet work, only to realise that we missed tons of solutions?
Like already pointed out: Investments in users pays out. Take the very userfriendly website chess.com, which is just about to absorb every chess website in the world wide web (about 2million users or something). People just come in big numbers if they can just enjoy and sit back - but if we give a crap about starting problems, they won't bother.
>First whe need the basis to do stuff. Then we can build stuff on it. Building the basis will take longer and delay cool scenarios etc. but if we don't we'll just have a crappy game in the end.
It's been damn hard keeping the CR community some sort of alive, and to outlive it completely would be nothing but foolish. The knowledge is their, the ideas are there - and the players know the game somehow. If we support cool scenarios etc, players might get ideas which will improve the game not in 10 years, but now.
Imagine if some kid would get a perfect idea which would solve a big clonk issue, like u-tubes. And he got it now, and we could dig it only because we can still adjust the groundwork to our likings.
Imagine doing 5 years of quiet work, only to realise that we missed tons of solutions?
You got a really good point there.I guess the best solution is, as nearly always, a middle path. We should set a goal: All the basic stuff that's really needed. At the moment that's mostly Settlement.
Luckily I'm pretty much done with the GUI, the only 2 things left is replacing all the "old" menus used in scenarios with either new ones or adapt the old ones, and bugfixing. The latter also mostly has been taken care of by Maikel building his contest scenario, therefore providing me with lots of testing. ;)
The only 2 things that remain are cks engine-internal rope, floating points and Peters lights. The lights only add stuff, so it shouldn't be a problem adding them later. The same probably goes for floating-point. It "only" provides more/better solutions. Not really sure about the rope. We do have a script-one at the moment, but when the engine rope comes everything that uses ropes will have to be rewritten.
>but when the engine rope comes everything that uses ropes will have to be rewritten.
Which is a) the hook and b) the rope tower? :)
That was more aimed towards people who use it in their own objects/development.
Oh, well, we are currently breaking backwards compatibility all the time anywayRather make the change sooner than later
Don't forget the ropeladder and the ropebridge! Although they require a more flexible rope implementation as ck is probably currently aiming at.
>Like already pointed out: Investments in users pays out. Take the very userfriendly website chess.com, which is just about to absorb every chess website in the world wide web (about 2million users or something).
You got it!
Hmm, I have been starting to write a reply like three times, every time not finding the words.Let it put me this way: Something about your attitude here annoys me.
It is the matter of course you seem to assume that "somebody" who normally does the work in the project ("the devs") will take on your project if you stress hard enough how important you think this is - And if they don't, they must be either ignorant or not care about the project enough.
I am saying this independently of the point you just made, you have a point. But this is not my point here, because what you are telling us here is nothing new, nothing we wouldn't know. Yes, to be open and welcoming to new people in the community, to help them out and bind them to the community is important for a long-term establishment of an open project - but it has to be done by someone!
The deal with an open project is that it lives by the contributions, you can not assume that everything is done by the same people. Frankly, people who come by and dump their opinions on how to do things better don't help the project in that manner (even if they preach that exactly this openness is important).
Long story short: It is your idea, it is your project - don't assume that the responsibility for that will be assumed by others. Otherwise, see Günther
Guess what, since I'm not Chuck Norris who has mastered every possible skill (including php) - I just can't do it myself.
My assumption is actually this:
Since I've been active in the community almost constantly, playing the game nonstop I'm having a big amount of experience regarding playing, bugs and problems etc.. This knowledge of course is something which a programmer usually doesn't have (and I'm glad, since he spent his time programming and improving). The problems now arise with these programmers making the sole decisions based on their experience as a developers, and me having to explain them why these ideas might actually be bad for players.
Take for example the topic of lag in Clonk. I have seen hundreds of games played in slow motions - where I saw single players blocking the games for all the others, ignorant in terms of stopping their downloads or something else.. And the developer Peter who for a long time thought, that it is just fair that every player has the same amount of lag. No!
I always tell him that tons of players have stopped playing only because of this lag, and that the young kids don't give a crap about optimizing their system, and that lots of insults ingame (and a sort ob noobish atmosphere) are the result of lag, and nothing else.
So what should I tell him? Well done, I respect your opinion and I'll wait and shut up till "somebody" will take on my idea - even if years pass. Oh and of course it is my idea, so it is my responsibility that this problem is solved. - and here I just don't do that, but instead repeatedly remind him that his idea was wrong and needs improvement.
And there are just tons of these topics, who are very obvious to players - but not to developers.
-----
This beeing said, I'm completely fed up with telling this stuff and be completly ignored like in: "Yes, but that's not what the game needs. Yes but that's not what we want. Yes, but I don't want to do that work" - I'm getting these "absolute" statements all the time, as if a single developer would know so much more about the game than I do. My worst experience was writing a whole fantasy patch for Clonk Endeavour, which wasn't even looked at.
This explains my sort of attitude, which I'm a bit sorry for. Altough I try to be clincal, I actually deleted and not posted some very agressive postings dozens of times. I understand that it is hard for a creator, to read critical assumptions from someone who doesn't do anything at all (and I ignore such statements, since I'm doing CR stuff instead of OC stuff).
And here is the big but: I don't indicate ignorance, I clearly state that some developers ARE ignorant. I found it to be very foolish, to completely ignore the opinion of players (not just mine), and to just change what they want. This ruined big numbers of ingame ideas and scenarios in the past and will so in the future. And that's just a big shame.
With all this talking I hope to change some point of views at the least.
You will miss it if I stop doing so.
My assumption is actually this:
Since I've been active in the community almost constantly, playing the game nonstop I'm having a big amount of experience regarding playing, bugs and problems etc.. This knowledge of course is something which a programmer usually doesn't have (and I'm glad, since he spent his time programming and improving). The problems now arise with these programmers making the sole decisions based on their experience as a developers, and me having to explain them why these ideas might actually be bad for players.
Take for example the topic of lag in Clonk. I have seen hundreds of games played in slow motions - where I saw single players blocking the games for all the others, ignorant in terms of stopping their downloads or something else.. And the developer Peter who for a long time thought, that it is just fair that every player has the same amount of lag. No!
I always tell him that tons of players have stopped playing only because of this lag, and that the young kids don't give a crap about optimizing their system, and that lots of insults ingame (and a sort ob noobish atmosphere) are the result of lag, and nothing else.
So what should I tell him? Well done, I respect your opinion and I'll wait and shut up till "somebody" will take on my idea - even if years pass. Oh and of course it is my idea, so it is my responsibility that this problem is solved. - and here I just don't do that, but instead repeatedly remind him that his idea was wrong and needs improvement.
And there are just tons of these topics, who are very obvious to players - but not to developers.
-----
This beeing said, I'm completely fed up with telling this stuff and be completly ignored like in: "Yes, but that's not what the game needs. Yes but that's not what we want. Yes, but I don't want to do that work" - I'm getting these "absolute" statements all the time, as if a single developer would know so much more about the game than I do. My worst experience was writing a whole fantasy patch for Clonk Endeavour, which wasn't even looked at.
This explains my sort of attitude, which I'm a bit sorry for. Altough I try to be clincal, I actually deleted and not posted some very agressive postings dozens of times. I understand that it is hard for a creator, to read critical assumptions from someone who doesn't do anything at all (and I ignore such statements, since I'm doing CR stuff instead of OC stuff).
And here is the big but: I don't indicate ignorance, I clearly state that some developers ARE ignorant. I found it to be very foolish, to completely ignore the opinion of players (not just mine), and to just change what they want. This ruined big numbers of ingame ideas and scenarios in the past and will so in the future. And that's just a big shame.
With all this talking I hope to change some point of views at the least.
>Frankly, people who come by and dump their opinions on how to do things better don't help the project in that manner (even if they preach that exactly this openness is important).
You will miss it if I stop doing so.
>And here is the big but: I don't indicate ignorance, I clearly state that some developers ARE ignorant. I found it to be very foolish, to completely ignore the opinion of players (not just mine), and to just change what they want. This ruined big numbers of ingame ideas and scenarios in the past and will so in the future. And that's just a big shame.
Ok it sounds a bit harsh after rereading. Of course behaviours shouldn't be generalized like that - it's not about beeing right, acknowledged or beeing ignored.
I had such talks in the past and remember Zappers(?) opinion who stated that such discussions are a general open source problem: Open source developers tend to create things for free, which we all respect. But of course they don't tend to execute rush tasks which they are not fully convinced with, and even more unlikely on demand.
But as users or players only look at the final achievment, they will often notice that there are things missing.
I would even call gnu chess ignorant: Of course not for developing a free strong chess engine over 20 years, which I respect. But there is a bitter taste because they stopped updating their programm for windows completely.
It's similar here: I love you people for your work, but I feel a bitter taste after facing problems as a player, which I reported years ago. And there also is a bitter taste every time I see a user with an obvious demand which won't be taken too seriously.
>lag stuff
You can only say that because you (probably) don't know how complicated network code is. ;)
On a more general note: Coders like to create and experiment with new stuff. Revisiting old stuff and trying to make it better, or rewrite it, is kinda boring. Especially if the current implementation basically works. The new toys always are more interesting than the old ones.
>Especially if the current implementation basically works. The new toys always are more interesting than the old ones.
Sorry for saying that, but if a game needs rework and improvement there is no such point as "im dont wanna do that :<". Such person is partly responsable for a bad game expericence which results in loss of players or worse.
Lag in other games is always the problem of the person who caused the lag. Players just leave the game (maybe forever) if they have to pay if someones lags. Sure, you can tell them there are ignorant or foolish or dont understand the complexity of network code. Maybe you're right (and to point this out: I have highly respect to the developers of clonk, who spent dozens of painful ours to write the stuff) - but seriously, who cares? Its "you" who is now alone in your big cloud-castle without a audition. (i dont want to sound agressive, but due to my poorly english skills i couldnt explain it otherwise :/)
> My worst experience was writing a whole fantasy patch for Clonk Endeavour, which wasn't even looked at.
Hint: The people in charge have changed since then. While we don't have the best track record imaginable, we do have fewer hurdles to contribution than Redwolf Design had.
And about ignorance - I'd be one of the first to acknowledge that players know the game better than I do in a lot of ways. The thing is, in order to decide how to fix a problem one needs the whole picture. A developer can usually get that by listening to a player or playing the game, a player would need to spend a few months getting familiar with the codebase and/or learning how to program. (Few developers being able or having the time to explain the relevant details) So, in practice, the developers need to make the decision, and the players need to accept that their input will be considered, but they won't get to decide the direction. At least, not directly.
To get back on the original topic - Almost every developer seems to agree that a board on this forum would be the right thing to start out with.
As for what you can do: I think we'd benefit from somebody organizing regular playtesting of the current development version, or a stable release update candidate when there's one. Newton or ck can set you up with access to the blog if you think that'd be useful, and just ask in #openclonk for changing the topic of that channel.
>As for what you can do: I think we'd benefit from somebody organizing regular playtesting of the current development version, or a stable release update candidate when there's one.
Unfortunately I'm maxed out currently, entrance exames for universities and my unfinished sountracks are at duty. My ClonkRage todo is also unfinished, but I plan on doing some content by August or September.
>A developer can usually get that by listening to a player or playing the game, a player would need to spend a few months getting familiar with the codebase and/or learning how to program.
A developer playing his own game, seriously ;)?
> A developer playing his own game, seriously ;)?
Just as most players in Clonk do not play every scenario. And for some of us, writing code is more fun than playing games.
That's where one or more game designers usually close the gap between coders and gamers. ;)
Date 2012-05-16 17:07
Are you trying to convince me to work on your vague project? I'm flattered, I guess, but why would you want to waste your time like that? There are people in this community who seem to agree with you. Work with them.Though perhaps I didn't make my point clear enough: Policy in open-source projects is set by those who do the work. If you want to be taken seriously, start doing a bit of the work. It can be as small as an introductory text for an add-on-download board on this forum that Newton could just copy&paste. With some luck others will chime in and help.
The benefits could be enormous, yes. I have been somewhat critical of CCAN in the past - there's a lot of relatively low-hanging fruit available, like proper support for different languages in object packs or some basic linking to the league system (which would benefit both sides). Everybody involved has probably huge wishlists lying around, there's really no shortage on that.
Yet we would still need something to actually code it all up. Personally, I don't enjoy web programming at all - as evident by me just doing the bare minimum for keeping the league system running. Looking around the community, we do have a distinct lack of decent rails (/whatever) whizzes that would be willing to undertake the project. Until that changes, we just have to make do with what we have.
Yet we would still need something to actually code it all up. Personally, I don't enjoy web programming at all - as evident by me just doing the bare minimum for keeping the league system running. Looking around the community, we do have a distinct lack of decent rails (/whatever) whizzes that would be willing to undertake the project. Until that changes, we just have to make do with what we have.
> I mean, wouldn't an extra section in this forum suffice for "unofficial" game content?
>That actually sounds like a good starting point. No need to over-engineer everything from the start...
I agree completely. An extra section would give the people who already want to start contributing stuff a place to upload it and get feedback. It would be very easy to setup, and sufficient until we decide to get a "real" upload page.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
