Author Topic: Builder tip: How to ensure that items with custom models/icons degrade gracefully  (Read 653 times)

Legacy_Invisig0th

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
  • Karma: +0/-0


               Problem: Many module authors include a few completely unique loot items (weapons, armor, helms, rings, etc.) which have custom models and/or inventory icons. By "custom" here I am specifically referring to appearances which are not available in the default game resources -- unique 3D models or icon images which are instead included by the module author as custom content assets in the HAK file specifically made for that module.

Unfortunately, if a victorious character carries that cool custom item into a subsequent module, they will often have problems due to missing appearances. For items with visible 3D models (helms, armor, weapons), the game will either not show a model at all, or will show a model for a bag. For items that only have inventory icons (rings, amulets, etc.), blank squares will appear in place of the missing custom icon.

All this can be really confusing, and it certainly makes the item a lot less fun to use in subsequent adventures. Personally, I export and reuse characters all the time, and I can't tell you how many times I've ended up with a bag on my head, an invisible weapon, or an inventory full of black boxes.

Solution: Consider replacing a less used default item of that type rather than adding a brand new one. That way, even in other modules that do not contain your custom assets, the game will use a reasonably suitable model and/or icon. For example, adding a custom helm model so that it replaces helm_015 might not be a bad idea. The helm will at least always look like a helm. For the very, very few people that might already possess an item with that specific appearance, the only difference is that they get a slightly different appearance for that specific item, and only while playing your module. The name and description (and for most armor and weapons, the colors) will still be different, and that should help to prevent any confusion. Assuming you choose wisely, your players will never end up mistaking a new item for one they already had.

This technique works even better for things that only appear as inventory icons. Wouldn't you rather have two rings with the appearance of iit_ring_036 rather than having one of end up as a black box? For things like Miscellaneous Thins, most of the available icons are rarely used and easily replaced in your own module without any concerns.

This approach is best suited for items that only use default Bioware item abilities. In these cases, the item should be 100% functional in any other NWN module. For items that have scripted special abilities, of course those abilities simply won't work in other modules. But at least the item will have some sort of appropriate appearance, and the players will have a much easier time managing their inventory between when they finish your module and when they visit the next merchant to sell their loot.
               
               

               


                     Modifié par Invisig0th, 12 septembre 2010 - 08:19 .
                     
                  


            

Legacy_Shadooow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7698
  • Karma: +0/-0


               To summarize: So you are telling us not to use new models and icons at all and just override that small ammount of already existing.



Considered and refused, but thanks for idea, I know a better solution which I keep for my project.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_The Amethyst Dragon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2981
  • Karma: +0/-0


               Interesting thoughts.  Not really useful for a servervault PW where characters aren't expected to be re-used elsewhere (after all, you can't take all that custom scripting/feats/spells/subraces/etc. with you when you leave that PW for another module).



I could see working this way for a small one-off adventure/module, where a player might want to be able to re-use the same character over in another module...but not having the item use the same icon/model I originally got it with would, for me, pretty much ruin that item anyway.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Invisig0th

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
  • Karma: +0/-0


               Yes, I specifically said in the second paragraph that this is intended for modules where players would be likely using their characters in other modules without that content after completion. You can call them small one-shots if you like but the fact is that the vast majority of modules available on NWVault fall into this category. If your only concern is playing one of the relative handful of PW modules, then this particular suggestion obviously isn't for you.

As for you Shadooow: if you actually do have a better suggestion as to how to prevent custom models from not showing up in other modules (which is unlikely), then post it.  Stop constantly insulting the contributions of others and try making a positive contribution to the discussion for a change.
               
               

               


                     Modifié par Invisig0th, 16 septembre 2010 - 11:53 .
                     
                  


            

Legacy_Invisig0th

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
  • Karma: +0/-0


               Before anyone suggests an obvious, but flawed, alternative ... forcing players to add your HAK to other modules so that your custom models and icons will work misses the point entirely. The point here is that builders who wish to do so can take extra steps so that their players have as seamless an experience as possible, and without requiring the player to take extra steps. Most NWN players have no idea how to attach a HAK to a module -- as anyone who has spent time in the Toolset forum can confirm.

Creating programs that "degrade gracefully" is an important concept in software development, and my point here is that this same concept can be very useful to certain NWN builders. This kind of thing won't be a priority for everyone who makes modules, but those of us who shoot for a professional level of quality in our releases can choose to use techniques like this to ensure that our players have a better experience.

For anyone who is not familiar with the idea of "graceful degradation", here is how one person explained it in the context of web development.

"Graceful Degradation" is an important principle in Web design.  It means that, when you put in features designed to take advantage of the latest and greatest features of newer browsers, you should do it in a way that older browsers, and browsers letting users disable particular features, can "step down" to a method that still allows access to the basic content of the site, though perhaps not as snazzy in appearance.

Which is the same general idea I'm talking about here -- allowing access to the same basic functionality, but with a less snazzy appearance. When the choice is between that and losing the functionality entirely, most people will choose the former. It's a compromise of course, but it's clearly better than not having a model or icon at all.
               
               

               


                     Modifié par Invisig0th, 16 septembre 2010 - 12:16 .
                     
                  


            

Legacy_Kendaric Varkellen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
  • Karma: +0/-0


               

Invisig0th wrote...

Before anyone suggests an obvious, but flawed, alternative ... forcing players to add your HAK to other modules so that your custom models and icons will work misses the point entirely. The point here is that builders who wish to do so can take extra steps so that their players have as seamless an experience as possible, and without requiring the player to take extra steps. Most NWN players have no idea how to attach a HAK to a module -- as anyone who has spent time in the Toolset forum can confirm.

Creating programs that "degrade gracefully" is an important concept in software development, and my point here is that this same concept can be very useful to certain NWN builders. This kind of thing won't be a priority for everyone who makes modules, but those of us who shoot for a professional level of quality in our releases can choose to use techniques like this to ensure that our players have a better experience.

For anyone who is not familiar with the idea of "graceful degradation", here is how one person explained it in the context of web development.


"Graceful Degradation" is an important principle in Web design. It means that, when you put in features designed to take advantage of the latest and greatest features of newer browsers, you should do it in a way that older browsers, and browsers letting users disable particular features, can "step down" to a method that still allows access to the basic content of the site, though perhaps not as snazzy in appearance.

Which is the same general idea I'm talking about here -- allowing access to the same basic functionality, but with a less snazzy appearance. When the choice is between that and losing the functionality entirely, most people will choose the former. It's a compromise of course, but it's clearly better than not having a model or icon at all.


What you suggest either increases the amount of work considerably on the builder's side (extracting resources from the haks, changing their names/references so they replace standard resources) or limits the builder by using standard NWN resources. While the latter may be an option for stuff that only has iventory icons (rings, amulets, etc.), it's hardly a good solution for weapons and armor since we use a hak to replace them because we don't like their looks or feel they don't fit the atmosphereof our module. So we'd be stuck with the former option, which increases the workload on the builder's side.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Shadooow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7698
  • Karma: +0/-0


               I had the idea to add duplicate icons (models maybe too) of default ones up to max. However Im not now so sure if its good solution as they will show in toolset and builder could choose them.



For players there is no issue but if I add this into my community patch and builder choose one of those duplicates, players who dont have the patch will see the blank square again. Still better than original idea.
               
               

               
            

Legacy_Invisig0th

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
  • Karma: +0/-0


               

So we'd be stuck with the former option, which increases the workload on the builder's side.

For some builders, having these items be fully usable in other modules is very important, and well worth the time it takes. It certainly does not take a "considerable" amount of work to open the ASCII model for a quick find and replace -- at least not for anyone even moderately familiar with such things. I've done it myself many times.

Other builders either won't consider this important, or just aren't interested in doing any extra work. That's up to the individual builder.
               
               

               


                     Modifié par Invisig0th, 16 septembre 2010 - 11:17 .
                     
                  


            

Legacy_Invisig0th

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
  • Karma: +0/-0


               <snip, double post>
               
               

               


                     Modifié par Invisig0th, 16 septembre 2010 - 11:21 .