Thinking to start building a PW but not sure if to use any HAK's

[Legacy_SuperFly_2000]

               Actually I am swaying towards not using any right now. It is going to be lots of desert....and the default desert tileset is lacking both this and that...even though the tropical tileset could be used to some extent also.

CEP - It is good but too big and a questionmark for quality in most of the content unfortunately. Also there is a questionmark about what is going on....if they are making more releases and so on. Questionmark on new NWNCQ tilesets...are they coming? Questionmark on the KOTOR heads...will they be in? ...and some other questionmarks...

Project Q - It is good but too small still. Questionmark about some of the "overrides" while most are good though. Questionmark about performance. Questionmark about upccoming releases.

Custom tilesets - I never really fell in love in any of them. Sure I know many love Worms and they are ok but still I think there is always somehting lacking when you compare custom tilesets to the default ones... Maxam the same...one of the best...but still...

Of course I have been thinking about the Babylon many times but in the end it always boils down to a battle of if the added content is worth it....



I know this is probably the wrong forum to have this discussion...because I know most of you have  completely different view. That is - the more custom content the better.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Jez_fr]

               

SuperFly_2000 wrote...I know this is probably the wrong forum to have this discussion...because I know most of you have  completely different view. That is - the more custom content the better.

Yes, and yes. Besides seems to me you already have made up your mind. If its of use, you can always start your PW without hak, see what happens, and if your community seems favorable add haks later.
The other way around, starting with haks and eventually removing them later is almost impossible to do.
Of course you will loose player attracted by new content, but you'll gain those who don't want to download things.

I don't thing there's a better route, only the one that suits the most (obvsiously the no-hak one).
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_olivier leroux]

               

SuperFly_2000 wrote...
I know this is probably the wrong forum to have this discussion...because I know most of you have  completely different view. That is - the more custom content the better.

Is it a discussion? Sounds more like thinking aloud. '>

Like jez says both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages and you can't please everybody. The important thing is that you have fun building and that you are convinced of your work. So only you yourself can answer what suits your tastes and requirements best.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_TheSpiritedLass]

               

The important thing is that you have fun building

SO true.



As Jez pointed out, haks are not real forgiving if you use them and try to take them out later.  Tilesets in particular are NASTY about that. As in crashing the toolset on load type of nasty.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy__six]

               

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

Custom tilesets - I never really fell in love in any of them. Sure I know many love Worms and they are ok but still I think there is always somehting lacking when you compare custom tilesets to the default ones... Maxam the same...one of the best...but still...

If I'm totally honest, I think if that's what you believe then I'd say no, custom content is not for you.

TheSpiritedLass wrote...

As
Jez pointed out, haks are not real forgiving if you use them and try to
take them out later.  Tilesets in particular are NASTY about that. As
in crashing the toolset on load type of nasty.

Hm. Tilesets should only crash the toolset if you try to open an area that uses a tileset you've removed,  which kinda stands to reason. Removing the tileset an area requires, and trying to access that area isn't necessarily the best way to avoid errors. However what is rather more concerning is the amount of ingame crashes you get simply for having areas in the module that use a tileset you've removed. Again the solution is to simply delete areas that require content you haven't got in the module.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par _six, 03 novembre 2010 - 06:34 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_TheSpiritedLass]

               @Six.  Sure, which is pretty nasty, no?  Now if you load a map that contains a monster that is no longer in the hak, you just get an invisible monster.  Annoying, but it doesn't tank your toolset.  *coughs*  Not that I've ever done either of those, of course.  *innocent whistle*  I'm uhhh... just guessing here, yes that is it.  *nods several times while trying to keep a straight face*
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_TSMDude]

               

TheSpiritedLass wrote...

@Six. Sure, which is pretty nasty, no? Now if you load a map that contains a monster that is no longer in the hak, you just get an invisible monster. Annoying, but it doesn't tank your toolset. *coughs* Not that I've ever done either of those, of course. *innocent whistle* I'm uhhh... just guessing here, yes that is it. *nods several times while trying to keep a straight face*

Though the crazy weird tileset thingy that someone did with adding then removing the hak was cool as heck...

I know they added it the Vault too.

Here it is;

Rabbit Hole Games: Escher's Labyrinth

It would actually make a great Chaos Plane Type Area.


               
               

               
            

[Legacy_SuperFly_2000]

               What the lol ... NOW I finally know how to do it! ....hahah
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_ehye_khandee]

               

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

Actually I am swaying towards not using any right now.

I too view adding haks as a bit of a hurdle, an impediment to _some_ PLAYERS logging into the server. Aside from the "oh I can't download THAT" crowd's reason, there are more. My _major_ objection to many haks is the fact that some include material from other games and NONE have yet shown me written permission from the original IP's owner. NWN2 is just one example, but KOTOR heads are another, and there are more. I would HATE to get a letter from one of those owners demanding I remove their content from my module. CEP uses NWN2 material since their 2.2 release, that and the sheer bloat of it all makes me shy from it. I may be of a different mind than most, but to my way of thinking the older CEPs were more polished and less crammed-in-at-the-last-minute. For that reason, I'm sticking to CEP2.1 - no odd IP stuff to monkey with and more, I'm compatible with all who have 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3.  '>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy__six]

               

TheSpiritedLass wrote...

@Six.  Sure, which is pretty nasty, no?  Now if you load a map that contains a monster that is no longer in the hak, you just get an invisible monster.

True. I think my point was that it won't do any permanent damage, though, which stands '>

ehye_khandee wrote...

My _major_ objection to many haks is
the fact that some include material from other games and NONE have yet
shown me written permission from the original IP's owner.

Isn't it a bit disrespectful to generalize and tar hakpaks with that brush, though? I actually share the same feelings as you on that one, which is why for instance I don't use worms' forest or the KotOR heads in my projects, and why Project Q has never included any content from NWN2 or elsewhere (or even from community authors that don't want us to).

On the other hand I very much doubt that anyone would take action against usage of such content. Of course that doesn't equate to moral justification, but aside from one incident with lucasarts I'm pretty sure it's never happened.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par _six, 03 novembre 2010 - 08:08 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_TheSpiritedLass]

               

Touche. I think my point was that it won't do any permanent damage.

Touche right back atcha.  *grins*
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_ehye_khandee]

               

_six wrote...

ehye_khandee wrote...

My _major_ objection to many haks is
the fact that some include material from other games and NONE have yet
shown me written permission from the original IP's owner.

Isn't it a bit disrespectful to generalize and tar hakpaks with that brush, though? I actually share the same feelings as you on that one, which is why for instance I don't use worms' forest or the KotOR heads in my projects, and why Project Q has never included any content from NWN2 or elsewhere (or even from community authors that don't want us to).

On the other hand I very much doubt that anyone would take action against usage of such content. Of course that doesn't equate to moral justification, but aside from one incident with lucasarts I'm pretty sure it's never happened.

I don't tar them all with that brush, I merely said 'some' do this. I mean no disparagement to all the folk who use only original material or who vette all the bits they use. I _do_ tend to err on the side of caution; and this is one noose I won't stick my head in. The very fact that it _could_ happen, makes me utterly sure that even tempting fate is not a good idea here. The law is pretty clear on use of material without permission so I avoid all that I find which does such, on a case-by-case basis I make those judgements.

Worms' uses some material from elsewhere ? Is that what you're saying here? Did not know that. Can anyone confirm or deny?
               
               

               
            

[Legacy__six]

               

ehye_khandee wrote...

Worms' uses some material from elsewhere ? Is that what you're saying here? Did not know that. Can anyone confirm or deny?

A huge amount of NWN2 stuff in there, which is even stated on his vault page IIRC. A lot is based on DLA/CODI/stilgar's stuff, too, which is fairly standard for NWN custom content, though that doesn't really go under the banner of from another game, so is not of any real note '>  I should point out too that I'm saying that in any kind of disapproving way - most of my own earlier content was entirely hashed together from existing stuff - merely that it's quite surprising when you look at just how little of the CC floating around is actually original.

Oh, and apologies for misreading your original post regarding the hakpaks. *puts glasses back on*
               
               

               

                     Modifié par _six, 03 novembre 2010 - 08:39 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Fester Pot]

               HAKs are about all that PW really has going for it. Customization is a big part to attract players considering a PW cannot offer the plot specific story lines and attention to detail that a single player module can offer as every player wants their character to be the focus of attention. Perhaps your vision would be best suited to a single player adventure, full of plot twists, depth and character focus.

FP!
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Fester Pot, 03 novembre 2010 - 08:25 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_SuperFly_2000]

               

ehye_khandee wrote...
I too view adding haks as a bit of a hurdle, an impediment to _some_ PLAYERS logging into the server. Aside from the "oh I can't download THAT" crowd's reason, there are more.

Actually it is not that I see them as a hurdle. It is more because I question if the design is really that good that it compares to the default design of the game...

ehye_khandee wrote...
My _major_ objection to many haks is the fact that some include material from other games and NONE have yet shown me written permission from the original IP's owner. NWN2 is just one example, but KOTOR heads are another, and there are more. I would HATE to get a letter from one of those owners demanding I remove their content from my module. CEP uses NWN2 material since their 2.2 release, that and the sheer bloat of it all makes me shy from it. I may be of a different mind than most, but to my way of thinking the older CEPs were more polished and less crammed-in-at-the-last-minute.

To be blunt I don't care so much about this. If the content is good and the original creators wouldn't OBVIOUSLY have anything against I don't see why not.

ehye_khandee wrote...
For that reason, I'm sticking to CEP2.1 - no odd IP stuff to monkey with and more, I'm compatible with all who have 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3.  '>

For me personally CEP 2.3 was a HUGE step forward compared to anything they had before that and this was the first time I actually started thinking to use CEP for building...
               
               

               

                     Modifié par SuperFly_2000, 03 novembre 2010 - 08:29 .