Difference between CEP 2.3 and 2.4? And a frank discussion on CEP in general.

[Legacy_henesua]

               If you want to join us at Foundation, Ravens, you are welcome.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Squatting Monk]

               By "already done", henesua means we're already trying to tackle the problem, not that a project like this is already complete.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               Thats why I quoted her, so there would be no confusion. But this is the internet, the place where confusion happens ™.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Rolo Kipp]

               <answering q's...>

Well, actually, Project Q *is* doing exactly what you say, 3RM. It is better organized, generally higher quality, still posting (and *listening*) on these forums and still actively advancing. Cervantes in particular is working on the enhancement/cleanup of a truly spectacular tileset...  

What my compadre's above are discussing, however, is changing the rules quite a bit ;-) Which makes me happy as a pickpocket at the market =) <*ah-hem* boss...>

Er, a pig in slop, I meant :-) <*face-wing*>

<...not asked of him>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_3RavensMore]

               

henesua wrote...

If you want to join us at Foundation, Ravens, you are welcome.

Now that sounds like a seriously ambitious project!  I’ve read the Foundation thread, and I’ve I one wee question that my old raven brain is having trouble with.  How exactly is this a replacement for large content collection like Q or CEP?  Or is it not supposed to be at all?  It seems targeted at PWs – and that’s fantastic – but will it be useful for SP mods?  Will it be useful for people who already have their own custom scripting systems?   Does is have some function as a replacement or improvement of large custom content collections, or am I missing its purpose completely?
               
               

               

                     Modifié par 3RavensMore, 18 février 2013 - 12:11 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_henesua]

               Foundation is not intended as a replacement, but the next generation. If CEP 3 is modular like Project Q or CEP 1 it can work with the next generation of content management. CEP 2 however just won't work by nature of its all or nothing design.

The key to this is the Never Launcher that I keep alluding to. I shouldn't really be talking about it since I am not the developer, but the truth is that its in the works and when released will render the whole "to CEP or not to CEP" argument a quaint relic of the past.

BUT I am putting together HAKs for common resources that linked PWs will use. Character appearances, item appearances etc...  Then when that is done, it would be interesting to create thematic HAKs that fit particular aesthetic styles, game genres etc... Some of the thematic content would override the common resources.

Example: Character is wearing a tabard in Medieval PW. In Modern PW thematic override makes this look like a tench coat.

Foundation is not intended for singleplayer use. The HAKs of course can be used in any environment.

It will definitely be useful for people with their own scripted systems, and we are designing it with that in mind. It really depends on how well those systems are written. Krit's work is a good example of scripted systems that are designed well enough to plug and play anywhere.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par henesua, 18 février 2013 - 01:03 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_3RavensMore]

               Thanks for the clarification of what it is, and is not, and what the general intent of the project is.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Lazarus Magni]

               

NWN_baba yaga wrote...

i just let it go and accept the role as the evil sexist.

Wow, ok... now I look like an idiot defending you.

And hey Monk, pro tip for ya... things aren't always what they seem.

P.S. Too Sensative? That's my thing... no one else is allowed to be that. If anyone else attempts that they are posers. (BTW this is a joke in case anyone missed that nuiance    )

P.P.S. In case anyone was wondering...  I am not baba, despite our remarkably similar posting times last posts... Again Monk... things...
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Lazarus Magni, 18 février 2013 - 11:31 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Master Jax]

               In short, if no one is satisfied with CEP, why not make a new CEP? Ditch that! Project Q is a great base for such an endeavor! The one thing I don't like about CEP is it is full of what I perceive as low-quality content, and is all mis-matched. "New" contributors have some sort of coherence in this respect. I mean, put Sixesthrice, Baba, PstMarie and Toro together, and their work flows seamlessly between them. Maybe I like their particular style and approaches, but it seems to me others love it just as well. So, why not start a new CEP project?
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Lazarus Magni]

               

Master Jax wrote...

why not make a new CEP? Ditch that!

The only reason we use CEP is because it is/was ubiquitous (or at least highly prevelant over the last 10 years), and offers a tremendous amount of content which is widely accepted. If a true "community" pack came out, I personally would advocate for it stongly on our world. In other words, if CEP 2.5 came out (or 3.0). or something better, which was a true community project (e.g. open to true community development, and widely accepted), I would also be quite interested in incorporating it into our world (as I bet many others would as well.)
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Lazarus Magni, 18 février 2013 - 06:26 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Tarot Redhand]

               Just a thought (may be stupid, may be impractical) but why not use as the base the content that has made Hall of Fame status on the vault and then cherry pick the best of what's left? At least for a sp common set of haks.

TR
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               

Lazarus Magni wrote...

Master Jax wrote...

why not make a new CEP? Ditch that!

The only reason we use CEP is because it is/was ubiquitous (or at least highly prevelant over the last 10 years), and offers a tremendous amount of content which is widely accepted. If a true "community" pack came out, I personally would advocate for it stongly on our world. In other words, if CEP 2.5 came out (or 3.0). or something better, which was a true community project (e.g. open to true community development, and widely accepted), I would also be quite interested in incorporating it into our world (as I bet many others would as well.)

I'd like it if someone offerred to produce a CEP 3.0, or would join with us at Foundation to lead such an effort (allowing me to focus my efforts on code). I think it is critically important that the organization of this package be modular as was done with CEP 1 and is done with Project Q.

The first task for the Foundation's CC package is a focus on a HAK for body parts, phenotypes etc.... My current intention is to make this compatible with Project Q as they have already done an incredible amount of work in this regard, and a builder that wants that content only needs to use a couple of Project Q's HAKs. While I like the work I did for Arnheim in this regard, I think it worth while to talk with the Realms of Mythology folks as they did some excellent work in this regard.

But anyway, the compilation part is easy. I've already done this a few times, including moving indexes for the different pieces around, and adding Q's phenotypes to robes etc... The hard part is getting approval from the artists to redistribute their work. Most are not reachable anymore, and while the CEP team received approval for some of the stuff in their compilation, they have made it clear that they lay claim to all content in CEP as their property and that they will not share anything.

Again this is why I have been critical of the CEP team. They have done everything they can to prevent the community from creating a new expansion pack. Making the compilation is incredibly easy. The hard part is getting approval from the artists to use the content. If we could simply make a CEP 3, and inherit the approvals of the artists that CEP was given this would be an incredibly easy project.

In anycase, by working together we could probably get over this hurdle. People with contacts of old community members would be a great help to work with. And someone that would do the leg work to contact artists and get approval for inclusion of stuff in a compilation HAK would be very useful. This would be someone that would take inventory of all the content they can't live without, and start contacting the artists to get approval to use it. I can do all of this, but have a lot on my plate and without help I need to keep the scope of my work small.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy__six]

               Forgive an absolute tangent here. Am just thinking aloud, solving nothing...


Honestly, the root of all these problems is the .2da file. Why are compilations even necessary? .2da files. Why can CEP not be compatible with Q without extensive work? .2da files. Why do servers need a master hak to use more than one non-tileset (or even some tilesets) hakpak at a time? .2da files. It might be occurring to me a decade too late, but I wonder if this could all have been solved long ago with some kind of dynamic hak file system implemented as a launcher application. With the interface somewhat similar to the .esm queue used by Elder Scrolls mods.

Wishful thinking though. I have an idea how it could be done - Q for instance already packs its haks from a set of directories, and I've myself written a wrapper that essentially swaps out all standard NWN content for custom archives - but without converting the entire community's content over to an appropriate format it'd be a momentous task to retcon it into use.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par _six, 18 février 2013 - 01:58 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

_six wrote...

Forgive an absolute tangent here. Am just thinking aloud, solving nothing...


Honestly, the root of all these problems is the .2da file. Why are compilations even necessary? .2da files. Why can CEP not be compatible with Q without extensive work? .2da files. Why do servers need a master hak to use more than one non-tileset (or even some tilesets) hakpak at a time? .2da files. It might be occurring to me a decade too late, but I wonder if this could all have been solved long ago with some kind of dynamic hak file system implemented as a launcher application. With the interface somewhat similar to the .esm queue used by Elder Scrolls mods.

hmm, you are right its because of 2DA files, but I cannot imagine how you could avoid them

Problem is not in client. It would required completely new server-client protocol as server atm send to client: "show placeable X" where X is reference to the player's 2das. The only way to workaround this would be if server sent a name of the model. While we could maybe be able to modify nwn server to do that, problem would be with client...
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_henesua]

               The problem isn't only 2da files. Any resource which is part based or otherwise has numbering will collide with a similarly named part. Integrating Reforged Weapons with Project Q for example requires a bit of work - none of which involves 2da edits. Q's shields are another example, and anyone that has compiled a HAK of heads and clothing knows the renumbering game. And there is also the TGA - DDS thing which can lead to work. Phenotypes are a hybrid case: do you edit the 2da or do you edit the model names? Both?

Regardless I do catch your drift, _six. But I do not think you are too late with this idea. I wonder if a conversation between Pain and yourself could be fruitful in this regard.