It is currently 10 Dec 2022, 10:40

WELCOME TO SIMUSCAPE!


Please Sign in or Register to enable all features, remove restrictions and gain additional access!
For information on how to bypass the CAPTCHA or to contact Team Simuscape, Continue Here!


Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 2   [ 24 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 27 Feb 2013, 10:30 
Lurker
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2013, 18:24
Posts: 10
Location: Seattle, Washington
The Canadian Cities NewGRF is by far, my favorite town set while playing OpenTTD. Recently, I have begun playing my games with the starting date set to 1840. Canadian Cities obliges me in this regard, but with a couple of caveats:

    Modern skyscrapers began to appear in North America shortly after 1880, but no skyscrapers will appear in Canadian Cities until 1940.

    Once skyscrapers do appear in 1940, they are brilliant examples of the architecture I would expect to find from around 1880/1890 until the late 1920s. By 1940, we should be firmly in the Art Deco period.

It would be great if this could be adjusted in a future version of the file, or better yet... the ability to set the "eras" used by the NewGRF through parameters.

Likewise, I have only recently "discovered" the NA Roads NewGRF and I am rapidly falling in love with it. However, I would like to recommend two possible design changes to any potential future versions of the file:

    The replacement of the red brick roads with cobblestones, or an option to choose either (such as through a parameter).

    The ability to make ALL roads dirt roads (probably via parameter).

Thank you for your time, and thank you for the great contributions you are making to our shared hobby. You are really turning out some first class stuff.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013, 01:18 
Player
Player

Joined: 12 Mar 2012, 02:39
Posts: 469
BauerME wrote:
Modern skyscrapers began to appear in North America shortly after 1880, but no skyscrapers will appear in Canadian Cities until 1940. ...
When CanCity was created, game start was 1920 or later. Having the highrise appear already in 1920 was considered too early for the game.

CanCity is due for a complete re-write. I've got some more buildings to add. I take your suggestion to time shift the appearance of buildings via parameter on board and see what I can do. But, don't expect a release soon ...

Quote:
... NARoads ... The replacement of the red brick roads with cobblestones, or an option to choose either. ... The ability to make ALL roads dirt roads
We did have plans to add a third road type, but unfortunately, there are no artists willing to do a conversion. The code is ready to accommodate a third road type. Should there be anyone willing to create another road surface, it could be added.

Having city streets in dirt would also require a number of sprites to be updated ... any takers ?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013, 02:24 
Master Mentor
User avatar

Joined: 27 Feb 2012, 22:45
Posts: 1880
Location: Canada
OzTrans wrote:
Having city streets in dirt would also require a number of sprites to be updated ... any takers ?
Well, the road surfaces would be the same as those of the rural roads. Only the sidewalks and streetlights would need changing. I'm thinking wooden sidewalks and gas lamps. Hitching posts and water troughs would also be appropriate. What about the drive through bus and truck stations/stops? Can they change with the era?

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013, 02:41 
Player
Player

Joined: 12 Mar 2012, 02:39
Posts: 469
wallyweb wrote:
... the road surfaces would be the same as those of the rural roads. Only the sidewalks and streetlights would need changing. I'm thinking wooden sidewalks and gas lamps. Hitching posts and water troughs would also be appropriate. What about the drive through bus and truck stations/stops? Can they change with the era?
Yes, the road surface would remain dirt, but all the furniture would require an update, including bus/truck stops, bridges and any other feature that uses brick road surface. We could implement it as either an alternate road type to dirt/brick or as a third road type (e.g. all dirt, dirt/brick and bitumen).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013, 06:39 
Master Mentor
User avatar

Joined: 27 Feb 2012, 22:45
Posts: 1880
Location: Canada
OzTrans wrote:
(e.g. all dirt, dirt/brick and bitumen).
With OTTD's early years capability, this makes the most sense, so the question would be can one have three eras?
BauerME wrote:
The replacement of the red brick roads with cobblestones
Also, cobblestones are more realistic than brick. The same texture with a grey colouring should work.

OzTrans wrote:
all the furniture would require an update, including bus/truck stops, bridges and any other feature that uses brick road surface.
Herein lies the challenge.
Historical accuracy says bridge surfaces evolve from wood to bitumen. Brick is rare if at all, but never cobblestone.
Paved bus/truck stops in a dirt era would look strange, but so would dirt in a paved era.

Obviously the TTDPatch restrictions still apply, but has OTTD evolved yet to allow an evolution of bridge and road stop surfaces?
What about bus/truck stations? These might actually work nicely with brick in any era.

Another thought ... Can the depots evolve? A livery stable in the early years ...

@BauerME: How are we doing with this?

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013, 08:43 
Lurker
Lurker

Joined: 06 Mar 2012, 23:12
Posts: 72
wallyweb wrote:
Herein lies the challenge.
Historical accuracy says bridge surfaces evolve from wood to bitumen. Brick is rare if at all, but never cobblestone.
Paved bus/truck stops in a dirt era would look strange, but so would dirt in a paved era.

Obviously the TTDPatch restrictions still apply, but has OTTD evolved yet to allow an evolution of bridge and road stop surfaces?
What about bus/truck stations? These might actually work nicely with brick in any era.

Another thought ... Can the depots evolve? A livery stable in the early years ...

All that sounds possible, except bridges, I don't know if date-dependent bridge graphics are possible.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Feb 2013, 08:48 
Player
Player

Joined: 12 Mar 2012, 02:39
Posts: 469
wallyweb wrote:
OzTrans wrote:
(e.g. all dirt, dirt/brick and bitumen).
With OTTD's early years capability, this makes the most sense, so the question would be can one have three eras?
Yes, you can have any number. Same logic as with 2 surfaces; either one for entire game, or upgrade at a given year.

Quote:
OzTrans wrote:
all the furniture would require an update, including bus/truck stops, bridges and any other feature that uses brick road surface.
Herein lies the challenge. Historical accuracy says bridge surfaces evolve from wood to bitumen. Brick is rare if at all, but never cobblestone.
True, I used brick with the bridges, because I had the road sprites, so it was just a copy + paste. Remember Hartland ? the same sort of issues with bridges vs road surface.

Quote:
Obviously the TTDPatch restrictions still apply, but has OTTD evolved yet to allow an evolution of bridge and road stop surfaces?
No, both are exactly the same; all graphics replace either relevant sprites in trg1r.grf; with bridges implemented via Action-As, still no Action-3-2-1 support for bridges.

Quote:
What about bus/truck stations? These might actually work nicely with brick in any era.
They can remain and be used in any era

Quote:
Can the depots evolve? A livery stable in the early years ...
They can, just like the road surface.

One thing that may cause troubles are the tram tracks ...

Supercheese wrote:
... I don't know if date-dependent bridge graphics are possible.
Could be implemented too, same logic as with road surface.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2013, 00:09 
Lurker
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2013, 18:24
Posts: 10
Location: Seattle, Washington
Quote:
@BauerME: How are we doing with this?


This is absolutely fantabulous... certainly more than I had expected. :)

After, I got my feet wet with the North American/Canadian sets from this site, I was pretty jazzed to hear that the second generation on the way (or at least in the planning stages). I would love to see these changes make it into that.

Quote:
CanCity is due for a complete re-write. I've got some more buildings to add. I take your suggestion to time shift the appearance of buildings via parameter on board and see what I can do. But, don't expect a release soon ...


No problems. As I said before, the files as they currently exist are very playable. Making changes along the lines I suggested are good. Making changes along the lines you are discussing are even better. Anything worth having is worth waiting for... so I'll wait. :)

It would be nice to add the ability to tweak how often some of the less common/unique buildings are built. I am playing a map where there are several cities with over 70,000 people, but so far I have spotted only two department stores. If I was a department store CEO living on that map, I would see potential expansion all over the place. ;)

Quote:
Also, cobblestones are more realistic than brick. The same texture with a grey colouring should work.


I like this idea. Something else to consider is that paving the streets did not come with city size, but rather with prosperity... at least in North America. Chicago had no paving at all until after the big Chicago Fire and even then, it was initially found only in the most prosperous parts of the city. The same was true for Seattle. Generally, the rapid growth of North American cities meant that the city expanded much faster than the resources that were available to pave the roads. This is different from Europe where many towns and villages grew much more slowly and all or at least most of their streets had been paved with cobblestones long ago.

That reminds me... since we are kind of brainstorming here, I would like to throw the idea out there of someday expanding the scope of the NA Roads to be a kind of "Global Roads" patch. As it stands now, it is the only worthwhile option for dirt roads (in my humble opinion). Since I like to start my games in the 19th century and I now always use NA Roads, I eventually get North American traffic lines and striping once the bitumen triggers... even if I am playing with everything else set to be a European locale (generally I only play in North America or Europe). At this point, that is perfectly fine with me.

However, it would be even better (perhaps in version 3... if there will be such a thing) that there is a parameter or toggle that lets the bitumen surfaces be painted in North American or European striping.

While, I am here, there is another point I would like to bring up while I have your ear(s). TTO/TTD and its descendants are somewhat unusual in that there is no single "official" way to play them. Some folks play them as business simulations. Other folks use them as "virtual" model railroads. Others just want to feel the thrill of building or accomplishing something while still others like to play it like a real-time strategy game. Who is right? All of them.

That's an important distinction because the vast majority of NewGRF files out there have no ability to change anything within them short of changing the NewGRF itself or building an add-on to be used in conjunction with the original file... both of which are beyond the skills or abilities of 99% of the user base. That leaves the vast majority of players at the mercy of the original NewGRF author(s).

Of course, adding parameters to the NewGRF would go a long way toward fixing this. Most of the time, the lack of parameters is due to the fact that the author may not know how to add them or has a very specific purpose in mind for the file and there is no need to add parameters to meet that specific purpose... or there is no need to add parameters that do not specifically help meet that purpose. However, the Simuscape artist community seems to be filled with some extremely bright and talented people and the stuff that I have seen you produce so far seems to be head and shoulders superior to 98% of the stuff that is out there.

Therefore, I would like to plant the bug in your (collective) ear(s) to consider adding extensive parameters (to future releases) in order to allow a user to configure your stuff in a way that works best with their preferred mode of play (which may or may not be how the original author envisioned it to be used). In actuality, your files generally have more parameters than most of the stuff out there and for that I am very grateful. However, expanding the number and scope of the parameters will broaden the appeal of an individual NewGRF because it will allow users to better integrate it into their preferred play style.

After all, the point of all this beautiful customization work is for others to use, share and enjoy the fruits of the labor. Anything that broadens that audience has got to be a good thing.

Thank you for listening to my ramblings. Keep up the good work!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2013, 00:35 
Simuscape Admin
User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2011, 09:25
Posts: 3033
Location: Sweden
BauerME wrote:
While, I am here, there is another point I would like to bring up while I have your ear(s). TTO/TTD and its descendants are somewhat unusual in that there is no single "official" way to play them. Some folks play them as business simulations. Other folks use them as "virtual" model railroads. Others just want to feel the thrill of building or accomplishing something while still others like to play it like a real-time strategy game. Who is right? All of them.


Is there really a right or a wrong when it comes to how people prefer to play their games? I'd say that the vast majority probably plays TTDLX due to the the transportation feature itself, and more so because of the railroad model it provides - rather than having a "real" railroad model at home... And yes, I do believe also a vast majority are sort of railway freaks when it comes down to it... :P

But again, people chose different play styles depending on personal preferences... me for instance focus more - perhaps more than anybody else - on developing cities that are complex and well balanced in terms of overall realism... I really enjoy that play style, and since it's obviously also a transportation game I try as much as possible to integrate both railroads and roads inside my cities - actually up to a point where I no longer have full control myself... :P You can view it HERE!

_________________
Image

Simuscape - A world of its own;
SimuTalk | Visual Studio | INFRA Diary

INFRA - Chose Your Destination;
INFRA Projects | INFRA Downloads


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Mar 2013, 08:50 
Lurker
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2012, 19:34
Posts: 48
Adding simple newgrf parameters is, broadly, not that hard, and is probably easier to understand than some other newgrf features.

However, parameters are a PITA. Every parameter increases complexity. Side effects of this include:
- increases the amount of testing required (adding two parameters could require up to four times the testing effort)
- bugs are harder to report, diagnose and fix
- setting up a game is more complicated and time consuming for players
- the grf is harder to design and modify, which slows down the release cycle

Parameters that are orthogonal are much simpler than combinatorial parameters (which are horrible).

I also dislike parameters because for me, good design involves making choices. Providing many many parameters allows the author to duck the work of making good choices, and pass that work on to the player. Obviously there are cases where that's actually desirable, but other times it's just making the player do boring work :)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Mar 2013, 00:53 
Lurker
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2013, 18:24
Posts: 10
Location: Seattle, Washington
Quote:
I also dislike parameters because for me, good design involves making choices. Providing many many parameters allows the author to duck the work of making good choices, and pass that work on to the player. Obviously there are cases where that's actually desirable, but other times it's just making the player do boring work :)

I totally understand that.

However, if a NewGRF gets coded a certain way that appeals to one particular class of player or only for one particular set of scenarios AND yet it becomes popular and lots of other players are bugging the author to whip up a new version of the NewGRF to handle their particular game style or preferences, then you have yet another stack of work to do (unless you tell the community to put a sock in it and live with it as it is... which is a completely valid response as well).

You can also go with the disclaimer approach which is to include the parameters but make it clear that running the NewGRF with the default parameter settings has been tested and is suitable for mainstream use, but that changing the values comes with a substantially greater risk of unintentional weirdness and such use is at the risk and responsibility of the user.

However, the point I really wanted to make is that there is a certain generally accepted (de facto) gold standard for NewGRFs in the community, but the deliberate and liberal use of parameters in future NewGRFs could bring a greater level of value (perceived and actual) to the player community and facilitate a wider band of the overall player population and their disparate play styles.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 02 Mar 2013, 00:55 
Lurker
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2013, 18:24
Posts: 10
Location: Seattle, Washington
Quote:
But again, people chose different play styles depending on personal preferences... me for instance focus more - perhaps more than anybody else - on developing cities that are complex and well balanced in terms of overall realism... I really enjoy that play style, and since it's obviously also a transportation game I try as much as possible to integrate both railroads and roads inside my cities - actually up to a point where I no longer have full control myself... :P You can view it HERE!


Thank you, SAC. I had not realized that there were some game journals on the site (I love game journals). Thank you for pointing it out and sharing a link to yours. :-)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013, 04:10 
Player
Player

Joined: 12 Mar 2012, 02:39
Posts: 469
BauerME wrote:
It would be nice to add the ability to tweak how often some of the less common/unique buildings are built. ...
It isn't that easy ... the Department Store can appear once in cities with a population of between 2,000 and 15,000, larger cities can have a maximum of 2 stores. However, the problems is, that this department store is a 2x2 building and city authorities have real difficulties to find large enough vacant land to construct one. This is a very old issue, but I do have some ideas and I'll try to find a way, so that 2x2 buildings in particular get a better chance to show up.

'unique' buildings shouldn't be seen too often on the entire map; e.g. the 'Flatiron' Tower is limited to 4 per map, but no more than once per city. But with the addition of more 'unique' buildings we should be able to get a better mix. CanCity is far from finished.

Quote:
... Since I like to start my games in the 19th century and I now always use NA Roads, I eventually get North American traffic lines and striping once the bitumen triggers... even if I am playing with everything else set to be a European locale ...
NA Roads in general can be at home anywhere in the world as it caters for both right and left hand traffic side and only the yellow road markings make it North American. It would be no problem to add a set of bitumen roads with white markings. But, we would need an artist to do the conversion, unfortunately they are very hard to find nowadays.

Quote:
... there is no single "official" way to play them. Some folks play them as business simulations. Other
folks use them as "virtual" model rail roads. Others just want to feel the thrill of building or accomplishing something while still others like to play it like a real-time strategy game. Who is right? All of them.
Of course all of them are right. I, for one, see the map as 64,000+ tiles on which I can place something. In the end I have a piece of 'animated' art work.

Quote:
... the vast majority of NewGRF files out there have no ability to change anything within them short of changing the NewGRF ...
True, but many have the ability to be tailored by the player to some degree. Many GRFs have parameters to do that; e.g. (from some of my GRFs) BK Tunnel uses different materials for the tunnel walls, most sets have the variable snowline feature, CanCity allows to adjust the city population, NARoads has a 2 era road system. In the Canadian Theme Pack (v2.0) there will even be more options to choose from.

Quote:
... adding parameters to the NewGRF would go a long way toward fixing this. Most of the time, the lack of parameters is due to the fact that the author may not know how to add them or has a very specific purpose in mind for the file and there is no need to add parameters to meet that specific purpose...
Simply adding a parameter is not the solution. First, we must have a good idea, then that idea needs to be implemented, and only then do we have to decide whether we need a parameter or can use an automatic procedure for the idea to work.

You are welcome to bring ideas. If they are doable and we have an artist or two to help implementing them, then I am more than willing to look at it. I am fully aware, there are many GRFs out there with multiple implementations. Take 'Total Bridges Replacement Set' (TBRS), there are as many sets as there are road and rail options. Not wanting to be too critical, but all could go into one single set and they wouldn't even need any parameters to make them work. But, it would need a lot of co-operation between various artists and coders of many a GRF.

andythenorth wrote:
... parameters are a PITA. Every parameter increases complexity. ...
Not necessarily .. I haven't really found any problems with implementing a number of similar features, selectable via parameter; e.g. NARoads has a 2 era road system, coding the second era was much quicker than the first one. Naturally, when a problem does arise, then we need to know what the parameter settings were, just as we need to know what other GRFs have been activated.

Quote:
... Providing many parameters allows the author to duck the work of making good choices, ...
I have to disagree on that ... e.g. CanCity allows to adjust the city population. I've had great difficulty to come up with a well balanced solution. Now, with the ability to adjust the population by players, let them try to find a good individual solution. Of course, all parameters must have default values, that are considered balanced, and must be validated fully before being applied in a GRF; thus minimising issues.

But in most cases, parameters have no influence on playability, they just allow certain features to be customised visually.

BauerME wrote:
However, the point I really wanted to make is that there is a certain generally accepted (de facto) gold standard for NewGRFs in the community, but the deliberate and liberal use of parameters in future NewGRFs could bring a greater level of value (perceived and actual) to the player community and facilitate a wider band of the overall player population and their disparate play styles.
I believe, you are one a few that welcomes the customising of GRFs, the majority doesn't really care. They download the GRF, activate it but then never actually use it. Why is it that so many sub-features available within a GRF, that have real issues, never get reported as faulty. I've found many issues months after the GRF was released and nobody reported it. They are just not getting used !!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013, 04:33 
Master Mentor
User avatar

Joined: 27 Feb 2012, 22:45
Posts: 1880
Location: Canada
OzTrans wrote:
BauerME wrote:
However, the point I really wanted to make is that there is a certain generally accepted (de facto) gold standard for NewGRFs in the community, but the deliberate and liberal use of parameters in future NewGRFs could bring a greater level of value (perceived and actual) to the player community and facilitate a wider band of the overall player population and their disparate play styles.
I believe, you are one a few that welcomes the customising of GRFs, the majority doesn't really care. They download the GRF, activate it but then never actually use it. Why is it that so many sub-features available within a GRF, that have real issues, never get reported as faulty. I've found many issues months after the GRF was released and nobody reported it. They are just not getting used !!
I strongly suspect that many, if not most, players simply download the files without reading any of the literature, where the power of many of the features are described. These are probably the same folks who buy a car, say "I know!" to the salesman's instructions, get in, turn the key, set the gear shift, press on the gas peddle, and then promptly fall into a panic when they pass under a rain cloud and they can't find the wiper switch.

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013, 07:31 
Lurker
Lurker
User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2013, 18:24
Posts: 10
Location: Seattle, Washington
OzTrans wrote:
It isn't that easy ... the Department Store can appear once in cities with a population of between 2,000 and 15,000, larger cities can have a maximum of 2 stores. However, the problems is, that this department store is a 2x2 building and city authorities have real difficulties to find large enough vacant land to construct one. This is a very old issue, but I do have some ideas and I'll try to find a way, so that 2x2 buildings in particular get a better chance to show up.

'unique' buildings shouldn't be seen too often on the entire map; e.g. the 'Flatiron' Tower is limited to 4 per map, but no more than once per city. But with the addition of more 'unique' buildings we should be able to get a better mix. CanCity is far from finished.

NA Roads in general can be at home anywhere in the world as it caters for both right and left hand traffic side and only the yellow road markings make it North American. It would be no problem to add a set of bitumen roads with white markings. But, we would need an artist to do the conversion, unfortunately they are very hard to find nowadays.

Thank you for the specific details. It would be nice to have parameters to control those heuristics. ;) Seriously, I am looking forward to the next incarnation of CanCity (and all of the Canadian stuff for that matter). Up to this point, I have been strictly a consumer of the stuff that has been coming out of the TTD community and its descendant communities. If you could let me know exactly what file formats, bitmap sizes, palettes, etc. that you require, I could take a stab at generating some stuff for you. At the very least it might help us in prototyping the proof of concept and get some testing done until a better artist is freed up. In the best case scenario, it just might work out to be good enough to go out for mass consumption.

However, there are caveats... things are always crazy on my calendar (I have twin three year olds, a full-time job, a high maintenance wife and I am working on my bachelor's degree), so I can't guarantee a speedy turnaround, but some progress is better than sitting dead in the water (if the art stuff is the only thing currently blocking you).

OzTrans wrote:
Of course all of them are right. I, for one, see the map as 64,000+ tiles on which I can place something. In the end I have a piece of 'animated' art work.

Absolutely. I totally love the stuff I see in the game journals. These are worlds that are built and trimmed one tile at a time... like a master gardener working on a huge bonsai tree. The created map is almost a static snapshot of an ideal little self-contained world and to me it is nothing short of high art (at least in a TTD/modeling sense).

Personally, I am attracted to that same aspect of the hobby, but I prefer my "art" to "function" within the context of the game... so while I truly love the static ideal, my efforts go toward growing and shaping a thriving world that still fits within the context of the game as a game (and not a modeling platform). As a result, my maps will never look as realistic or beautiful as some of those I have seen around here, but I get a lot of satisfaction out of taking the less than optimal "raw material" that the game provides (and continues to change on me) and to shape and maintain order out of that chaos while building a growing and thriving world.

OzTrans wrote:
True, but many have the ability to be tailored by the player to some degree. Many GRFs have parameters to do that; e.g. (from some of my GRFs) BK Tunnel uses different materials for the tunnel walls, most sets have the variable snowline feature, CanCity allows to adjust the city population, NARoads has a 2 era road system. In the Canadian Theme Pack (v2.0) there will even be more options to choose from.

Absolutely... but these tend to be the exceptions to the rule. In general, I find parameters only on the better NewGRF files and those tend to come from some of the more experienced and active members of the artistic and development community.

At the risk of sounding like a fanboi, this is a major attraction for me to the Canadian stuff (plus the fact that you have an actual user guide for each release AND it contains useful information). It is the same reason why I love NewGRFs from PikkaBird. Besides the fact that your stuff works and looks good, the parameters allow me to take what I need or want from your work and use it in-game in the manner that works best for my playstyle... which I guess goes back to the root of this conversation in the first place. However, more options are always welcome. :-)

OzTrans wrote:
Simply adding a parameter is not the solution. First, we must have a good idea, then that idea needs to be implemented, and only then do we have to decide whether we need a parameter or can use an automatic procedure for the idea to work.

You are welcome to bring ideas. If they are doable and we have an artist or two to help implementing them, then I am more than willing to look at it. I am fully aware, there are many GRFs out there with multiple implementations. Take 'Total Bridges Replacement Set' (TBRS), there are as many sets as there are road and rail options. Not wanting to be too critical, but all could go into one single set and they wouldn't even need any parameters to make them work. But, it would need a lot of co-operation between various artists and coders of many a GRF.

I would love to be of assistance in any way I could. Free time is not an abundant commodity in my world, but if you are not in a huge rush, I can help out in almost any aspect... though there will definitely be a learning curve for most tasks. Just let me know what you need or want and I will see what I can do.

OzTrans wrote:
I believe, you are one a few that welcomes the customising of GRFs, the majority doesn't really care. They download the GRF, activate it but then never actually use it. Why is it that so many sub-features available within a GRF, that have real issues, never get reported as faulty. I've found many issues months after the GRF was released and nobody reported it. They are just not getting used !!

Yep. I doubt that most people care or even know about that stuff... but fortunately (or unfortunately) the dual influences of my nature and my career choice kind of drive my need/desire to look under the hood, kick the tires and check every button and dial on the dashboard.

wallyweb wrote:
I strongly suspect that many, if not most, players simply download the files without reading any of the literature, where the power of many of the features are described. These are probably the same folks who buy a car, say "I know!" to the salesman's instructions, get in, turn the key, set the gear shift, press on the gas peddle, and then promptly fall into a panic when they pass under a rain cloud and they can't find the wiper switch.

I agree 100%. This is the lowest common denominator, and for this crowd almost any NewGRF would be acceptable unless it crashes the game or their machine. Even a casual stroll through the forums shows that a lot of these folks often don't understand what the individual NewGRFs have to offer, and many even have no idea that individual NewGRFs can conflict and overwrite each other and that even the order in which the files are loaded can (and often is) very important.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013, 08:58 
Browser
Browser
User avatar

Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 10:10
Posts: 229
wallyweb wrote:
I strongly suspect that many, if not most, players simply download the files without reading any of the literature, where the power of many of the features are described.


With the recent changes made in the in-game content system UI, it's now very easy for users to view the readme, change log and license files, as well as visiting a URL for more information (it could be a tt-forums post, a website, a PDF file). Of course, to take advantage of that, authors have to be providing those files.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013, 10:29 
Master Mentor
User avatar

Joined: 27 Feb 2012, 22:45
Posts: 1880
Location: Canada
kamnet wrote:
With the recent changes made in the in-game content system UI, it's now very easy for users to view the readme, ...
Every little bit helps. Unfortunately, we could hang a document directly in front of their eyes and they would just shove it aside to get at the "good stuff" more quickly.

By the way, has anybody encountered one of those software installers where the "I agree" check box is greyed out until the customer has scrolled through to the end of the document? More the question ... Has anybody read the document while scrolling through it?

Perhaps the check box could remain greyed out until the customer correctly answers a skill testing question based upon the document.

_________________
Visit SimuSchool - Tutorials, Questions and Answers
TTDPatch Nightlies Downloads are back
Thrive


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Mar 2013, 17:13 
Browser
Browser
User avatar

Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 10:10
Posts: 229
If it ever reaches that level, that I have to read a document, then sign off that I've read a document, just to download an add-on for a video game, then I'm done with it all. You've lost me as a player to the entire gaming ecosystem.

Sure, some users will be idiots. Let's not treat them ALL like idiots because of a few.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013, 09:45 
Player
Player

Joined: 12 Mar 2012, 02:39
Posts: 469
BauerME wrote:
If you could let me know exactly what file formats, bitmap sizes, palettes, etc. that you require, I could take a stab at generating some stuff for you.
You are very welcome to help.

Basically, the file format can be either .pcx or .png (no .bmp or .jpg) paletted 8 bit indexed. The palette needs to be 'TTD for Windows' (it must still be compatible for TTDPatch for Windows). As for a range of drawing programs, there is MS Paint at the low end, or Photoshop at the upper end. I use iMage v0.99, as it is very easy to learn and use.

If you want to give it a try, I PMed you a Graphics Pack ...

Should you wish to convert bitumen NARoads to white road markings, be my guest. I have included the sprite sheet. Take your time and I'll include it in a release of NARoads once it is done. Welcome to the team of all things Canadian ….

kamnet wrote:
With the recent changes made in the in-game content system UI, it's now very easy for users to view the readme, change log and license files, as well as visiting a URL for more information (it could be a tt-forums post, a website, a PDF file). Of course, to take advantage of that, authors have to be providing those files.
Yes, this author has started to implement these; e.g. see BK Tunnels v1.5. But, it is probably a waste of time, as players are not bothered with it anyway.

Quote:
If it ever reaches that level, that I have to read a document, then sign off that I've read a document, just to download an add-on for a video game, then I'm done with it all. You've lost me as a player to the entire gaming ecosystem.
You don't have to read it, but don't complain afterwards, if it doesn't work, because the document contains vital information to operate the add-on.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Mar 2013, 10:47 
Browser
Browser
User avatar

Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 10:10
Posts: 229
OzTrans wrote:
Quote:
If it ever reaches that level, that I have to read a document, then sign off that I've read a document, just to download an add-on for a video game, then I'm done with it all. You've lost me as a player to the entire gaming ecosystem.
You don't have to read it, but don't complain afterwards, if it doesn't work, because the document contains vital information to operate the add-on.
I don't object to reading a document, but when you ninny me and insist I click on stuff to show I read the document, well, you're just being silly.

I say, reserve the right now to read it, and when you complain about something not working because you failed to RTFM, then the author has the right to publicly slap you on the backside of your head. :mrgreen:

(NOTE: is notoriously guilty for failing to RTFM himself)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 2   [ 24 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron


Status SimuscapeTerms of UseAbout Simuscape

Design by SAC © 2012-2015, Sweden • Powered by phpBB • Based on twilightBB by Daniel St. Jules