Larger Actuator Database

[Paul Stevens]

Well........some people have said that it is very bad to change
the game. Yet we design new levels and new dungeons.
I am still on the fence as to whether I would allow additional
spells in my version of CSBwin. Even as an option. The reasons
against it include those "Don't change a classic" feelings and
issues of being able to maintain the thing in its current, seemingly
rather robust, state.

But....
I have spent a few days writing what I consider a 'nice' editor.
It is a bit in the fashion of DMute with dialog boxes, etc. and a
bit in the fashion of Builder without Hex Editing. It is just started
but the look and feel of it are already apparent.

Now the reason for writing this note: I have been thinking of
designing a dungeon that will be quite impossible without using
an editor and very difficult with access to an editor. (This is why
I am writing my own editor. This is for those two or three people
looking for a challenge. DMute won't do what I want and I
cannot get Builder to work.).

The first thing I notice is that CSB has used about every possible
actuator. There can only be 1021 and it has used 1020. I think I
can make CSBwin use double or triple that many because there
are a couple of unused databases, each of which can contain
1023 entries.

This kind of change seems to me to be exempt from the 'Don't
Change a Classic' argument. What would people think of this?
It certainly would make the resulting dungeons inoperable on
the DOS or Atari platforms. And they could not be edited with
the existing editors.

prsteven@facstaff.wisc.edu

[PaulH]

A classic will always be a classic. Development of a classic will not mean the original is forgotten: in fact it is a tribute to the design of the game.
If increasing the number of actuators increases the flexiblity of the game then go for it. I don't think the matter is 'exempt' or not, because I do not believe the argument is valid in the first place. Your opening statement ties with this: 'yet we design new levels and new dungeons' ie we have changed it already.
My point in the DM forum is that just because the option is there does NOT mean you have to take it. If new spells, weapons or even actuators (not that a DM player without resorting to an editor would know they were there anyway) enables a better game for some then I do not believe people have the right to deny them that. I can see the ethics of the argument, 'it was the first, the best the only(...)' and yes it always will be, but most people who will play new creations will have played the original dungeon anyway and respect it. So what is the problem? I hardly imagine any complete DM virgins are going to stumble upon this site and download a variation so they do not and can not respect the original. This is merely evolution of the game, but not revolution. The change is not permanent, if new ideas are to be implemented. If people disagree, then OK, get rid of all your new dungeon downloads, editors etc as you surely do not need them...

[beowuuf]

Actuators and teleporters...you can never have enough of those things!

I say expand away, the only way to get fresher puzzles it to have more flexibility, and that ultimately lies in having large amounts or actuators to build complex systems

I'm burning them up in the dungeon I started...and this is a dungeon that is barely started!

[Paul Stevens]

Good evening, Mr. PaulH,

You are right and wrong. The reason I am asking is that I
feel that my CSBwin has grown to be more than I had originally
planned.....it should be controlled by the collective will of the
group with veto power reserved to me. If everyone said
'No, no no!!!' then I would create my own private version
with my additions. So far I have heard 1)Yes, 2)Yes. And,
of course, one 'yes' from me....I count, too.,

The spells are still questionable in my own mind. They would
change the 'nature' of the game to a small extent. So I am
listening. But I agree that you don't have to cast them if you
would rather be loyal to the original version. I, myself, use
about six spells. That's all I can remember. Let's see....Magic
Footprints? Hmmmmm.

Mr. Beowuuf,

I understand about the actuators but certainly you have
not used 1021 teleporters!!!! Wow. If you really wanted
more perhaps I could arrange that the designer designate
what the unused databases be used for.

[sucinum]

i vote for yes, because i always wanted a an editor more flexible than dmute. i do not really mind if you remove some caps from the original game or add any spells.
these are things id wish for your editor, feel free to apply to or not
-replace ALL knows issues made by hex-editing in classic dmute with buttons/toggle-buttons etc
-add the possibility to switch the new spells on or off for a created dungeon
-include all textmute-features in it.
thats all i want
a simple editor which adds up all important things in ONE tool, flexible and comfortable to use. the easier i can build dungeons, the more ill create.
the best i could personally imagine is to lock up you, george and sphenx into a room for two weeks with enough food supplies and 3 computers, designing the best editor u can image (just to be sure its good, throw beowuuf and zyx inside, too *g)

[Jardice]

Heheh Not a bad idea..I'll get the pri- uh computer room ready j/k

To tell the truth Paul it' really all up to you on what you want to do. If you want add new features/expand/etc. Great. If you don't you don't. I for one really don't care too much. I like the idea of new features in dm But I'll be happy with an another neat editor to use in making dungeon(when I'm not being lazy ).

Long live Dungeon Master! (I'll think Of something to put here soon)

[Christopher]

I vote yes. As for not having enough teleporters... I agree. I ran out in my new dungeon using dmute. I could certainly use many more.

[Sphenx]

I think the most used objects should be
1) actuators
2) teleporters
3) miscellaneous

and if I'm right, there are 3 unused database.

That's true that CSB has used every actuators (1020) and if you want to know, all actuators in Skullkeep are also used (1020 too). They did not make larger databases, which is more annoying with Skullkeep since the number of maps is quite more than in DM.

[Gambit37]

Well, if I'm considered "some people", let me clarify that I have not stated it is "very bad" to change the game. I simply asked the question "Can't you leave the game alone?"

I do believe that fundamental gameplay changes such as spells (which is where the argument came up originally) should be treated with extreme caution because they could change the feel of the game considerably, especially some of the more outlandish suggestions (spike traps, etc.).

But if people are going to continue building dungeons (and they will), then something like expanding the number of available actuators is arguably a "good thing".

It's down to individual taste at the end of the day--personally, I'm not that bothered with extending the original game, especially since I can't play it with sound, and that severely detracts from the experience. RTC for me is a better option, because it's a native Windows app, has been coded from scratch and is a lot more flexible.

I think the final word is that it depends whether or not one considers these kinds of developments an evolution of DM or it's systematic destruction... depending on my mood, I'm somewhere in between...

[PaulH]

"There is no right or wrong merely a matter of opinion"








And I am right!





Only joking! As long as people enjoy the game, that is what matters, and this thread has been entertaining anyway.

[beowuuf]

To christopher: try getting a list of where you wanted the teleporters and then switch to DMBuild once you have 'muted happily...the final limit is, as said, 1020 - DMutes limit puts it at...oh...less that a quarter of that anyway

To Paul stevens: I never said i had run out, but yes, i can see it being another limit in a complex dungeon - you can use teleporters for lots of exciting background mechanics as well as the usualy tricks and traps

To PaulH: yup, the discussion threads have been very entertaining. Nice to get them once in a while, as no one seems to drag it down to a flame war, so they are never mean..just passionate : )

[ChristopheF]

I'm OK with new spells, but a dungeon designer must be able to choose whether the new spells will be available in his dungeon or not. I certainly do not want to see new spells in the original DM and CSB dungeons.
But it would certainly be fun and refreshing to have new spells in new dungeons with new graphics.

Christophe