Page 2 of 9

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 5:05 pm
by Paul Stevens
If you call teleporting an apple onto a pressurepad to open a
door 'simple' then something is strange. A different definition of
'simple' perhaps.
so it doesn't look so daunting
Everything has a price.

I dare say that none of you is too dense to use CSBuild/CSBwin. Even
with pre-constructed DSAs to solve tough problems like making custom
sounds. If you like 'daunting' try reading the DirectX manual. Like everything
else you have studied in school and out of school, it is daunting until you
understand it and understanding takes great effort (ie: work. Not something
we usually volunteer for).

By the way, I might as well say that CSBuild version 1.78 is released and
supports Exporting and Importin DSAs. Take that!

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 6:12 pm
by Toni Y
Paul Stevens wrote:If you call teleporting an apple onto a pressurepad to open a
door 'simple' then something is strange. A different definition of
'simple' perhaps.
It's simple because it's intuitive. We all know how teleporters and pressure pads work because we've played the game. From that it's just a small step to abstract the mechanism.

Compared to that, in the old days of DMute, before we even understood the whole hex system, it was a really difficult task to implement something using the abstract open-close messaging system.

DSA on the other hand is documented and well understood. It however requires another type of skill: programming. Which looks daunting to most people who haven't dabbled into any.

Personally, I've had 20 years of experience using computers, and much of that I've done programming of some kind. So for me picking up DSA would be easy task. I have a broad base to build on (5 Basic dialects, Pascal, C/C++, Java, Scheme, Assembly, various scripting languages). But someone starting from scratch will have much greater task to first just understand the concepts of programming, before they can even really start to learn and learn to use the language.

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 6:37 pm
by PaulH
For a minute there I thought I read 'Import/Export' level feature!

Apples are a dungeoneers best friend!

Video recorder manuals are daunting. But they don't have to be...

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:08 pm
by Ameena
It's been annoying me for ages...I don't understand half of this stuff you're talking about, but what does "DSA" stand for? Has been bugging me for yonks :).

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:11 pm
by Gambit37
Designer Specified Actuator is the official extraction.

But I prefer Demonically Sadistic Addendum

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:20 pm
by Paul Stevens
"Simple". As in:

Its simple to walk from New York to San Francisco. Everyone knows how
to take one more step.
understand the concepts of programming, before they can even really start to learn and learn to use [DSA].
I've tried to say this. I thought I had said it. I will try again.
YOU DON'T NEED TO WRITE A DSA TO USE A DSA THAT SOMEONE ELSE HAS
ALREADY WRITTEN AND DOCUMENTED. IF YOU WANT A CUSTOM SOUND, USE
ZYX'S DSA FOR CUSTOM SOUNDS.
You use a pressure pad.....you did not write the code for that yet you figured
out how to use it. You teleport apples but you did not have to write the code
for a teleporter. In both those cases you probably had to learn something
before you were successful. Zyx's DSA for custom sounds is easier to use than
a pressure pad. A lot easier. Zyx's DSA to produce custom text in the text
area of the screen is easier to use than a teleporter. A lot easier. If you want a
particular apple to be poisonous then you need to get an expert to write the
DSA for you. It would probably be useful to more than one person so we could
document it and add it to the library. That would be harder to use but you still
would not have to learn anything about the language used to implement DSAs.
If you want to modify the behaviour of spells then you will have to learn to
edit a DSA definition. But even then it is likely that we can build a template into
which you only have to fill in the blanks for the spell types, scroll locations, and
symbols used to cast the spells. Another thing we might do for general tasks
such as this is provide a program that compiles the DSA for you. Zyx has tried
most everything and could probably provide an outline of what would be required
to compile a custom 'Spell Filter'. Sounds like fun. Zyx!!!! Are you there? Should it
be a GUI or a text-input compiler? Text is probably 'Simpler'. ;-)

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:08 pm
by Zyx
The DSAs sound taunting because right now Paul and I are developping the functions, testing and debugging. Doom III would not be appealing either if you would listen to the chit chat of the coders.

----------------------------

Here's how I see the use of CSBuild for a common profile:

* You can use CSBuild without ever needing a DSA. CSBuild CAN work plainly and simply.

* When you reach journeyman level, you may want to add some special functions and a library of DSAs will be here to make it easy.

* Then with expert level you'll start coding your own DSA. Among the possible DSA's functions some are very simple and other more complex.


Paul is right when he says that anyone could reach the "expert" level through a step by step learning. I had no idea about DSAs and their language when I started. I'm certainly not very clever when using DSA, but I manage what I want.

----------------------------

As for providing examples, I'll check how the import/export feature works. I hope there is the possibility to add &&comments :)
Anyway I'll try to supply some of the basic DSA I use myself.
Maybe after the release of conflux iik the possibility of DSAs will be more obvious.

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:41 pm
by PaulH
I think pressure pads are somewhat easier to understand. You tread on one, or don't! LOL!

OK, OK! I need to sit down with an hour or two spare and have a play (again) with the examples that you have provided to see if I can manipulate them and/or import them elsewhere. Maybe I am looking at implementation in the wrong light. I dunno. They make my brain crumble.... give me theory of relativity, planetary motion mechanics, sub atomic particles... I understand them: but not the DSA! I will try to use, not discover what the core holds. But I ain't the only one am I?!

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:44 pm
by beowuuf
it's more the syntax than the concept, and that is just laziness on my part sicne there are documentation and examples everywhere...i just had a look at the syntaz section, and it doens't look too bad....

Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2005 9:48 pm
by Paul Stevens
I fully admit that the DSA code is gibberish. The code for teleporters is
gibberish, too. The code to display an apple on the screen is complete,
total gibberish. But the user does not need to know this. You display
an apple by entering a room with an apple in it.

The code for DSA is patterened after FORTH without the defining words or
the program structure words. After 10 days a FORTH program is
total gibberish to the fellow who wrote it. DSAs are quite a bit worse because
the underlying data represents things other than integers. And it started out
as a very different thing and developed in unexpected directions without going
back and fixing the original. So it is a mish-mash of syntax, methods, etc.
And it allows no comments. So all documentaion must be kept separately.
All-in-all not to be taken lightly.

But you don't need to see the program to use it. You use a text editor without
looking at its source code. Same with DSAs. Until you become expert. If you
are not afraid of something new you can become a novice quite easily. Expert
will require a background that most of you don't have. Zyx is an expert. There
aren't any Masters, including me. Together, Zyx and I might make a Master.

Posted: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:36 pm
by sucinum
the difference between apples, open/close-messages ans DSA is for me, that i know what the first one does in one look. if i start building a dungeon and look into it some weeks later, i still know what i intended with a special mechanic and can go on very easily.
when thinking about a riddle, i think in terms of apples, which might be abstract, but is quite easy, after you got into it. the last few weeks i learned a bit about xhtml/css by reading dozens of tutorials and stuff, but it's still hard for me to think outside tables.

Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:07 am
by Dark
To your original question: I do have a new dungeon on the way called, The Vortex

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 5:04 pm
by PaulH
Another new dungeon has been posted, excellent. For RTC: this definately seems to be the format of choice now. Is this for playability reasons or design(ing) reasons? I would like to hear comments from dungeon builders and players. I still prefer CSBWin.

But I am afraid to say that I have put my CSBWin project/new dungeon on the back burner. One of the reasons seems to be a lack of interest in new work, as shown by Zyx's post on Ratings and Awards. We are in the same boat. Hardly any comments at all, which can be offputinng to new dungeon designers. I understand we have been here before many a time discussing it, but it comes down to this: if there is no interest in new dungeons, I am not gonna break my balls to complete one. More so on a format that only one or two people seem interested in using.

I will finish it, I will simply add bits here and there and maybe release in the summer. Maybe.

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 5:58 pm
by beowuuf
I am interested in new work, but apart from an exception to Conflux II, and maaaaaybe the new L.Bridge one, I am not really in a dungeon playing place. Trying to focus my time on other things just now! But soon I will be unemployed, then maybe will get around to some of the new stuff (quickly tried Sukumvit and Sleepers, but never got back to them).

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:07 pm
by PaulH
What about RTC dungeons and CSBWin dungeons? (and Java?). What do you prefer to see new dungeons made on? If people genuinely are going for RTC then I may have to switch camp.

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:57 pm
by beowuuf
Either RTC, CSBwin or PC DM is FBM

Don't tend to touch DM JAva dungeons - mostly because I don't think I can run DM Java anymore!

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:09 pm
by Florent
I'm sticking with CSBWin !

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:34 pm
by Zyx
Well, it's quite the same for me. Only two or three persons voted for their fav dungeons, (mostly the designers and the veterans from the forum). This is not encouraging at all!
On the other way one has to be quite patient about the result. Maybe in some 20 years a community will find those dungeons and worship them...

Anyway I'll finish my current update to my dungeon, because it's too risky to let time pass by and forget all the pending things. Then I'm done with designing for DM! 1 year of design for only two or three players may be not worth my energies...

However, we could organize something, like a competition... Race to fusion was fun. Quests for Conflux were cool, IMHO. Another idea? Which dungeon would be suited for it?
Maybe some recordings/screenshots about funny/impressive situations?

We could also make some publicity for the DM community and custom dungeons, in sites like the little green desktop, the underdogs, etc...

As for CSBwin vs RTC, events are occurring with a certain delay...
I think RTC editors have been at last available for several months now and we're seeing the results today.
CSBuild has begun a new phase of development with the DSA's stuff: it make it look complicated. People will wait for a "stable" version to dare use it, I suppose. And we'll have to wait for a few months after that to play their creations. (some DSA documentation and tutorials will help, too).

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:51 pm
by PaulH
Excellently put.

Maybe we could have a 'new monster' competition? This will be a good one for the budding artists out there. Design a new monster (at most 4 frames) that will work with CSBWin or RTC, and maybe stats to go with it (not essential if you simply edit an existing monster but can be done through ADGE). Then maybe we can have a monster database where new dungeon designers can simply pick from a list.

Or new weapons, or any graphics.

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:47 pm
by Toni Y
Like I told in the chat yesterday, I still work with good old DMute and PCDM. :)

But any new releases I will probably atleast convert them to CSBWin.

Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:14 pm
by PaulH
This is the reason why I prefer CSBWin: it plays as close to DMPC as is possible, has more features and can support a bigger dungeon/more objects which I found limiting in DMute.

I think if you do convert your work to CSBWin you will give in to temptation and edit with CSBEdit! That orignal 'DM' feeling will still be present though.

Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 12:15 am
by linflas
*long breath*
sorry if my opinion is a bit pessimistic but there are more dungeon makers here than players, or approximately the same amount because they (we) are the same ones...
the rest of the community is composed by original dungeons players (because nostalgia is the reason why you came here), and they don't seem to be interested in new ones.

i finished "Sleepers" and it wasn't very interesting, because i'm still using the same spells, viewing the same monsters, fighting the same way with the same weapons (or almost), hearing the same old crappy sounds, ... and nostalgia doesn't work anymore. i want something overblasting my brain now !...

RTC or CSBwin ? what a stupid question ! CSBwin provides new rules and puzzles, new spells and so on. RTC provides new graphics, new sounds. we need BOTH of these features to make something really new.

and we can't actually.

Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 1:08 am
by PaulH
"RTC or CSBwin ? what a stupid question !"

Ouch!

1700! Yeeee haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:30 pm
by Florent
Kind of agreeing with Linflas...

After discovering this forum, I used CSBWin to replay good ole DM, CSB, then tried out RTC, completed it with one character with the spellbook, then refinished DM on CSBWin with one character. After that I played Imprisonned again, and started Towers of Chaos.

And now I'm kind of burnt out, I haven't played for weeks... I know I will finish Towers sooner or later, because it's a very good dungeon, but I'm not sure what I'll do next. Maybe I'll play DM2...

Regarding Conflux II, I'm not sure I want to try playing it, seeing how everybody here is ranting on about how insanely difficult it is... I had to ask for help in Imprisonned Again and Towers of Chaos, so I'm afraid of getting stuck in the Conflux II Hall of Champions ! ;)

Having only played one and a half custom dungeons, I am in no position to vote... I do have a certain interest though, just not right now.

Maybe we should all stop OTing on these forums and go back to playing ! :lol:

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:01 am
by linflas
all right, going back to subject... (sorry for OT lovers ;) )
about dungeon designing, i prefer short but tough dungeons, i.e. that you can complete in approximately less than a month but with a good challenge.
something like 6-8 levels is suficient for new stuff imho.
for example, i started conflux 2 three months ago and completed about 30 or 40% i guess.. but i don't plan to come back to it anymore. not because it's hard (oh yes it is!), but because i don't see the end of it...

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:08 pm
by FallenSeraphin
Hummm 6-8 hard levels ? talk about Unreal 2 complex. Way too few levels for the die-hard dungeneer, wouldnt you think ?

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 1:49 pm
by linflas
i don't understand your unreal 2 complex ? what are you talking about ?

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:23 pm
by beowuuf
It's not the amount of levels it's what's in them really - especially as CSBwin and RTC allow for large level size. Consider if you removed the hall of champions, how muchof DM spans 8 levels it involves alot of exploration and also slow progression. CSB has only 10, and really level 1 and 10 (Chaos's lair and the basement) could be removed (one is for the endgame, the other is alot of large spacious areas) to allow you to understand how much you can really pack into 8 levels!
By the converse, no reason in making something 20 levels long if people are bored by level 3, or if it can be blown through really quickly (easy fights, easy puzzles)

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:01 pm
by Zyx
As Linflas said, it's more about the time you're ready to spend playing it. One month seems reasonnable for long dungeon (if it's not boring of course).
One or two weeks for a short dungeon can be nice too.
Am I the only one who'd like to play some sort of DM campaign in a persistent world spanning on 3 months? :twisted: Too bad, because, like sucinum, I'm designing the dungeon I'd like to play...

Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:42 pm
by linflas
a persistent Conflux world would be great if wallsets weren't the same in the dungeon (sorry -world- ;) ) areas : the boreness i'm talking about is the consequence of the old grey stone wall feeling...
same thing for TOC for example : the 'forests' and 'wild woods' could be something beautifully frightening with dark trees !