Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
Quote
Originally posted by zhouj: Again, you seem to fail to understand that a guide requires a certain amount of certainty. There is no use in having a guide that presents dozens of methods, then tells you to go try them since the only thing that would do is confuse people.
I think it would be extremely short-sighted to only provide one point of view in such a guide. If something of lasting importance is to be created, it would be a good idea to conduct interviews with many different plug developers/teams, past and present. Why not get input from others who have already gone down this road? Surely, Martin, ATMOS, Bomb, Anubis, and many others could give insight as to some of the pitfalls that they encountered. What worked, what didn't. Hind-sight being 20/20, and all that.
------------------
(This message has been edited by slouch (edited 03-15-2004).)
I like slouch's idea.
Originally posted by slouch: **I think it would be extremely short-sighted to only provide one point of view in such a guide. If something of lasting importance is to be created, it would be a good idea to conduct interviews with many different plug developers/teams, past and present. Why not get input from others who have already gone down this road? Surely, Martin, ATMOS, Bomb, Anubis, and many others could give insight as to some of the pitfalls that they encountered. What worked, what didn't. Hind-sight being 20/20, and all that.
**
Did you bother to read any of the recent posts? It's been addressed.
Zzap, I'll respond to your post in due time. I need to sleep so I can wake up early to do some homework.
------------------ (url="http://"http://www.zhouj.net/days/")Days of Glory(/url), Upcoming TC for EV: Nova
nobody seems to listen to me anyway but I'm gonna post.
If you still insist on making a guide, zhouj, don't do it alone. Gather information from other sources, Martain, ATMOS(like slouch said). maybe put your ideas with theirs and put it up as a getting started guide to TC making. for the fourth time, don't just say "do it this way and not another", give the person a wide range of basic ideas and let them choose which is best for their idea and circumstances. Both you and Turner have some really cool ideas. I think both of you should start working together instead of arguing.
------------------ Cmon people, the (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number;=20&SUBMIT;=Go")Chronicles(/url) are worth looking at.
I've been keeping out of this because I really don't believe that, as an un-released developer, I have anything authoritative to say.
However, my opinion was asked for, so I'll give it, because I, too, can be pompous and arrogant and happily admit it. I can also be humble and hypercritical of myself at the same time, which, I've observed, is a natural state of all true artists, and since I have a certificate from the Joe Kubert School that says I am one, I feel qualified enough to make that sweeping generalization.
Having said that, I've been able to work on SFA for the past two years to get it to the point where I'm comfortable releasing an Alpha Build to the general public probably by the end of the month. It's more than just playable, despite the lack of storyline missions (which are written on paper and just need to be added once I get the basic bugs fixed and all the extraneous text written for all the planet/outfit/bar descriptions).
I'm one person, it's a pre-developed universe with a stupid amount of detail, and there's so much to do that, occasionally, I get really discouraged. When that happens, I take a break and work on other things -- not development related at all.
The key, though, has been as I've said all along: I only work on SFA when I'm having fun working on SFA. I don't set deadlines for myself (invariably when I do, I stop having fun and stop working altogether), I don't have other people upon whom I'm dependent in order to get anything done, and I only announced to the Nova community that I was even working on it when I was at a point that I was confident that I'd finish the project (yeah, that was a year-and-a-half ago and I'm still inundated with things that need to be done, but, as I said, I'm ready for a semi-release, so there's that).
I also made extensive use of a very dedicated alpha testing team of people who helped me spot the trees for the forest (I have a tendency to look at the project as a whole at this point, and thus tend to overlook little things that need tweaking or fixing -- the alpha team has helped me focus on the little things). Once they'd spotted everything they were capable of noticing before they, too, succumbed to the trees-for-the-forest syndrome, I started releasing limited public alphas and let those who downloaded it find those things the alpha team missed.
Which is why I'm quite confident that the alpha release that I'm readying for the public will be reasonably bug-free and playable -- in fact, the only reason I'm still calling it an alpha release is because of the tremendous amounts of dëscs that need to be written.
The one place I screwed up, and I mentioned this to zhouj on the ev-nova.net forums, was that when I was researching the planets and systems for the map, I should have been writing the dësc resources at the same time. Why I wasn't, I have no freakin' idea, but it's the bane of my existence right now and I'm certainly paying the price for it. Hindsight's 20/20.
Anyway, I hope that serves an object lesson, and that my own experience in this helps someone put their own project into perspective (the only advice I really offer out of all this is: don't bite off more than you can chew). I also hope EVula reads this and contacts me about getting SFA alpha 3 onto the ASW Add-Ons page.
------------------ Starfleet Adventures: A Star Trek TC for EVN (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=145") Discussion Board (/url) Starfleet Adventures (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=71")Progress Log(/url) denki's Starfleet Adventures (url="http://"http://www.geocities.com/starfleet_adventures/")FAQ page(/url) It is better to feed the goat than it is today.
Originally posted by Captain Phillips: ** If you still insist on making a guide, zhouj, don't do it alone. Gather information from other sources, Martain, ATMOS(like slouch said). maybe put your ideas with theirs and put it up as a getting started guide to TC making. for the fourth time, don't just say "do it this way and not another", give the person a wide range of basic ideas and let them choose which is best for their idea and circumstances. Both you and Turner have some really cool ideas. I think both of you should start working together instead of arguing.
Well, here's a bit of my preachy thinking on things to keep in mind, for what it is worth. Yes, it does overlap with some things others have said -- that's unavoidable.
Given the strength of their respective convictions, I actually think it might be a bad idea for Zhouj and Turner to work together -- though they both make useful points in their own writings, I'm not sure they would ever produce anything joint-authored that gave useful advice in an efficient manner.
If there's one thing that this discussion thread shows, it's that people often get in trouble when they try to represent each others' views. Turner has expressed his views on plug creation countless times, on these boards and elsewhere. Zhouj, I'd recommend that you avoid trying to paraphrase Turner in your guide -- it would be gracious and helpful for you to quote him and/or include links to places where he (and others) have given their own views, but don't try to put words in his mouth. If "debating" him has helped you understand your own views better, great. If you think that you can now take the advice of CP (and others) to write a guide that acknowledges and explains a range of options for how people can attack the plug-making process, even better. Just don't have the hubris to be certain that you understand exactly what others think, and can therefore speak for them.
As to the degree of pre-planning that should be done for a big plug/TC: I haven't done one, but I did just finish a multi-year writing and research project in real life, and I can report that at my progress was hindered, at different times, by both under-planning and over-planning. The trick is to carefully consider well-reasoned advice sources with differing views, and then to plot your own course between them.
Quite a few things written in this thread should be helpful for plug-makers, actually. In my opinion, when giving advice it often helps to step back and ask yourself whether you are battling for something truly critical (souls, lives, etc.). If not, one doesn't need total acceptance from ones audience -- you should be satisfied with your contribution if people simply make use of your views when synthesizing their own from multiple sources. (Sometimes the best advice is that couched in the terms of an object lesson, as UT just did.)
(And I used the term "debate" above in its general sense of "a dialogue between disagreeing parties." I really can't get why you guys got so worked up about that common word, unless it just seemed fun to do so. I don't see any podiums or moderators around here.)
------------------ (url="http://"http://home.comcast.net/~drtrowel/")Dr. Trowel's E.S.W.P.(/url) -- Featuring Cold Fusion graphics for EVN Override and two EVN:O bug fixes. Very Good Stuff: (url="http://"http://www.evula.com/escape_velocity/")EVula(/url) (url="http://"http://w00tware.ev-nova.net/")NovaTools(/url) (url="http://"http://www.evula.org/infernostudios/search.html")EVPlugSearcher(/url) Play FAQs: (url="http://"http://ev-nova.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2832&sid;=43627ead61761e7f19060b00c14c739c")N(/url) (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum;=EV+Nova+FAQs&number;=30&DaysPrune;=20&LastLogin;=")N(/url) (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum;=EV+Override+FAQs&number;=53&DaysPrune;=20&LastLogin;=")O(/url) (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum;=Escape+Velocity+FAQs&number;=28&DaysPrune;=20&LastLogin;=")C(/url) Dev FAQs: (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum;=EV+Plug-in+Developer+FAQs&number;=29&DaysPrune;=20&LastLogin;=")A(/url) (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/ubb/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number;=31&SUBMIT;=Go")B(/url) Interests: The Good, The Bad, and The Loopy.
Actually, guys, I wasn't getting worked up, except about the personal attacks which I still think are totally wrong for this forum.
To go back to my original point, which most of you seem to have overlooked, I said (and am saying) that there is no one 'best' way of doing plugins, and you should do what works for you.
I don't really see how this can be accurately described as a 'one-sided viewpoint'.
If anybody is still interested in my advice, you'll find most of it on the EV Developer's FAQ, and in the now-ancient post '110 commandments of plugin development'. I think you'll find the most important rule is 'Break all the rules'.
And, by the way, I have nothing against teams. My point was that to say 'you must work in a team' is too prescriptive.
Do what works for you, make your plugin, release it. Then we can all enjoy.
The rest is silence.
------------------ M A R T I N T U R N E R (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/vftp/show.pl?product=evo&category;=plugins&display;=downloads&file;=FrozenHeart104.sit.bin")Frozen Heart(/url) (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/cgi-bin/vftp/show.pl?product=evo&category;=plugins&display;=downloads&file;=FemmeFatale.sea.bin")Femme Fatale(/url) (url="http://"http://www.ambrosiasw.com/cgi-bin/vftp/dl-redirect.pl?path=evo/plugins&file;=Frozen Heart - the No.hqx")Frozen Heart - the Novel(/url)
Originally posted by Martin Turner: **Actually, guys, I wasn't getting worked up, except about the personal attacks which I still think are totally wrong for this forum.
So in the end we all agree. This is the sort of dumb debate that happens when a bunch of people have a misunderstanding. During world war two(or was it one, I can't remember) the Americans said they wanted to table an important subject. (I've forggoten what it was) To the british this meant to put something under the table, and to the americans it meant to put something in the middle of the table. A heated argument insued. After nearly a month, the two contries relized that they actually wanted the same thing. Alot of embaressment came out of a simple, slangy, phrase.
something like that happened here.
Here's an idea. Zhouj can put out his plan for Plug development and Mr Turner can write a history of FH's developmen't. If zhouj does make his guide he shoud devinently mention plugins that were started and not fineshed. If this guide is going to be for beginners It is good for them to know what they are getting into.
Originally posted by Martin Turner: Actually, guys, I wasn't getting worked up,
Glad to hear it.
Originally posted by Martin Turner: except about the personal attacks which I still think are totally wrong for this forum.
Yes.
Originally posted by Martin Turner: To go back to my original point, which most of you seem to have overlooked, I said (and am saying) that there is no one 'best' way of doing plugins, and you should do what works for you.
Good. No, that's not a 'one-sided viewpoint'.
Originally posted by Martin Turner: If anybody is still interested in my advice, you'll find most of it on the EV Developer's FAQ, and in the now-ancient post '110 commandments of plugin development'. I think you'll find the most important rule is 'Break all the rules'.
Hey, yeah -- there is good stuff here, not all of it by Martin Turner: (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/webboard/Forum9/HTML/001110.html")The 110 Commandments of Plug Making (add your own)(/url), and, for that matter, here: (url="http://"http://www.AmbrosiaSW.com/webboard/Forum9/HTML/004575.html")Commandments of Plug Making 2.0(/url) Just as impressively, the stuff in those threads is concise!
From ingredients such as these, plus our own additions, we choose what to chuck into our own personal stews. Our something like that.
I think some people have too much time on their hands. However I must admit that I am impressed that you find time to do homework, write a plug, and write huge posts.
If you mean my ability to do that, it's because I get about 3-4 hours of sleep and pull all-nighters. Not to mention that weekend was out of the ordinary. And Days of Glory has not gotten much work done it. :
I will not be giving any further rebuttals given that it's apparent no one does debate on these boards, or even reads all the posts given that I've already said that I would appreciate it if Martin Turner could do a write-up of his viewpoint. Unfortunately, it seems everyone on the boards is a selective reader who chooses to overlook that fact and then proceed to attempt to admonish me.
If I still haven't made it clear, there was quite a bit of misinformation in this thread but such is the nature of unorganized debate. In the end, the conclusion is that I will write my guide with the "detail the universe" method and if Martin Turner so chooses, he can write a section on his own method, as I have already said at least once.
Something concise is a summary. For this topic, the details should be clearly shown given the process. A phase of development cannot be adequately described or summarized in two lines. If concise is better, why are research papers so detailed? Why do items such as doctoral dissertations exist.
Now that this debate is over, I will be posting the "What makes a good plug-in?" section (preliminary) online this afternoon. Rest assured it, I'm sure someone will find something contentious within it. Hopefully, we will get a more definite opinion instead of the useless "Let's be ambiguous!" posts.
Originally posted by zhouj: I will not be giving any further rebuttals given that it's apparent no one does debate on these boards, or even reads all the posts given that I've already said that I would appreciate it if Martin Turner could do a write-up of his viewpoint. Unfortunately, it seems everyone on the boards is a selective reader who chooses to overlook that fact and then proceed to attempt to admonish me.
I started my earlier post with a quote from Cap'n P. because my strongest concern was that you might take to heart his advice: "If you still insist on making a guide, zhouj, don't do it alone." I think you have good ideas to contribute, and I'll be glad if you continue to contribute them, but from what you've written here you don't strike me as the kind of person who would make a good co-author on a written work. As to Turner doing a write-up of his viewpoint.... Well, if he wants to have a section of his own in your guide that's his decision, but I rightly or wrongly thought you were implying that he hadn't already given his views, which I would say that he has. With proper attribution, you can certainly quote from his previous writings in your own work, or link to them. Since your goal is to be of use to your readers, you might consider doing such things. It won't make what you are doing worthless if you don't, though.
Originally posted by zhouj: Something concise is a summary. For this topic, the details should be clearly shown given the process. A phase of development cannot be adequately described or summarized in two lines. If concise is better, why are research papers so detailed? Why do items such as doctoral dissertations exist.
OK, not everything can be ultra-concise. By now you might have noticed that I tend to be rather verbose myself. Funny you should mention doctoral dissertations -- I just finished mine a few months ago, and recently spent two weeks trying to hack one of my chapters down to half its length so it would be acceptable for publication. Why? The journal has a 7000 word limit, in part because they value brevity -- short, information-packed morsels of text are often more likely to be read and remembered. I've found reading this thread informative, but exhausting. When I saw the short "commandments" in the other thread, I found them refreshing. I'll concede that it's probably true that not everything you want to say could be reduced to that format.
Originally posted by zhouj: **Rest assured it, I'm sure someone will find something contentious within it. Hopefully, we will get a more definite opinion instead of the useless "Let's be ambiguous!" posts. **
If anyone argued in favor of advice being more vague, I missed it. People suggested you should present a range of methodological choices for them to choose between, which is a different sort of thing. You've given your opinion that "the only thing that would do is confuse people," so I won't belabor this any farther, except to point out that our differences in how to characterize the posts you see as advocating ambiguity demonstrate my point that you probably should refrain from loosely paraphrasing other writers.
To end on a positive note, I'll repeat that I'll be glad to see your guide come out regardless of whether it is a polemic or a comparative analysis, Zhouj. I won't take it as definitive, but I will look at it, and at other advice sources, if and when I find myself in the planning stages of a large plug project.
Ugh. You know what this thread lacks that "110 Commandments" had? Humor. I need a good joke.
(This message has been edited by Dr. Trowel (edited 03-15-2004).)
Originally posted by Dr. Trowel: **
What Im concerned about is that constant ignorance of the fact that I explicitly said that I wanted the opinions of at least Martin Turner and other developers. Youre also right that I wouldnt make a good co-author. In positions of teamwork, I prefer to be in control. Its something about wanting to fail only if Ive failed.
I believe he has given his views on the topic. However, I feel that he should be given the chance to formalize them and submit them as completed section in the guide rather a jumble of quotes and paraphrased ideas. I would also run the risk of putting words in his mouth and so I feel that if he wrote the section in the guide, it would avoid those issues.
My dad wrote a 138 page doctoral dissertation on inorganic chemistry in German despite the fact that he was a native speaker of Chinese. It goes both ways but if you look in journals like Scientific American or the more technical ones, youll notice that being concise is not too emphasize especially with intricate systems like the interaction of subatomic particles. (An arbitrary example.) I think the point is that there are extremes on both ends but most technical subjects entail that articles are not the most concise things in the world. In turn, I will concede that being concise is better for everyday conversations and for materials some less educated people may read.
The vibe Im getting from people is that theyre arguing that a guide should present every possible method and then let the reader choose. In other words, telling me that I should come to as few conclusions as possible in order to give them more choice. My issue with that, as you know, is that it would indeed confuse people and not be as beneficial as if I came to a conclusion of sorts and then gave alternate explanations, which is what is typically done. As I said before, I dislike paraphrasing the opinions of others, especially my opponents in a debate. Human nature tends to kick in sometimes.
As for the issues I have with the two posts presented, I prefer to have more detail and justifications, as both of them contained quite a few ambiguous points and presented an entire phase of development in two sentences. I personally feel that its at the other end of the spectrum in terms of wordiness and a little too extreme.
Similarly, I wish to end on a positive note. Some people may feel that Im arrogant, but theres a reason Im still here and working on a guide and trying to help.