@AGS

[Calin Leafshade]

As it stands, I'm not sure why more plug-ins aren't written* (it's not really that much of a hassle to have to include a few dlls with a game, is it?) to add features to appease the whiners.

Yes, 100% agree. There's loads of stuff that AGS can do which we just havent unlocked yet.

There are some very very talented coders here who could expand AGS a great deal.

I would love to do it.. but unfortunately I suck at C++ and it seems its not possible to use C# for unmanaged plugins.

[Ryan Timothy B]

I've said time and time again.  If drawing surfaces fully supported alpha channels, I'd feel AGS is complete.  It's the only thing that really holds me back from making some really cool effects and such.

[TerranRich]

Well, I wasn't aware that AGS has reached the absolutely pinnacle of its development. It is the only computer program to ever do that in the history of personal computing. Unless there are any other examples I'm missing where the software halted in development because it reached absolute perfection?

[LGM]

Oh let's everyone stop being ornery and go make some adventure games.

[Calin Leafshade]

Terran: Stop being some damn obtuse. No one is saying that AGS has reached the pinnacle of perfection but one could certainly argue that AGS fills all reasonable expectations.

[Snake]

Oh let's everyone stop being ornery and go make some adventure games.

lol!
You don't post much, LGM, but when you do, it's good

[TerranRich]

Well, you were certainly implying it, Calin, by saying that the only features left to add were frivolous ones.

AGS filled all reasonable expectations 6 years ago, but it still continued to improve.

[Darius Poyer]

I don't really understand the point of connecting websites with facebook and twitter at all. Because of that I would say that AGS should not have a twitter account since it has a freakin' website anyway. You really seem to dabble in redundancy quite a bit.

[Dualnames]

I wake up depressed from Final Cut, so here's my point of view.

Calin, because you can script and you can't find anything cool to add anymore doesn't mean AGS is there.

Look at AGS 2.72. As it was, there was nothing more to put. So CJ changed it completely. I recall we all thought there was nothing more to put.

Don't expect people to accept your opinion, when you force it upon them, is all I'm saying here. Pretty much LGM summed it up.

[Misj']

Terran: Stop being some damn obtuse. No one is saying that AGS has reached the pinnacle of perfection but one could certainly argue that AGS fills all reasonable expectations.

And one could also argue that it doesn't. Because that entirely depends on your (reasonable) expectations...many of which may be different that yours (mine certainly are).

One may even argue that many aspects of adventure game development could (and possibly should) be implemented into AGS that are currently not even touched upon. One could for example think about something like story-development (there aren't many good tools for interactive story-development out there, and it's something that's crucial to adventure games), or a way to order your ideas and references, etc. So why not implement it into AGS? - Yes, one can argue that AGS is essentially a programming tool designed specifically for adventure games, but one can just as easily argue that AGS is a development tool and that such development encompasses a lot more than only the programming aspect.

I still see a lot of potential for AGS (including but not limited to the programming aspect of adventure games), I still see useful features that can be better and easier (including but not limited to the ones I mentioned earlier (that despite some claims aren't all 'done' yet; although some baby steps have been taken)), and I still believe that AGS is a good package (that CJ can be proud of, but that is still far from being at the end of it's development).

I don't claim any of the things above (working on story or gathering references and ideas) are required to make AGS useful...they will however may it more useful (for it's purpose: developing adventure games).




Ps. Oh, and I somehow don't understand what this entire discussion has to do with Twitter...but then again, I never understood Twitter in the first place, so this might be exactly the kind of thing that Twitter is all about.

EDIT: Pps. Sorry Dual, Snake, LGM...

[Calin Leafshade]

Well fine, lets add a sprite editor, an audio editor and somewhere to hang our hats while we're at it.

Neither I, nor GG nor anyone else has said that AGS is entirely without criticism and as Terran said there is *always* room for improvement.

But software design is not about cramming more buttons on the toolbar.

Things like graphical engines should be as lightweight and fast as possible while still allowing for expansion if the developer so desires.

If someone wants to write a plugin that adds a useful but not often used feature then that's awesome but why should the engine-core be cluttered with it?

[Misj']

But software design is not about cramming more buttons on the toolbar.

And neither did I ever say that it was...so how exactly is this remark in any way a relevant reaction to my post (to which the first line was clearly a reaction)? - Or is this just you trying to bash me with irrelevant knowledge that we (and probably just about everyone else on this forum) both already posses?

If someone wants to write a plugin that adds a useful but not often used feature then that's awesome but why should the engine-core be cluttered with it?

How can you claim certain features will not often be used if they currently simply don't exist (or don't exist in an intuitive manner)? - Or is that a claim based solely on the fact that you wouldn't use them within your vision or projects? - Because others might have a different vision that you.

AGS is currently very limited for people who use classical animation rather than pixel-art. Sure, that makes sense because the majority of people here do pixel-art. However, there are several people on this board who have shown (based on their art, and their work in progress) that high-res and classical animation is the way they want to go. But since the higher resolution also causes certain mishaps to surface (like sliding of feet while walking, and non-lipsync as simple examples) they currently can't make a game where the overall quality matches that of the single frames stills.

From your point of view AGS is created for low res 2D adventure games. And from your point of view it is finished. If so, then indeed why continue development for low-res features, and not continue with AGS to better support high-res and classical animation? - Would that clutter then application? - Well, for people who can't do high res or don't understand classical animation maybe. But for me? - No, that's not clutter, that's expansion in a good, valid, and desired direction.


As for plugins. There are a lot of 'problems' regarding plugins (many non-technical).
1. Rather than having a single 3rd party developer responsible for the engine of the game (CJ) you have multiple.
2. Conflicts between plugins can be a real pain to debug (particularly close sourced plugins).
3. If AGS becomes mostly/largely plugin driven these plugins will be distributed under different licenses some free some commercial (there is no reason why commercial plugins shouldn't be allowed).
4. Unless AGS is fixed (stopped development) the compatibility of the plugins will always have to catch up to new versions of the application (and CJ isn't the one responsible for making sure each and every plugin still works).
5. CJ is often credited in-game. Should the same apply to the creator of a used plug-in? - Should it apply too if it was a commercial plugin (because then the person was already given his due).
6. Plugins are developed by different people with different design-philosophies and a different 'standard' way of working. This will cross over to the way plugins are used resulting in a less universal feel and usability of the AGS application (not in theory, but in practice this is always the case).

and there are more examples that this summary (so while you can nitpick on each and every point, remember that it's a very crude summary of things to think about concerning plugins). Now I am in now way against plugins, as I've stated several times in the past. I think plugins and add-ons are among the most important features of AGS. However, it should be a feature and not the core of the application.

I also think that you've created some really nice example of the power of AGS (your sprite displacement is just one of them), and I think that with the right (simple and intuitive) user interface they would be very welcome additions (yes in the form of plugins) to AGS.


By the way, before we claim that I want to clutter up AGS with features...how many feature-requests have I made in all the years that I've been here? - And you? - Or any of the other people who now claim that AGS should be feature-restricted?

[GarageGothic]

Aw, poppycock! (always wanted to use that word, thank you so much for giving me an occasion, and don't take it too seriously )

There's very few of the issues you mention that differ much from the current situation with modules (compatibility, conflicts, crediting, design philosophy etc.).  You do have a valid point about the closed source, but I guess that will be up to the developer. Btw, commercial plugins, really? I mean, I'm sure I could make a couple of quid on a plugin that adds full alpha channel functionality, but it goes totally against the freeware ethos of the engine itself and I find it highly likely that someone would quickly offer up a free alternative.

I do agree that *some* features would be useful to so many people that it should be part of the engine, and you mention several good examples. But there's tons of perfectly valid feature requests that were already on the list when I joined the forums that still haven't been addressed. Nobody's forcing anybody to use a plugin if they don't want to, but unfortunately we can't always rely on the kindness of CJ to get things done. Personally I'd rather solve my own issues than spend the time lobbying for new features that may or may not happen.

Personally I'm not advocating feature restrictions (though I do agree with Calin's "lightweight" comment), but rather thinking that with the current "fully featured" state of AGS as a generic, old-school point-n-click engine, the way ahead of us diverts into more specialized areas. And some of those would probably be better undertaken by people who need those functions themselves. What I really would like to see would simply be better access to some of the existing engine features that cannot be directly accessed (for instance - why do we have to use Sierra portrait to use voiced lipsync, instead of just getting the sync frame number from the audio channel and animate it ourselves in whatever style we want?)

In the past I've consistently refrained from using plugins for some of the reasons you mention - particularly relying on someone else to fix bugs and keep it updated. But I've never used other people's modules either, stubbornly so, even if it meant reinventing the wheel on several occasions. When I finally decided to write my own plugin to add some features that I miss in AGS, it was precisely because I didn't want to count on CJ getting around to implementing it eventually. Most likely I still wouldn't want to implement plugins written by others, unless they were either very simple or proven bug free through years of use, but that's just me being weird again

[Misj']

Aw, poppycock! (always wanted to use that word, thank you so much for giving me an occasion, and don't take it too seriously )

You're welcome

There's very few of the issues you mention that differ much from the current situation with modules (compatibility, conflicts, crediting, design philosophy etc.).

True...but these issues will increase if plugins, addons or modules become more the heart of the application and it's development.

Btw, commercial plugins, really? I mean, I'm sure I could make a couple of quid on a plugin that adds full alpha channel functionality, but it goes totally against the freeware ethos of the engine itself and I find it highly likely that someone would quickly offer up a free alternative.

While I agree with that to a certain level, AGS was created with the ability to create commercial games in mind. Some commercial games exist (though not that many)...it's a logical step to assume that the same will apply to plugins. Particularly if you buy not only the product but also the support (and I don't present it as a fact, but it is something to think about).

I do agree that *some* features would be useful to so many people that it should be part of the engine, and you mention several good examples. But there's tons of perfectly valid feature requests that were already on the list when I joined the forums that still haven't been addressed.

True...which is one of the reasons why I don't really do feature request.

the way ahead of us diverts into more specialized areas. And some of those would probably be better undertaken by people who need those functions themselves. What I really would like to see would simply be better access to some of the existing engine features that cannot be directly accessed (for instance - why do we have to use Sierra portrait to use voiced lipsync, instead of just getting the sync frame number from the audio channel and animate it ourselves in whatever style we want?)

I agree with this...But at some point you could also wonder: why stay with AGS if you have to create too much from scratch? - I'm not saying that that's currently the case. And I do feel AGS is much more than just a very good basis (although there are some design decisions that wouldn't have been mine...but which application doesn't have that). But would that basis - without further controlled development - be good enough for me to stick with it? - I couldn't answer that question at the moment.

When I finally decided to write my own plugin to add some features that I miss in AGS, it was precisely because I didn't want to count on CJ getting around to implementing it eventually. Most likely I still wouldn't want to implement plugins written by others, unless they were either very simple or proven bug free through years of use, but that's just me being weird again

And I fully agree with this. The examples that I've given earlier would probably also be plugins that I would write (or have someone write for me, depending on my time and their complexity)...but just like you can't expect everyone to draw as good as some people on this forum, you also can't expect everyone to code as good (reliable, smooth, etc)...

[Snake]

And neither did I ever say that it was...so how exactly is this remark in any way a relevant reaction to my post (to which the first line was clearly a reaction)? - Or is this just you trying to bash me with irrelevant knowledge that we (and probably just about everyone else on this forum) both already posses?

I love you, Misj'.
Calin, I like you, don't get me wrong. I like you a lot. You should probably know that by now just from IRC. You've got a sense of humor that I like, you are a hell of a game designer, you are an artist, a goddamn killer programmer and not to mention a damn good debater (which is something I will never possess). And I must not forget the great hair.
But sometimes you... do have a tendency, whether you realize or not, to make it sound like you know better than anyone else. I really can't stand that about anybody, so it's not just you. I don't care who you are or what part of the world you are from - don't think you are king shit. Not that you do, but that's the vibe you give off sometimes.

[Calin Leafshade]

I could put 'IMHO' before everything if you'd like.. because that's all it ever is.. my humble opinion.

But i do apologise.. I could probably do with putting a few more qualifying statements in what i say.

[TerranRich]

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks that, Snake.

[Calin Leafshade]

pffft let's all bully Calin for expressing an opinion with conviction.

[Chicky]

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks that, Snake.

I have never got the impression that Calin acts in any way different regarding his ego than anyone else on this forum. Don't pick faults in the way someone presents themselves just because it hits a nerve. Terran, rather than posting snide remarks and hiding behind Snake's comment, why not speak up and share your opinion? In fact, screw that. Picking faults in someone's personality is childish, why not have a debate without getting personal?

[Babar]

CALIN SUCKS!