Messages

1

Discussion / Re: Why is the "saved game during combat" thread locked?

« on: August 30, 2009, 11:18:49 am »

> It is permissible to start a thread in a mod section even if I have no plans to make such a mod?
Sure you can. May be there will be someone who codes that mod.

Thanks, I am pleased to see that my concerns about censorship of discussion turned out to be wrong.

2

Discussion / Re: Why is the "saved game during combat" thread locked?

« on: August 29, 2009, 03:35:29 pm »

We don't need any more discussion about it. If you make a modification you can share it with other players in the User modifications forum.

If you want a mod, go for it, it can go in that section of the forum

I am sorry, I think I misunderstood the quoted sentences above. I thought I was being told to make my own mod and post it in the mod forum. Therefore, I assumed I was forbidden to do any further discussion until I made such a mod. That's why I was complaining about censorship. Is my understanding correct that this assumption of mine was incorrect? It is permissible to start a thread in a mod section even if I have no plans to make such a mod?

3

Discussion / Re: Why is the "saved game during combat" thread locked?

« on: August 29, 2009, 11:45:30 am »

I think the main problem here is the layout of the UFO:AI forum.

Let's look for example at the OpenTTD project, which has very similar goals as UFO:AI, except that it is based on the game Transport Tycoon instead of XCOM. OpenTTD offers a sub-forum for suggestions, where anyone can write their ideas to improve the game and these ideas are then discussed. Of these ideas, only about 5% ever get implemented as a patch by an unofficial developer and probably less than 1% ever make it into the official SVN repository. Despite these very low chances of implementation, the OpenTTD suggestions forum is still a very pleasant place to exchange ideas with other players.

As a veteran user of this OpenTTD forum and its suggestions sub-forum, it is very hard for me to understand the policy of the UFO:AI forum in which threads with ideas that the developers don't agree with are locked and not to be further discussed by the players. Such a policy would be unimaginable on the OpenTTD suggestion forum, as this would cause 99% of all threads to be locked.

In OpenTTD, many important developments originated as ideas in the suggestion forum, which were then discussed. This discussion then inspired people to have additional, more refined ideas, which in turn inspired people to make unofficial patches that implement some of these ideas. These patches then inspired further ideas and patches, which eventually inspired official developers to include some of these patches in the official SVN repository or to make their own patches. All this inspiring and productive exchange of ideas would never have happened if the threads containing all the initial unrefined ideas had been locked.

It is not my intention to push the official developers to change their opinion on battlescape saves, especially since they have presented good reasons not to implement it. I also have no intention to write such a patch myself, at least not before the next stable version is released. My intention is rather to convince the forum moderators to change their policy regarding the suppression of ideas by locking threads, in order to allow a similar exchange of ideas as on the OpenTTD forums, as I have described above.

I fully understand that most developers don't want to constantly read new ideas regarding topics that they have already dismissed. Therefore, why not make an additional sub-forum for suggestions, as has been done on the OpenTTD forums? Wouldn't that be best for everyone?

After having been disappointed by Project Xenocide, I have come to the conclusion that UFO:AI is the most promising game based on XCOM. As a fan of the XCOM series, I have great interest in taking part in the UFO:AI community, as I have previously done with the OpenTTD project. So far, the only thing preventing me from actively taking part in the community are the reasons stated above, as I do not wish to take part in a community in which ideas cannot be exchanged freely.

4

Discussion / Re: Why is the "saved game during combat" thread locked?

« on: August 29, 2009, 01:16:25 am »

"New ideas" are really irrelevant - A final decision on the matter has already been made, it doesn't need to be discussed any more, it isn't "counterproductive" because it has already gotten to the end.

I completely disagree. The "final decision" you are referencing was made by official developers and concerns only the official SVN repository. However, there may be other potential patch coders out there who would be interested in "new ideas" on this topic. Therefore, I cannot agree with your statement that such "new ideas" are "irrelevant".

For this reason, I continue to believe that the locking of the thread is counterproductive and against the spirit of open source.

5

Discussion / Re: Why is the "saved game during combat" thread locked?

« on: August 28, 2009, 10:08:53 pm »

We don't need any more discussion about it.

Yes, several official developers have stated this opinion. But is this a valid reason to forbid any further discussion about this topic, by locking the thread? Such censorship is disrespectful to the UFO:AI community, in my opinion. It is also counterproductive, as it prevents people from posting new ideas they have on this matter.

6

Discussion / Re: Why is the "saved game during combat" thread locked?

« on: August 28, 2009, 08:47:31 pm »

I don't understand why people keep whining about the battlescape save as if we're infringing on a basic human right. There are quite simply two reasons why it's not going to happen: we don't really want it and it's a coding nightmare. The first is an opinion we're not going to change our minds on, the second isn't even a matter of opinion.
So yeah, people can either live with the situation, or... not, I guess.

I can understand the second specified argument, namely that battlescape saving is not implemented for technical reasons ("coding nightmare"). However, I am unable to understand the first specified argument, namely that it is disallowed for design reasons. What would be wrong with the option of disallowing battlescape saving in the difficulty settings at the start of the game? This would satisfy everyone, because it would allow everyone to play the way they want to play.

I respect the developers' decision to not implement this feature for technical reasons. However, what I really can't understand is the fact that this thread in which this topic is being discussed has been locked, thereby preventing further discussion on this topic. Since this is a controversial topic and it will certainly remain controversial in the foreseeable future, it seems appropriate to me to allow this discussion to continue. Even if the developers no longer wish to take part in this discussion, such a discussion might inspire someone else to make an unofficial patch.

For the above reasons, I request that the previous thread be unlocked. Surely, it cannot be in the interest of anyone to censor the UFO:AI community.

7

Discussion / Re: Saving game & replacing units

« on: August 14, 2009, 07:00:41 pm »

From reading this thread, I have come to the conclusion that both sides have many valid arguments.

I would suggest the following compromise:

Let the player decide at the start of the game, in the window with the difficulty settings, whether battlescape saves should be permitted or not. This would give both sides exactly what they want.

Of course, nobody can demand that a dev implements such a feature, especially if none of the devs are interested in this feature. However, I hope the devs would at least permit such a patch to be included into the official source code, if someone else were to implement it cleanly. Even if such a feature makes it harder to maintain the source code, I believe that it would be worth it, since this thread has shown that many people want this feature.