myk
volveré y seré millones

Posts: 14420
Registered: 04-02 |
Quasar said:
It's not impossible, but it's making life harder than it needs to be for both the end user and for port authors who are now suddenly forbidden to make any advancements that might require a single IWAD (or at LEAST IWADs from the same gamemode only) to be loaded.
Heh, what? The game always uses only one IWAD as the game-determining "internal" resource file, and no one here is expecting anything else. The only relevant differences in reading two during load-up is that one must make sure the right one is selected as the IWAD, and that the PWAD that makes sure all the resources are used properly is loaded on top. Assuming you haven't altered the way Doom normally loads WADs, which could screw up the loading of multiple WADs, there isn't really anything you should be worrying about. IWADs are WADs like any other.
If there are possible methods to make it even easier for ports to handle these situations, especially considering they added loading capabilities (drag and drop, at least), which is what we were discussing, it certainly wouldn't hurt to see them implemented, as long as the coders are interested in bothering with the details. If not, WADs loading more than one IWAD might just be a bit less straightforward to load in some ports. In those that rely more on the command line, or for users who commonly use it or use launchers that apply it, this is a non-issue.
If you can show me any map on /idgames from before this year that required this, I'll go and rewrite a few dozen lines of code in EE and admit I was wrong.
Code what? I just tested this in Eternity and stuff seems to work like anywhere else, except that, as in some engines, there were texture or patch errors depending on the game mode. This is expected, as we'd need to prepare the PWAD taking care of TEXTURE1 and PNAMES.
Otherwise I'm going to chalk this sudden trend up to a bunch of copyright lawyering and fearmongering and continue to insist that is an inappropriate practice.
It's one thing to be concerned about a possible technical issue, another to insultingly try to belittle people's attitudes or position. This has nothing to do with "lawyering and fearmongering." Maybe you are fearmongering, however, by overreacting here.
It's quite simple. The most transparent way for people to respectfully use each other's work and creations it to simply take into account what they requested for when their work is used by others. In a community, this goes for anyone involved. Designers making levels, musicians composing songs, coders programming engines, community game users... and the game's developers. I don't see any particular reason to exclude them, or any reason not to take their "permissions text file" at face value like anyone else's. I would even say that excluding them pretty much erodes any respect we may garner between each other. People who don't respect their parents do not tend to make good siblings. So, unless taking the GPL or WAD text file permissions notes into consideration is also "lawyering and fearmongering," we must conclude you got ahead of yourself in this instance, getting rather opportunistic and hypocritical in your concerns, which themselves may have been unnecessary, if you thought that people were requesting additional game modes or the like.
|