dsda-dev

I mentioned the video game industry because it's going through a large period of layoffs, downsizing, and readjusting. This was about how the current situation isn't guaranteed to continue forever (i.e., if you hypothetically moved authority to a company full of community members, it might not continue that way, and you can't always take it back). Are you suggesting that the outcomes of this discussion or the community adoption of id24 have no financial ramifications for anyone? I think perhaps you interpreted everything as having to do with goober, but almost nothing I said is about him. I don't think I said he was paid anywhere. If I did then I retract the statement. Does rereading my comments with this in mind help to make sense of it? Again, I'm not talking about the people directly responsible for id24 when I talk about the future and what this means for the community. Are you saying that none of the nightdive employees were involved with the uploader, you all objected to it being released, etc? That would imply that the community members involved in these topics aren't actually able to influence the outcomes, so it won't really lessen my concerns. Are you suggesting the super mod accusing me of "blatant astroturfing" is calmly assessing the situation and speaking rationally? I don't disagree but I don't think they would have been as true to my concerns. Seeing people either ignoring or dancing around the issue with less confrontational ways contributed to the way I worded things. Maybe the problem is people are assigning judgment to my statements and thinking I'm saying xaser = bad, but that's not the point of my comments and I don't think that. If the community wants to involve this level of influence from a company, then they will. If people feel the risk is not significant, it's the direction things will go. There are a lot of idealists in this thread and such optimism can be a strength. The community can decide anything and there isn't really an inherent "right" or "wrong" for these types of things as no one owns the community but itself. It doesn't seem like this discussion will go anywhere at this point, so I'll drop out. I'll point out that at least 4 other source port maintainers liked my original post, so maybe it's worth addressing those concerns for them if not for me.

I think you've read a lot of emotion in my posts and perhaps that's why you've interpreted them so negatively, but maybe if you try to read them from a neutral voice you'll see them differently. It doesn't matter who is involved or what the intentions are - if money is involved then it changes the flavor of everything. This isn't a personal attack because it's not a question of anyone's character or intent. Just look at the uploader. Releasing that the way it was released isn't something I think any of these people would do, but somehow collectively they did. It's the type of consequence that happens when money is involved. Once again the only reply to my concerns is a personal attack. I feel like that starts to speak for itself.

Xaser asked me some questions over the past months. For instance he asked a while ago if I had an opinion on json being in standards. He also mentioned someone was working on a standard and was hoping it would get run by me at some point soon. That's about all I knew: someone is thinking about a standard, and it may or may not involve json. To be honest I couldn't think of who would be working on something like that but not want to discuss it openly. I don't know what kind of intentions you had but I essentially knew 0% of what this is. I don't care why you did the gpl laundering. This term seemed the most fitting to me and it still does. I did ask Xaser about it when it came out and he explained what you did. What else exactly would you have wanted?

For me personally (and understand I'm coming at this from the perspective of someone that cares significantly more for demo compatibility than the average person), the port having the features doesn't bother me. It's that it has the features wrong. Its demos won't play back in existing ports and vice versa (at least, for boom and further). That's a tarnish on the history of doom that's hard for me to stomach. It feels like a mockery of the doom community source tradition rather than a celebration of it. An official gpl port that adopted the existing code and was backwards compatible would be awesome. Imagine if people could contribute to the official port and make it a community effort. I don't know whether such a thing would have been possible, but if it wasn't then I probably would agree that there isn't really a version of this that I would like. You're absolutely right that this is a fundamental distinction for me. That's about the port specifically anyway, my concerns about the standard are different. Personally I've got nothing against anybody. I'm sure it's hard to distinguish and you can believe it or not, but I try to speak as dsda-dev here and not as myself when possible.

The dsdhacked launch was a provocation specifically to draw people's intervention after a discussion somewhere on here. I'm not sure what this is about exactly. I stopped "active" pursuit of a cross-port udmf standard for a few reasons. 1) I found out the woof devs have no interest in this (so anything on the adoption scale of mbf21 is unlikely). 2) You had repeatedly mentioned how overwhelmed you are and I didn't want to try to coordinate any major moves across multiple ports that would put more pressure on people until everyone had "recovered" from mbf21 and things settled down. Given your resistance during the mbf21 days I didn't expect this to change any time soon - to be honest, I wasn't sure something like mbf21 would even be able to happen again. So I decided to pursue things as an experiment on my own. This reduced my direct scope of collaborative interest down to gzdoom and its relatives. There are very few things in the dsda udmf domain that don't already exist in other ports. They come from requests by mappers and I discussed them to an extent with Graf and Xaser privately as well as openly on discord. As far as why it has a domain name, I was requested to add this by I think Boris and Graf to make their lives easier, since even though it was mostly a subset of the zdoom namespace, it would help for identifying the maps. I'm at a bit of a loss why you feel like you should decide what gzdoom features I get to support in dsda-doom though.

I mean what does personally attacking me and relitigating past events have to do with id24? If you disagree with my concerns, how about sharing your reasons for doing so? I didn't want to post in this thread originally but after talking to some people separately and seeing that people didn't feel comfortable raising these concerns, I decided to do it myself. It's an uncomfortable topic but it's important to have an honest discussion about it. Meanwhile trying to derail the conversation into tangents won't get us anywhere.

I don't think this is relevant to the current topic, but somebody leaked your discord convos about me back then. Oops. Look at your posts about me in this thread - why are you even using this thread in that way?

You and others have misunderstood the point. The stipulation by xaser is that introducing the id24 spec will not benefit the company. What you've said about the assets is correct. However, the existence of the spec also makes it more likely that people use the assets in the future. It's not about what is required but what improves the adoption rate.

The best thing to do is always to just ping me on discord "hey is x intended or can I submit a patch". Sometimes things actually are intended, but the terminal endoom stuff was just a quick implementation so something exists, there's always room for improvement.

The spec essentially operates as additional marketing for the new release and in perpetuity as wads using the new assets naturally require people to buy the game, making it an investment. Hiding things would have increased community rejection, decreased the likelihood of behavior being adopted by ports, and thus resulted in fewer people using the new assets in their wads in the long term. Let's not pretend this is altruism - the dishonest presentation once again is a really bad sign for me. In terms of the future, given the state of the games industry right now it's inevitable that this falls out of community hands eventually even if you don't intend it to. Since we are gradually yielding control and influence away, it may not be so easy for the community to reject that future. Many people are uncomfortable voicing dissent here already, especially when those with power attack the people on the "wrong" side. The thing with good faith is it has a habit of floundering once money is involved. This isn't about you or your colleagues personally - it's just an unpleasant truth of humanity. If I had to put on my most cynical thinking cap, this is step 1 towards syphoning money out of the modding community ala skyrim, and even if I could trust you, I definitely don't trust Microsoft.

Kex demos aren't compatible with community standards, so they won't play back.

Ya, it doesn't have compatible demos so it acts as if you tried to play back a gzdoom demo for instance and just aborts. Going to have to silently ignore bad reel demos in a hotfix.

As this is a spec put forth by a gpl launderer and organized by people with financial incentives, it's impossible for it to be a community effort or even to have an unbiased discussion about it. Half the people chiming in are earning a paycheck. Future discussion or iteration is hopelessly muddied now, as the financial ramifications of all the details of any spec will weigh into the minds of the people trying to drive the topic. I think it's a terrible precedent and the presentation of it like it's what's best for everyone and as if it had community input is complete sophistry. This appears to simply be an effort by a company poised to profit off of control of the standards to take that control and serve themselves. It's capitalism and the cashing in of decades of community clout. I'm sure everyone had the best intentions and there's nothing wrong with wanting to make a living, but if this is the future then I'll probably find another hobby.

So, you know how to fix the issue, even made a fix yourself, but you didn't submit a patch, and you're complaining why hasn't this been fixed?

I checked this map and I have the same FPS on 0.27.5 and 0.28. Could you post your config? It could be due to a setting that I don't have enabled. This is an intended change since I want the assets to scale the same way. Assuming I understand what you mean - it's the same for the menu backgrounds.