Help decide what should Cyan release next

[theclam]

How should we, or how will Cyan, decide which fan-created age(s) would be released in MOULa first? Should we submit them to Cyan? How will that work?

If Cyan releases the plugin binary, then presumably anyone with both an Age and 3DS Max could get in contact with Cyan and ask about working with them to integrate their Age. This presumption depends on there being few enough Writers with 3DS Max (and, specifically, with v.7) that Mark will not be swamped by requests. Even so, I expect it would be a slow process.

The release of the plugin code will take longer to prepare for—that is one part of it being a "giant step". I see that extra time as negligible, but Cyan obviously doesn't. That time costs them money. And once released, it will take time to comprehend the code and to transplant its functionality into PyPRP (and it is likely that people will wait until the next release of Blender before implementing that functionality in full). I expect it will be a slow process. During this time, of course, anyone with 3DS Max could still deal with Cyan.

Without the server source or a testing server made available, writers will not have the opportunity to test their Ages. The release of the plugin source will eventually allay this, somewhat; the engines used in Hex Isle and Myst 5 are similar to MOUL, more so than PotS is, and the code will offer the information needed to allow us to export fan Ages to the newer games. This will not fill the need of multiplayer testing; however, it is better than not having a test environment.

[Dr Crisger]

this is great news. Whatever they decide to release is good, we can work with what is to achieve what will be.

Perhaps using 3D Max will help control and direct the work flow, only one age to start with to test and refine the process sounds quite workable. If we keep a respectful and open mind about this, I think it wlll proceed much smoother..... I am sure they will do what they can and we can do what we can.

I have 3D Max the latest version and all the current commerical plug ins as well as an older version of Max that will probably be more in line with what they used.....and am willing to help with the run up to a workable age if my own work load permits I have stayed quiet over here until things started to happen for real and to let the dust settle a bit. I think the key will be and always has been to remember the good of all over any individual goals. This is the dawn of a new era and a exciting one. Whatever we do should have a quality in texture, content and theme equal to and sympathetic to the original, it may take a lot of work but will show what can be done and will help open the door for this new future.

I for one am very grateful for anything they decide to release and I feel we should focus on working with them and for the overall good of the future and leave behind or set aside desires for things they choose not to share at this point.

If i dont have time to help on the actual age project i am happy to help with aesthetics and planning as time allows.

[GPNMilano]

I'm pretty sure I have a copy of max 7 laying around my place somewhere. And if they do update it i KNOW i can get my hands on a copy of the latest. Of course we'd have to build an age in 3dsMax cause there is no way to import a blend file into another 3d program.

And as I said, we have not finalized what the next step will be but I think we are leaning towards this. And we realize that most of the user-created content writers will not have 3ds max but there are a number that do have 3ds max or the means to acquire it. And taking a select few user-created Ages and getting them on the MOULa servers will provide a lot of good information on what the next steps should be.

Love Chogon, really do, but does he not understand that we've been working in blender for the last...at least 3 years now, and Blender and 3DSmax don't mix. You can't take one of our ages and plop it into 3dsMax. Can't be done. So this will at least prove interesting.

[Chacal]

Chacal: Here's my line of reasoning. Since Mark said that they want to get fan created content on the MOULagain servers, I interpreted that to mean that they would be bold enough to use their servers as the test servers. Might the servers crash if we give them a poorly written/converted age? Possibly. But it seems - to me, at least - they're willing to take that risk. Reading Mark's statement that way - "we have the test servers already" - is why I said we can leave the servers for later. But I admit that's my own line of reasoning. Also, if we open this up for a debate as to servers vs. plugins, we'll fracture even more - and we can kiss the consensus goodbye.

However, I don't want to misrepresent your opinion. So, do you want me to count you as plugin binaries, plugin sources, or 'abstain' (because you'd prefer the server binaries/code instead)?

Robert, none of the above. I am not abstaining.
You asked for opinions on the roadmap.
I gave you my professional opinion.
I have provided the rationale for this opinion.
Feel free to discard it if you don't want it.

While I appreciate what you're doing, I disagree with your opinion because :
- You try to interpret what Mark is saying and there is no grounds for that interpretation;
- you are limiting options to plugin source and plugin binaries for no reason;
- you think that further discussion will prevent us from reaching a consensus.

Releasing binaries is little or no work for Cyan (Edit: Mark has just confirmed this according to your later post), so it would have little impact on its ability to release sources.
Thus including server binaries in the roadmap does not prevent including the plugin, so I don't see how this would fracture us and prevent a consensus.
Besides, Cyan is free to accept what it wants from the suggested roadmap.

As for the testing environment, we do need one.
If Cyan ever decides to use its production server as a test server, then it is so wrong that it would be a waste of time to continue work on MOUL.

[Paradox]

Love Chogon, really do, but does he not understand that we've been working in blender for the last...at least 3 years now, and Blender and 3DSmax don't mix. You can't take one of our ages and plop it into 3dsMax. Can't be done. So this will at least prove interesting.

4.5 years, almost 5... Almlys released PyPRP in late October 2005

[Tsar Hoikas]

you think that further discussion will prevent us from reaching a consensus.

This is nothing new. Robert seems to think limited constrained discussions are best for some reason. I remember back when he was running the "talks" about the "Unofficial" GoW, he would forcibly halt discussions. For example: http://www.bergen-hill.com/rtr/chatlogs ... _08_18.txt. Obviously this was ineffective.

[I.Brattin]

Chloe is right on one thing though, Blender and 3DS Max won't mesh. You can export from 3DS Max to Blender. But going back the other way exporting from Blender to 3DS Max is impossible. I have tried exporting as 3DS, OBJ, NIF, FBX, DAE... Some for whatever reason won't export, and the ones that will 3DS Max won't import.

This is extremely frustrating, so close but yet so far away. Looks like I may end up waiting till a blender plugin is ready.

[rivenwanderer]

I think it's obvious that this discussion is about a very alpha kind of age integration process, so whatever leads to the ribbon-cutting of an age in MOULagain the soonest is the best approach for this exercise, and whatever leads to ease of Blender exporting is the best approach for the future.

It's true that we need some way to test before official release on the MOULagain server, to make sure it's working--just releasing to everyone it sight unseen (with the artist not even knowing exactly how it'll look in the engine) seems like a recipe for trouble...

[diafero]

Chacal took the words out of my mouth. Robert does not seem to be willing to reply to my comments, but since I am in line with Chacal, there's hope for an actual reply

[Dr Crisger]

Robert is clearly trying to help ease the immediate future by helping simplify the dialogue from the area of what does eveyrone want to what does everyone think is immeidatly and reasonably possible given what Mark is so clearly sayng which is...

we will do what we can
we want to do a lot more
we ARE doing what we can now
please be patient.

I for one am very grateful for Robert's efforts, for Mark's candor and obvious good will and see no need to bring up the past in a promising present. Lets keep our eye on this door that is opening and not on the ones that were shut due to circumstances beyone anyone's control.

What is possible will certainly depend on the good will and patience of eveyone.