BYOND Feature Wishlist

Feb 24 2015, 8:02 am

In response to NNAAAAHH

NNAAAAHH wrote:

I still don't like all the focus on the web client, when DS needs so much done to it.

The difference is that DS is a legacy project. It's finished. They tried to get people to use it successfully for years and failed. If the webclient doesn't take off and make some real money, BYOND in its current state will cease to exist. In case you haven't noticed, we rarely if ever meet our donation goals anymore. If people actually manage to make successful games and start bringing in some real money for Tom and Lummox to survive on, maybe we'll get new DS / DM features. Until then, shut up and take what you get.

Feb 24 2015, 9:56 am
Lummox JR	Well as Xirre pointed out, most of these requests aren't DS-specific and would apply more to DM or to both.

Feb 24 2015, 11:23 am

NNAAAAHH

I was more-so referring to the 'screw DS, just make sure webclient has this!' comments.

The only reason we met the donation requirements the first few months is because of a handful of people trying to help BYOND out and keep it alive, their wallets wore thin and/or they were disappointed at the progress made. The long list of bugs reported that go seemingly unchecked, the lo g list of feature requests that you would think would be implemented, by lummox and tom saying they want to, they're working on it, or that it's coming. I just feel like the webclient isn't worth the hassle and diverting resources from the list of stuff that still needs done.

I waited to donate and never really did, because I wanted to see some progress on the long list of stuff that needs work.

Feb 24 2015, 1:03 pm

Lummox JR

The bug list being long is misleading; long bug lists are common in all projects, even ones with hundreds of developers. I deal with bugs when I can, though what gets dealt with--bugs, features, site work, etc.--is based on what currently has focus. I spend some time working with bugs, some time dealing with site changes, etc. Flitting between focus areas would basically be impossible to do efficiently. So for this reason, there are stretches where the Bug Reports forum doesn't see a lot of movement.

(Not to mention, a number of the bugs listed there are poorly documented or impossible to investigate. Still, worth a proper purge at some point, at least moving a lot of Open items to Unverified if need be.)

Feature requests stack up more for even better reasons. All feature implementations risk introducing new bugs, especially if they're big features. Most of the items in that forum are not minor changes, or are the sorts of seemingly minor changes that can stack up into feature creep in a hurry. Tom is (rightly) wary of feature creep.

Feb 24 2015, 1:08 pm In response to Lummox JR
Xirre	Lummox JR wrote: The bug list being long is misleading; long bug lists are common in all projects, even ones with hundreds of developers. http://issuetracker.unity3d.com/ -- 170 pages of gloriousness. Surprisingly enough, all of my bug reports get fixed in the next update. Maybe I am just special. :) But a lot of these bugs have been sitting there for a long time.

Feb 24 2015, 1:09 pm (Edited on Feb 24 2015, 1:15 pm)

In response to Lummox JR

IchiroKeisuke

Lummox JR wrote:

Built-in autotiling for the map sure would be nice, but it'd be very limited. Like Nadrew said it's a complex issue. Bear in mind, there is no such thing as a standard definition as to which kind of tiling to use. Pmikell's classic "clock" of bitflags going from 1=north, 2=northeast, 4=east, and so on is the format I've always followed, but there are icons predating it (or from around that same time anyway) that use a different set of flags entirely. Is the desired joining 47-state, 16-state, or the limited but still often useful Foomerian 13 or neo-Foomerian 15? This is to say nothing of esoteric join types like 82, 161, and 256.

Even if it would be limited it would be nice to have.

I don't think its very important to create something universal here - instead of wasting time and resources both run-time and design-time we could have a built in version that eliminates that and gives us what we want quickly - nice maps

This is the setup I use for my soft-coded edging.

I think it's the equivalent of foomerian?

If it is foomerian. I vote foomerian for the type of auto edging to support, since it handles all the different types of edging :P

Feb 24 2015, 1:34 pm
Ter13	I use RPGMaker XP format for 47-state autotiling. I've actually written a few programs that generate DMIs from XP format slugs, and I also wrote a DMP processor that can go through and perform tiling. Unfortunately, the DMP processor is hard to use because I didn't design it very competently.

Feb 24 2015, 1:49 pm In response to IchiroKeisuke
Lummox JR	Yeah, that would be Foomerian. There's really no standard on what the icon states should be named in Foomerian joins, so it'd be the hardest to support.

Feb 24 2015, 1:50 pm In response to Xirre
Lummox JR	Xirre wrote: http://issuetracker.unity3d.com/ -- 170 pages of gloriousness. Surprisingly enough, all of my bug reports get fixed in the next update. Maybe I am just special. :) But a lot of these bugs have been sitting there for a long time. Your bug reports, here at least, also tend to have the benefit of being cogent and well documented, so they're easier to fix.

Feb 24 2015, 1:54 pm

Ter13

Your bug reports, here at least, also tend to have the benefit of being cogent and well documented, so they're easier to fix.

I've found the more research I do on a bug, the more likely it is to be fixed. I think there's only been one or two bugs I've found that I put a few hours worth of research or more into that never got fixed. world.Export() latency and Crossed() being called incorrectly during certain rare situations in particular.

Feb 24 2015, 2:14 pm

In response to Lummox JR

IchiroKeisuke

Lummox JR wrote:

Yeah, that would be Foomerian. There's really no standard on what the icon states should be named in Foomerian joins, so it'd be the hardest to support.

hardest just because of what to name the icon states?

well here is what I called them :

IchiroKeisuke wrote:

turf
>   var
> //this is an icon state that holds the name of your edge state - SETTING THIS ALONE WILL GENERATE 4 DIR EDGES
>       edge_state=""
>
>
> //Allows you to specify corner pieces if you go with 8 dir edging.(icon_state)
>       edge_corner_state=""
> //defines how edge should look if it surrounds a specific tile.(icon_state)
>       edge_all_state=""
> //if you have corners you can tell it to use them by setting this to true. but this requires all of the above to be set for proper results
>       edge_corners=FALSE
> //completely optional grouping - it allows multiple turfs to not create edging on one another by "grouping" them. for example "Grasses"
>       edge_group=null
> //if you only want specific directions to be edged just disable the ones you don' want...
>       edge_north=TRUE
>       edge_south=TRUE
>       edge_east=TRUE
>       edge_west=TRUE

Now I also used directional states so I didn't have to name very many things.

So long as it's well documented (maybe under "Map Edging") I can't imagine the point not getting across.

Feb 24 2015, 2:27 pm

In response to NNAAAAHH

Unwanted4Murder

NNAAAAHH wrote:

I was more-so referring to the 'screw DS, just make sure webclient has this!' comments.

The only reason we met the donation requirements the first few months is because of a handful of people trying to help BYOND out and keep it alive, their wallets wore thin and/or they were disappointed at the progress made. The long list of bugs reported that go seemingly unchecked, the lo g list of feature requests that you would think would be implemented, by lummox and tom saying they want to, they're working on it, or that it's coming. I just feel like the webclient isn't worth the hassle and diverting resources from the list of stuff that still needs done.

I waited to donate and never really did, because I wanted to see some progress on the long list of stuff that needs work.

But the point is that no one is using the features we already have. We shouldn't be trying to support the site by donations because it's never going to work long term -- we need people making solid, profitable games. That is entirely possible with DM's current state.

Feb 24 2015, 2:28 pm

In response to Lummox JR

Xirre

Lummox JR wrote:

Xirre wrote:

http://issuetracker.unity3d.com/ -- 170 pages of gloriousness. Surprisingly enough, all of my bug reports get fixed in the next update. Maybe I am just special. :) But a lot of these bugs have been sitting there for a long time.

Your bug reports, here at least, also tend to have the benefit of being cogent and well documented, so they're easier to fix.

I make them video recordings that are about 1GB in size that I attach to the bug report. Along with my 2GB project file. I bet their ISP must really love me too. Haha. But, honestly, I did that one time and felt bad. I try to minimize the amount of data I am sending them so they're not overwhelmed now. On average, I'd say my reports are 500MB in size since I remove assets like music, models, sprites, etc.

Thank you for the compliment on my bug reports. I've been trying to make your job easier, no doubt.

Feb 24 2015, 2:30 pm

In response to Unwanted4Murder

Xirre

Unwanted4Murder wrote:

NNAAAAHH wrote:

I was more-so referring to the 'screw DS, just make sure webclient has this!' comments.

The only reason we met the donation requirements the first few months is because of a handful of people trying to help BYOND out and keep it alive, their wallets wore thin and/or they were disappointed at the progress made. The long list of bugs reported that go seemingly unchecked, the lo g list of feature requests that you would think would be implemented, by lummox and tom saying they want to, they're working on it, or that it's coming. I just feel like the webclient isn't worth the hassle and diverting resources from the list of stuff that still needs done.

I waited to donate and never really did, because I wanted to see some progress on the long list of stuff that needs work.

But the point is that no one is using the features we already have. We shouldn't be trying to support the site by donations because it's never going to work long term -- we need people making solid, profitable games. That is entirely possible with DM's current state.

In all honestly. BYOND has a wonderful batch of games ready for marketing. There's literally a bunch of games in the BYOND void that has not come to light. They look absolutely beautiful. But, those who have made them fail to market them.

Feb 24 2015, 2:41 pm

In response to Xirre

A.T.H.K

Feb 24 2015, 2:42 pm (Edited on Feb 24 2015, 3:25 pm)

In response to A.T.H.K

Xirre

A.T.H.K wrote:

...
http://www.byond.com/games/QuaintShanty/Magick
...

++ I agree with your list entirely.

--

On another note, Magick isn't even really in a playable state. The moment it is playable and in a state that harsh critics will actually give it an 8/10 everytime, I have a lot of people who I have networked with to help me out with getting it noticed. And I also plan on keeping BYOND in the loop as well. There will be some minor obvious promotions of the engine.

Currently, I've only minorly advertised it on Tumblr, Twitter, Steam, and BYOND. I have yet to hit Reddit, indie-geared forums, and other places. All of which are on my list for future targets when the game is developed a bit more. In its early state, I actually had someone from off BYOND (a total stranger) say, "The art style looks like total shi*!"

Pardon me for getting off topic. But, to relate this post to what I have been saying, Maptext, an aforementioned topic, is actually one of the things that has literally taken up 2 days of my game development on Magick. Whereas if maptext were easier to manipulate, more flexible, etc... It would have taken me 2 minutes. I spent long hours trying to figure out how to prevent many logical errors I have seen. Even now, with some rendering issues fixed, it still isn't all that appealing to me. But, maybe I am just too picky about my own projects... Yeah, there are alternatives. But, they consume more resources in the long-run and my main intention was to go the most efficient route.

I could have finished Magick in about a day (and I mean completely finish it) if I didn't worry about polishing every section of the project that I finish before I move on to the next section. I may start working on it again sometime soon. I think it is time for some heavy updates. First, I need to do some homework in advanced to buy some free time.

Additionally, I hope some of these features here get implemented. Because, honestly, they're kind of some of the things I've been trying to do in a hack-ish way (which isn't the best of ways, honestly).

Edit: I almost forgot to add this --

Feb 24 2015, 5:23 pm

In response to Unwanted4Murder

Gtgoku55

Unwanted4Murder wrote:

NNAAAAHH wrote:

I still don't like all the focus on the web client, when DS needs so much done to it.

The difference is that DS is a legacy project. It's finished. They tried to get people to use it successfully for years and failed. If the webclient doesn't take off and make some real money, BYOND in its current state will cease to exist. In case you haven't noticed, we rarely if ever meet our donation goals anymore. If people actually manage to make successful games and start bringing in some real money for Tom and Lummox to survive on, maybe we'll get new DS / DM features. Until then, shut up and take what you get.

Why must everything be a doomsday scenario? Am I the only one that feel byond will be around forever? Even if it's not regularly being updated.

Feb 24 2015, 5:25 pm

In response to Gtgoku55

Xirre

Gtgoku55 wrote:

Unwanted4Murder wrote:

NNAAAAHH wrote:

I still don't like all the focus on the web client, when DS needs so much done to it.

The difference is that DS is a legacy project. It's finished. They tried to get people to use it successfully for years and failed. If the webclient doesn't take off and make some real money, BYOND in its current state will cease to exist. In case you haven't noticed, we rarely if ever meet our donation goals anymore. If people actually manage to make successful games and start bringing in some real money for Tom and Lummox to survive on, maybe we'll get new DS / DM features. Until then, shut up and take what you get.

Why must everything be a doomsday scenario? Am I the only one that feel byond will be around forever? Even if it's not regularly being updated.

BYOND will not be around forever at the rate is going. But, there is the possibility, just the possibility, that someone may actually become smart & competent enough at the same time and produce/market something to save BYOND from the hell hole it is in. One day.

Feb 25 2015, 3:01 pm

In response to Unwanted4Murder

MDC

Unwanted4Murder wrote:

But the point is that no one is using the features we already have. We shouldn't be trying to support the site by donations because it's never going to work long term -- we need people making solid, profitable games. That is entirely possible with DM's current state.

No one is using the features we already have and the same goes for the webclient. The only people so far that I've seen doing anything with the webclient are Doohl and WANO. I'm siding with DS on this one. It already has everything I need for the project I've been working on so long, but it's definitely missing a lot of polish and some optimizations/bug fixes in more areas that I would like to admit.

Every time they've worked on something new(first the flash client, then animate(), now this) there's the usual forum-goers saying that what BYOND is working on is the best thing they could prioritize but then no one ever completes a single thing with it and if they do manage to create a small project, they never market it and help BYOND make money. If people would just get off their asses and make something/advertize it, or if we could stop working on new things that most people on the forum here aren't even going to use anyways, we could get somewhere.

I'm sorry if I'm being rude or seem angry, this is nothing against you. I'm just tired of this circle that's been on BYOND for years where BYOND wants income and for things to improve meanwhile they keep working on things that people get happy about but never make anything with. The only opinions that have any worth on the webclient(in my opinion) are Doohl and his team because they're the only ones who've shown any real interest and do something with the webclient(no offense to anyone else who is creating something with it but haven't shown it publicly).

Everyone else needs to just zip it because it DOES affect BYOND. Who do you think Tom and Lummox listen to? The same people who haven't contributed anything except a couple of dollars here and there. No offense but it isn't that hard to break out of this damn circle. We already have a client good enough to create something that no one is using efficiently, now we're going to have two. Congrats I guess?

Feb 25 2015, 3:36 pm

In response to MDC

Xirre

MDC wrote:

No one is using the features we already have and the same goes for the webclient. The only people so far that I've seen doing anything with the webclient are Doohl and WANO.

http://www.byond.com/games/Lizard_Sphere_X/1
http://www.byond.com/games/Exadv1/SpaceStation13
http://www.byond.com/games/Teka123/AngelFalls
http://www.byond.com/games/Xirre/ShellServer
http://www.byond.com/games/QuaintShanty/Magick
http://www.byond.com/games/QuaintShanty/DFTB
http://www.byond.com/games/Xirre/Studia

I've been putting the web client to use. Every new project I work on, whether they're published or not, has been tested to work with the webclient. Yes, it may not utilize things like JS. But, what I mainly strive for is so the server actually converts the skin over properly. Others have been trying to fix their interface to be properly converted as well. So, it is a feature being used. Just not very openly.