OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Everything about development and the OpenMW source code.
User avatar
ap0
Posts: 289
Joined: 11 Aug 2011, 18:47
Contact:

Re: OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Post by ap0 » 19 Dec 2018, 19:41

It seems that this forum is becoming the place for everyone who doesn't contribute to give their opinion about what should or shouldn't OpenMW do; without even bothering reading the previous debates. Maybe we should put some items in the FAQ about MGE/MCP/MWSE/… :/

User avatar
AnyOldName3
Posts: 1566
Joined: 26 Nov 2015, 03:25

Re: OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Post by AnyOldName3 » 19 Dec 2018, 19:48

As we said in your other thread, adding options is a lot more work than it might initially seem, both when they're implemented in the first place and when other code is added later. We therefore can't just add options for every little thing anyone could conceivably want (although ideally, our future scripting system will be flexible enough that lots of things can be made as mods rather than OpenMW options).

As well as this, many of the things engine mods do were only done because they were the best option at the time, and if you had the choice of doing something else instead, the thing they did would have been a stupid idea. A large chunk of the point of OpenMW is that we no longer have to do stupid things because we have enough flexibility to do things properly. For example, adding MGE-style shadows would mean you can end up with artefacts where shadows can cast shadows on other shadows, even though they're both from the same light source. Replicating this as an option would clearly be stupid and a lot of work, too, and there's no benefit to it for anyone.
AnyOldName3, Master of Shadows

mikeprichard
Posts: 28
Joined: 16 Dec 2018, 19:42

Re: OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Post by mikeprichard » 19 Dec 2018, 20:04

ap0 wrote:
19 Dec 2018, 19:41
It seems that this forum is becoming the place for everyone who doesn't contribute to give their opinion about what should or shouldn't OpenMW do; without even bothering reading the previous debates. Maybe we should put some items in the FAQ about MGE/MCP/MWSE/… :/
As I already stated, that was not my intention at all; it was a neutral question about what may be planned for those specific features post-1.0 OpenMW, with the understanding that many MCP-covered fixes/features may not be relevant in OpenMW due to its implementation. But I appreciate everyone's input here on this admittedly potentially controversial issue. As I also already stated, I've seen many non-contributors barge into the forums demanding this or that over the years, but as for me, I really appreciate what all the contributors have been working towards, and am excited for 1.0 regardless. Thanks to all for the feedback.

TamrielCitizen
Posts: 22
Joined: 04 Dec 2018, 06:25

Re: OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Post by TamrielCitizen » 19 Dec 2018, 22:04

ap0 wrote:
19 Dec 2018, 19:41
It seems that this forum is becoming the place for everyone who doesn't contribute to give their opinion about what should or shouldn't OpenMW do; without even bothering reading the previous debates. Maybe we should put some items in the FAQ about MGE/MCP/MWSE/… :/
Speaking just for myself, I do hope to someday have time to contribute more directly (namely, with actual coding), but right now the best contribution to OpenMW I could make is voicing my opinion and ideas (and according to some of the news posts on the site, the developers agree that such contribution is still helpful), in the hope that the OpenMW team might agree with my argumentation. I believe that achieving the goals I suggest would be great both for OpenMW's future and for the Morrowind community. I didn't read all forum threads, of course, but I've read most of those updated during 2018, and some of the older ones, too.
And I did make suggestions about addressing MCP/MGE XE/MWSE in the FAQ, incidentally (see the comments in my thread).
AnyOldName3 wrote:
19 Dec 2018, 19:48
As we said in your other thread, adding options is a lot more work than it might initially seem, both when they're implemented in the first place and when other code is added later. We therefore can't just add options for every little thing anyone could conceivably want (although ideally, our future scripting system will be flexible enough that lots of things can be made as mods rather than OpenMW options).

As well as this, many of the things engine mods do were only done because they were the best option at the time, and if you had the choice of doing something else instead, the thing they did would have been a stupid idea. A large chunk of the point of OpenMW is that we no longer have to do stupid things because we have enough flexibility to do things properly. For example, adding MGE-style shadows would mean you can end up with artefacts where shadows can cast shadows on other shadows, even though they're both from the same light source. Replicating this as an option would clearly be stupid and a lot of work, too, and there's no benefit to it for anyone.
Well, as I've also said, I realise that it requires a lot of effort/time, but I am looking into the far future. I believe that the result is worth it in the end, and it's perfectly fine if that result won't be achieved in the next X years, the important part for me is the end goal. And also, it doesn't matter if OpenMW's implementation of feature Y differs (if it can be done less stupidly, that's great!), what matters is the in-game player experience: whether activating feature Y results in the same behaviour from the player's POV. And also, my main concern is gameplay mechanics - that's usually where people's preferences differ wildly. I personally haven't yet seen anyone arguing that MGE XE's shadows are better than what you have already done in your branch, on the contrary, many (count me among them!) have commented that your version is better. Thank you for all of your amazing work! :D
By the way, if some things can be achieved with OpenMW mods rather than OpenMW options, great! I'm all for powerful and flexible scripting system. If there is a mod adding feature Y to OpenMW (a mod, not a whole separate fork of the engine), it may indeed be unnecessary to implement it in OpenMW directly.

Also, I'm saying it for the third (fourth?) time already, but still: a huge thank you to the developers. I do appreciate all the effort you put into OpenMW, and you have my respect and admiration. I only want OpenMW to become even better in the future, and to become a true replacement for the Vanilla Engine, not just an alternative. :)

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 4645
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Location: Belgium
Gitlab profile: https://gitlab.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Post by psi29a » 20 Dec 2018, 10:12

Keep in mind that developers have their hands full as it is. Being drawn into discussions about what OpenMW "should" do just prevents them from working on things that need to get done.

That's not to say that people giving their unsolicited opinion can't be valuable, but a bit of restraint should also be shown. As someone already said, if you want to see MCP features sooner, find someone to help you do it or do it yourself.

The exception to this rule is when developers ask for everyone's opinion, then you know that someone in OpenMW is interested in something you're interested in and it's your chance to be involved in the development of that. :)

My advice is to be patient. If there isn't a ticket for it, create one! That way you can see if any dev takes notice to want to work on it. :)

mikeprichard
Posts: 28
Joined: 16 Dec 2018, 19:42

Re: OpenMW future plans and MCP features?

Post by mikeprichard » 20 Dec 2018, 13:16

Thank you, psi29a, and I can see on git how much work you also put into the project every day to get OpenMW to 1.0. Much appreciated. My original questions have been answered here, so I'll just let you all get back to work!

Post Reply