HDTP and the work I am doing are two completely separate things, but I'm not discrediting it's merits. Also without telling you what your mod is, it's scope is larger than that of HDTP's and that HDTP forms a small integrated component of GMDX. Is this statement incorrect?Cybernetic pig wrote:HDTP is a good mod to learn from: where they went wrong and where they went right, and in my opinion they were more right than wrong, hence why I built GMDX upon it. I don't expect you to follow or stand on their shoulders at all costs, but I just think they way they handled weapon mods was close to hitting the mark and that particular aspect should be followed. Doesn't mean I am not willing to hear out and discuss your concepts though.Mortecha wrote:You however have taken this out of context, as we do not stand on the shoulders of the developers of the HDTP. We are doing what they did, but better and under my design mandate which has a different design context with the purpose of achieving different goals. No offence intended to the developers of HDTP.
If you would rather create different scope attachments specific to individual weapons then I won't be complaining. But the idea behind the my suggestion of having one scope attachment with varying aesthetic scopes and views depending upon the weapon in order to reduce game-play complexity, and avoid the situations of picking up a scope attachment but being unable to use it of a weapon you wanted to use it on. I am only concerned about the aesthetics, and care little about what happens behind that to make it happen, that also means that I am stepping on as little of your toes as possible. And if I recall, I was asking if that was possible, and not just assuming it was a given. I guess this discussion is a continuation of that. Remember, this is a game, and sometimes some illogical magic needs to happen to keep things simple, similar to the magazine extension by one bullet attachments.Cybernetic pig wrote:Mortecha wrote:So to avoid confusion about this, what I propose that the games mechanic regarding universal scope modification remains unchanged. Where you can attain a universal scope modification and then apply it to any weapon you wish. But when that modification is applied, it is shown as the scope most desirable for the weapon based on it's function, and what would suit it best. In this case the scope I design for it. This prevents the need for having scope pickups designed for a specific weapon, maintains vanilla weapon modification complexity and produces results that are far superior than vanilla at the same time.
Yeah well this is where we disagree, at least mildly, unless some further elaboration from yourself is required. The mod kit providing a high-power zoom optics for one weapon, and holographic sights for the other, and a high-tech guidance system for yet another creates two problems: it asks the player to accept that this little mod kit is capable of providing this high variance of scope type, and two, it asks that all have the same UI overlay, zoom function etc (the scope screen and functioning that is drawn when you look through a scope), unless we make more. So we'll need to discuss these matters further without stepping on each other's toes.
Based upon what has been achieved and the directions taken with GMDX already. It is. Otherwise I would not have even made the suggestion. But I agree, we need a better way of communicating complex points about the mod, to ensure that this does not happen again further down the track. This will also prevent these discussions from spilling out onto the forums, sparing everyone else and keeping threads focused on their given topic.Cybernetic pig wrote:Well make sure it is fitting for it too. We need to be able to agree on direction.Mortecha wrote:I am just as happy making this a stand-alone mod to be adopted into everyone's mods, but as I have said before, GMDX is most deserving of it.
Speaking of which, I think I'll start that weapon thread now.