State of Zelda Classic 2.5 [Archive] - Armageddon Games Forums

Shoelace

08-23-2008, 09:45 PM

Hey there. I know I shouldn't be making a thread like this, but I haven't made anything like this, and I am really wanting to know the progress. So anyways, yeah I have a couple of questions for the developers.

First, how far do you think ZC 2.5 is to being released? And I am asking in a progress report sort of way. Like at this stage how long do you think is it going to take for 2.5 to be released? As it looks right now it looks like the big reason why 2.5 isn't going to released anytime soon is Large Mode. So much of Large Mode is unfinished. Is there anything we can do?

I noticed ZC progress has been getting a little slow. I know that the developers have lives and this is just for fun thing and not a job, but for the past like 6 months, the only developer doing anything is _L_ (God, bless his soul). So what happened to the other developers? Are we in need for more developers? Are you looking for new developers? I say this because it doesn't look like any of the other developers are coming back. That is the way it appears to me anyway. So shouldn't we move on and get new comers?

I know a lot of people are going to tell me, that the betas right now are good and such. But this is my point. We have been waiting for maybe 2 and half years now. We really can't release our games on 2.5 because the updates on the betas will destroy it, and no new comers are going to understand the download system. And that is one thing that is happening. The newbies here don't understand the betas. It hard to figure out to download them and such, and it is really hurting the community. Here and PureZC have seen a HUGE decrease in ZC interaction. And people are on the brink on leaving, including me. Now, I know it will kick back up once 2.5 is released, as we can something to advertise, something global to use. Like I can't go to Youtube and get people to come here and download build 847 or something like that. The point is, I just really want a progress report on what you think is the state on ZC 2.5. Because at this point it doesn't look like it is coming out in the next year or two.

Anyways, thanks. --Shoelace

Shazza Dani

08-23-2008, 10:04 PM

Quit yer spammin, Shoelance!

j/k

_L_

08-24-2008, 12:05 AM

I noticed ZC progress has been getting a little slow. I know that the developers have lives and this is just for fun thing and not a job, but for the past like 6 months, the only developer doing anything is _L_ (God, bless his soul). So what happened to the other developers?I think DarkDragon got a job or moved overseas or joined the military or something. Which is a shame, as he's always been the prime mover of ZC development since before I arrived. Even today his Shardstorm contributions outweigh mine by 50%.

Saffith and pikaguy900 are in unannounced retirement. jman2050 said about a week ago that he might soon have more time to work on the interface, so we'll see. Dark Nation? No idea.

The point is, I just really want a progress report on what you think is the state on ZC 2.5. Because at this point it doesn't look like it is coming out in the next year or two.
What do you mean? Other than the aforementioned HR problems, things are going better than ever. The bug forums only have 52 open bugs left! (The NES compatability bugs have been marked "Deferred to post-2.50" by DarkDragon) And the new bug reports have shrunken to about 4 per week. Even two committed devs could plough through those in 4 months. And after that is just the business of finalising ZScript and the Default Template and tidying up the ZQuest interface.

I noticed ZC progress has been getting a little slow. I know that the developers have lives and this is just for fun thing and not a job, but for the past like 6 months, the only developer doing anything is _L_ (God, bless his soul). So what happened to the other developers?I think DarkDragon got a job or moved overseas or joined the military or something. Which is a shame, as he's always been the prime mover of ZC development since before I arrived. Even today his Shardstorm contributions outweigh mine by 50%.

Saffith and pikaguy900 are in unannounced retirement. jman2050 said about a week ago that he might soon have more time to work on the interface, so we'll see. Dark Nation? No idea.

The point is, I just really want a progress report on what you think is the state on ZC 2.5. Because at this point it doesn't look like it is coming out in the next year or two.
What do you mean? Other than the aforementioned HR problems, things are going better than ever. The bug forums only have 52 open bugs left! (The NES compatability bugs have been marked "Deferred to post-2.50" by DarkDragon) And the new bug reports have shrunken to about 2 per week. Even two committed devs could plough through those in 4 months. And after that is just the business of finalising ZScript and tidying up the ZQuest interface.

Freedom

08-24-2008, 12:07 AM

ut oh.
The freedom and Petoe generation has passed away and now the next generations are in their life throws.

Nicholas Steel

08-24-2008, 01:54 AM

I believe DarkDragon is only on holiday over seas, he has not gone away for good.

Nimono

08-24-2008, 12:04 PM

Russ

08-24-2008, 02:09 PM

Revfan9

08-24-2008, 03:17 PM

2.5 and NeoFirst are both pretty much in the same boat as Duke Nukem Forever.

DarkDragon

08-24-2008, 03:25 PM

Sorry guys :( :( :(. That I got a job is partially right (grad student), which has been taking up a lot of time. In addition, I've found NYC a lot more conducive to having a social life than Kentucky. These factors, combined with me getting a little bummed out that, despite our best efforts, 2.50 stability appears to have become a Sisyphean task, have caused me to completely neglect ZC lately. Right now I'm working towards a paper deadline and won't have the time to get back in the swing of development, but do hope to do a spurt of work on ZC once my schedule becomes more leisurely. Again, I'm sorry to have let you guys down, I know how long everyone has been patiently waiting for 2.50, and as one of the few who can do something about it, share a lot of the blame.

Shoelace

08-24-2008, 05:00 PM

Again, I'm sorry to have let you guys down, I know how long everyone has been patiently waiting for 2.50, and as one of the few who can do something about it, share a lot of the blame.

DD, won't blame yourself at all. Like _L_ said you did a lot to get ZC 2.5 this far. Even if you were to retire right now, I still respect the hell out of you and thank you for all of the hard work you put into ZC. So again, don't you dare think you let us down.

This thread was just so I know, and everyone else for that matter, where everyone and everything stands. Because like you guys do, I put a lot of work in my quests. I devout a lot of time and care into my quests, and that is why I want to know the progress. Because I want to see my quest released some day, and the waiting and waiting for years is starting to take its toll on me. I am just trying to find hope because I don't want my hard work to go to waste, because there is no telling what I will be doing in 2 years and I don't want my game to be canned.

What do you mean? Other than the aforementioned HR problems, things are going better than ever. The bug forums only have 52 open bugs left! (The NES compatability bugs have been marked "Deferred to post-2.50" by DarkDragon) And the new bug reports have shrunken to about 2 per week. Even two committed devs could plough through those in 4 months. And after that is just the business of finalising ZScript and tidying up the ZQuest interface.

Thanks _L_ for the response. Yeah, I do see that there are only 52 open bugs. So that sounds great. However, the thing in the back of my mind was the Large Mode. To me, it seems like the longest part of the wait now is Large Mode, as everything has to be made and then tested still. And it has been going kinda slow. Yesterday, I was ZCing for about 7 hours and a lot of the time was using a magnifying glass to see the Tile Page. lol. I see that you put it on the next build, so I am crossing my fingers that there will be a new downloadable build soon as I have been switching back and forth from the normal and large mode constantly.

bigjoe

08-24-2008, 05:43 PM

History repeats itself :p How many tens of times has a thread like this emerged? Not that it is without justification.

It sure is boring around here -_-

waiting for the new version

ShadowTiger

08-24-2008, 07:34 PM

2.50 stability appears to have become a Sisyphean task, have caused me to completely neglect ZC lately.
There are tons of Sisyphean tasks out there. Whenever I work on graphics for a quest, it becomes such a thing. I'm sure that writing that paper of yours can become such a thing as well. With intelligence like yours, "perfection" becomes a lot harder to reach, unfortunately. To a simpleton, perfection is easy. It must be made of matter, and must provide as a simulation of duct-tape.

So you're in New York City now? Where in, may I ask? There are a bunch of people here who would actually love to visit you. :) (I'm maybe 15 or so miles east of the city, though that's a highly estimated measurement.)

Revfan9

08-24-2008, 09:35 PM

It sure is boring around here -_-

My boy, this peace is what... *gets pummeled by bricks*

_L_

08-25-2008, 12:20 AM

While we are on the subject of ZC 2.5's release, I have a question. What about NeoFirst. I believe it was supposed to be packaged with ZC 2.5 as an example quest. However, 2.5's release is drawing near, and NeoFirst is nowhere near completion. Will a first quest remake be made for 2.5 or something like that?

Well, NeoFirst is supposed to showcase the new things in 2.50, and it's, admittedly, a bit tricky to do so when 2.50 is technically not completed yet.

And furthermore, NeoFirst is, now at least, intended to showcase the new storytelling and gameplay potential of ZC as compared to First Quest. I intend it to be a full-fledged adventure of its own - not very long, but not too narrow.

Consider NeoFirst's completion a priority for 2.60.

Petoe

08-25-2008, 03:54 AM

elise

08-25-2008, 11:09 AM

_L_: Consider it "unnanounced retirement" if you want, but I plan to do work. I'm just...not confident in my ability to work with the code well at all. Right now, I really want to do something with the code, but there's so much thrown all over the place, and I have absolutely NO real experience working with the code.
Then PLEASE don't even touch it and get out the developers team :uhoh:
Maybe it's a good thing to look who is still active or planning to do some stuff and scratch the otherones from the team , so you have an idea , if you need to look for some new developpers to help and what skills they need ;)

jman2050

08-25-2008, 01:15 PM

I've been throwing around an idea to actually address the deeper-rooted problems of ZC for a release, but I've been afraid of making everyone mad again. Although really, with all the mistakes I've made so far, I pretty much don't care anymore how much I am disliked if it means getting something out the door that is reasonably complete AND not crippled.

Majora

08-25-2008, 01:18 PM

I shall rename ZC 2.5 as Zelda Classic Forever! ;)

And now that Peteo and Freedom are gone (too bad for the community), it is fun to see who will be the next Peteo/Freedom. I'm sure at some point someone will get fed up when they waste all their freetime for a program that is a piece of shit. :)

Oh and pikaguy900, I'm honestly fed up with ignorant comments like you're making. Freedom is the only reason there ever was hope for a stable ZC 2.5. He raised questions, he made things happen, he tested more than any of you slackers ever did, and now he's gone and that's a big effing loss to the community, get that? ZC community needs more Freedoms but none of you people seem to get it. "Freedom is bad, Freedom is shellfish, Freedom is annoying..." silly people, he had the interest of the whole community in his mind, not just his own. Where's the respect he deserves?

Whatever, you guys can keep dreaming of ZC 2.5. Maybe in 2 or 3 years I'll drop by to see what's going on and say to you all "what did I tell you, haha". ;)

In order, the underlined parts:

Don't flatter yourself.
Make a not-shit program, then you get to bash ZC. (Same goes for Freedom)
He make make "ignorant" (which is in quotes because I disagree) comments, but when you constantly say "ZC is shit, 2.5 is never coming etc." it's kinda hard to take you seriously.
The bold speaks for itself... *lol*
Apparently the key word is "Had" in that whole sentence (starting at 'silly people')
Yea, we'll dream. Now go ride a bike or something.

I may have done little (I DID actually do stuff) for the ZC community, but I don't sit around and complain waving my giant ego around maiming people with it.

Linkus

08-25-2008, 01:21 PM

jman2050

08-25-2008, 01:22 PM

Then PLEASE don't even touch it and get out the developers team :uhoh:

Comments like this won't be tolerated. Don't do this again.

jman2050

08-25-2008, 01:30 PM

I going to say this.

Devs, face the truth. The current ZC is unstable because of the lack of understanding its code. Phantom Meanace may have made the first ZC, but he knew how it worked to the best of his knowledge. Now that he's not here anymore, and he left no real archive of the code except the code itself, it's all guesswork for the others on deciding how it works.

At this point, sometimes when the plan isn't understood, and not explained, sometimes we must restart with a representation that does make sense. And this, I must say, is a direction we might as well take; this way, we can pinpoint what causes certain problems, and we know what ends are open and not break others by pure accident.

After all, I know a lot of suggestions made require a whole new engine, and the fact is that you might as well make a new one. You got some parts you can start from, but otherwise it be the only viable chance left to get a stable ZC running. After all, I know some of you want to ditch Allegro anyhow, and go with a more flexible library.

This is actually what precisely what I want to do, except it doesn't come from not understanding the code, it comes from understanding the code enough that you realize that trying to patch things would be more trouble than its worth.

The problems with ZC extend beyond what's reported in the bug forums. I evidently gained some fans by doing everything that the community wanted me to do, but if these years and experience have taught me anything, it's that the problem IS pandering to a fanbase. You want a stable release? Let us do our jobs and it'll get there when it gets there.

Of course, that's just my view of the whole matter, the other devs and I will have to consider what we want to do in the future, especially regarding this build of ZC we're working on now.

Dark Nation

08-25-2008, 02:02 PM

The big question is (and it's been raised before): "How good is good enough?"

To completely rid ZC of bugs would probably take a lifetime. Currently, we have 28 critical (corrupt quests/crash the program) and mechanical (make quests unbeatable or make things have to be done in a different way than was intended) bugs. Would releasing after these are fixed be "good enough"?

Also, less than half of the current code was actually written by PM. Much of the code has been heavily modified, completely rewritten, or added outright.

Finally, in regards to patching problems vs. rewriting: A rewrite is necessary at some point. To give an analogy, we need a bowl but we have a sieve. We are currently trying to plug up all the holes in the sieve to make a nice, pretty bowl, but it takes time and sometimes the patches that we have to hammer in place make some of the other patches fall off or break new holes into the sieve that have to be patched as well.

jman2050

08-25-2008, 02:05 PM

Finally, in regards to patching problems vs. rewriting: A rewrite is necessary at some point. To give an analogy, we need a bowl but we have a sieve. We are currently trying to plug up all the holes in the sieve to make a nice, pretty bowl, but it takes time and sometimes the patches that we have to hammer in place make some of the other patches fall off or break new holes into the sieve that have to be patched as well.

Along with your question, is it really worth it to keep patching up the sieve when we could be spending our time making a new bowl? and it doesn't even have to be a prettier bowl, it can be the same bowl everyone is used to, except more sturdy and less likely to break. I doubt people would be willing to wait, but like I said, I don't care about that anymore.

Dark Nation

08-25-2008, 02:13 PM

jman2050

08-25-2008, 02:16 PM

I suppose, but will that be worth it? After all, we already have bowls we've given out that don't have those big holes that we created trying to improve it further. Couldn't they just use one of those instead of waiting for something that's only a marginal improvement?

(On a seperate note, this analogy is fun)

Dark Nation

08-25-2008, 02:42 PM

Well, one of the problems with our current bowl is that some types of food containing certain ingredients, if taken out of the bowl and placed in the refrigerator, will be free of those ingredients when put back into the bowl: http://www.armageddongames.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102928

Another issue is that when mixing colors in the bowl, sometimes the bowl will become nonresponsive and not allow you to use it anymore (you have to stick the bowl in the refrigerator after dumping the contents in the trash, then take the bowl out of the refrigerator and putting a new copy of the old contents back in it from the refrigerator.): http://www.armageddongames.net/forums/showthread.php?t=102921

The bowl also has a food processor built in. Sometimes, if you put a lot of things with the same name into the food processor (egg[0], egg[1], etc.), certain actions with the food processor will cause the food processor (and the bowl) to stop working, forcing the trash/refrigerator remedy above: http://www.armageddongames.net/forums/showthread.php?t=103734

That's just 3 of the problems.

pkmnfrk

08-25-2008, 02:48 PM

I hate to interrupt this Super Bowl, but... I just wanted to point out some parallels in other projects.

I used to be the jman on another project (http://hamsterrepublic.com/ohrrpgce/). Though I've since retired from that project, in my time, I shook up the code base quite a bit.

Quite a few bugs were introduced with my new features, but even more bugs were shook out of the carpet. Alas, all of these bugs were attributed to me. The Freedom of that community expressed similar concerns to those in this thread.

Most of the bugs have since been worked out, either by me or by the _L_ (http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/wiki/ohrrpgce/index.php/User:The_Mad_Cacti) and the Dark Nation (http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/wiki/ohrrpgce/index.php/James_Paige). (Some bugs haven't, as they are artifacts of having been ported from Dos to Windows with as few changes to the code base as possible... bad idea, but not mine.)

Anyway, a major view during the whole fiasco was that "Why not just start over?". Well, I did just that.

Turns out, replacing 9+ years worth of work takes, well, 9 years. My replacement project never got off the ground, nor have any others, either ports of the original code, rewrites or independent projects. (http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/wiki/ohrrpgce/index.php/OHRRPGCE_Source_Ports) Only the original code base is still active.

Moral of the story: If anyone wants to see a stable release any time this decade, then a rewrite is not in the cards.

jman2050

08-25-2008, 03:18 PM

The_Amaster

08-25-2008, 04:14 PM

Well, we could patch the biggest holes in the bowl (the ones that can cause the bowl to break or allow all of your food to spill out) while leaving the smaller holes and scratches for later, if ever. Then, we can make a new bowl, though it won't hold a small percentage of the things that the old bowl held without modifying those things (the new bowl has nice compartments, perhaps, and some of the more messy items have to be folded neatly to fit in the pretty compartments, maybe).
QFT!!! This is exactly what ZC needs. Although if you guys embarked on a new bowl from the ground up we could keep using the old one, that would make the community fanatically mad. If you take maybe the next month or so and all just do what L's been doing these past months, we could have a stable 2.5 that's usable to tide the fans over, and then you could take months or a couple years to rebuild.

jman2050

08-25-2008, 04:17 PM

QFT!!! This is exactly what I mean, put far better than the kind of convoluted way I put it.

I find it hilarious that you found an extremely thin bowl metaphor less convoluted than what you said

Freedom

08-25-2008, 05:18 PM

When I first started calling for a stable release, NONE of the problems that exist now were there then.
You've done exactly what I said would happen.
You went in and added and connected way too many pipes to the bowl, and now you've got the bowl stopped up, almost beyond repair and all your pipes are leaking uncontrollably.
Now, when you put a wrench on one pipe to stop it from leaking, the bowl is stressed to the point all the other pipes that you've repaired start leaking again.
It's now a never ending cycle of tightening pipes only to have others work loose when you do.

I hate to say it boys, but I told you so. ;)

The_Amaster

08-25-2008, 05:34 PM

Oh, yeah, I edited out what I said, because it was kinda convoluted. The metaphor at least gives you an image to go on. Heh.

jman2050

08-25-2008, 05:38 PM

beefster09

08-25-2008, 06:59 PM

Turns out, replacing 9+ years worth of work takes, well, 9 years. My replacement project never got off the ground, nor have any others, either ports of the original code, rewrites or independent projects. (http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/wiki/ohrrpgce/index.php/OHRRPGCE_Source_Ports) Only the original code base is still active.It really could take less time, so long as you had more people to help you, but considering the current activity among the devs, it may actually take longer. Or shorter. _L_'s a mad genius after all.

Perhaps when you get to the rewrite you could just dump NES consistency altogether. And you could refer to and reuse old code, clean it up, port the editor and engine to native GUI, etc...

I mean...

When you make the new bowl, you could forget about making the bowl look the same and worry entirely on all the other functions of it. Then you could take dust from the sieve and reuse it in the ceramic for the new bowl and make it match cosmetically to any table it is put on.

Shoelace

08-25-2008, 07:02 PM

A stable enough release is fine. The crashes and anything that would destroy a quest needs to fix of course. So what I mean is the big bugs are a must, but little bugs, we can live with them in my opinion. So the bowl will most likely still have cracks but at least the bowl's big holes are patched.

But the thing is, 2.5 is getting stabler than ZC has ever been. And that is awesome. But what I am worried about and kinda still am, is Large Mode. I am just thinking since Large Mode is still being made, it is going to take a lot time for you guys to finish it. Say for example you finish it in January (Large Mode), well, bugs are going to be coming from the new code so that is more bugs to deal with. I am just saying this, without Large Mode, I see ZC 2.5 being released sooner, because of the few bugs for it at this point. However, with Large Mode, I don't know how much time it is going to take as I don't know when it will be finished and what kind of bugs are going to come out of it.

And I am not saying to cancel Large Mode or anything like that. I am just saying this is the reason for the thread. I wanted a progress on what you think is going to come out of it. And thanks for replying, as I sorta have a better idea. So hopefully, all is going well with Large Mode as I want to help kill the bugs for it as soon as possible.

Also, I am the next Freedom/Peteo? If so, that is a good thing, as I look up to them a lot. XD

PS. pkmnfrk should be a new developer. *runs*

Beta Link

08-25-2008, 08:19 PM

It really could take less time, so long as you had more people to help you, but considering the current activity among the devs, it may actually take longer. Or shorter. _L_'s a mad genius after all.

Perhaps when you get to the rewrite you could just dump NES consistency altogether. And you could refer to and reuse old code, clean it up, port the editor and engine to native GUI, etc...

I mean...

When you make the new bowl, you could forget about making the bowl look the same and worry entirely on all the other functions of it. Then you could take dust from the sieve and reuse it in the ceramic for the new bowl and make it match cosmetically to any table it is put on.

Yeah, but the bowls original designer wanted it to be pretty instead of having lots of different compartments and stuff. Now the company he sold it to wants to completely redesign it with lots of compartments, a food processor, a mini fridge, and a back-scratcher to go with it. How do you think the bowls original designer feels? :(

I am, of course, referring to Phantom Menace and his goal of creating a stable, accurate Zelda 1 clone.

ShadowTiger

08-25-2008, 08:43 PM

Isn't that ZC 1.00?

I have honestly never seen such a complex bowl before. I keep thinking "This is truly the mixing bowl from hell." What an analogy... ... oy, lol.

Shoelace

08-25-2008, 09:29 PM

At this point I think we already can make a pretty damn close enough clone of The original Zelda. Now it is evolving, and I don't think the future ZC's should keep being so limited by that. If someone would what a stable LoZ clone, I guess that will be 2.5, but beyond that, it is time for something new.

Beta Link

08-25-2008, 10:15 PM

Well yeah, but it's still Phantom Menace's program. I think the devs should at least go let him know that we're gonna ditch NES consistancy, ya' know? Or, maybe we could just put 'Zelda Classic' to rest and when we rebuild it from scratch, we could call it 'Zelda Classic, But it's Not so Classic Anymore'. :tongue:

Revfan9

08-25-2008, 10:22 PM

Me? I think it may be just a little too late for ZC.

Even if a stable 2.5 could come out tomorrow, what good would it do? Honestly, think about it for a moment. To be fair, I don't keep up with you all enough to make a complete, in-depth analysis of the situation, but as an outside observer one thing is clear, and it has been clear since long before I requested my ban from PureZC: The ZC community has poisoned itself from the inside out.

How many quest projects have been abandoned by the beta wait? Is it even possible to count them all? The general mindset amongst the community of "This is a beta version, so you shouldn't use it yet, even though everything new and exciting you can only get by using this new beta" doesn't help at all either. It's not a very good environment for new ZC users, since they look at this mindset and say "Well, if I use an old version, then my project will look like an outdated piece of crap. But if I use the betas, I'll run the risk of ZC magically corrupting all my hard work and forcing me to start over. I'm just not going to bother." As such, how many users have joined ZC since the beta marathon started? Maybe more than my imagination is guessing, but certainly far less than before.

Not to mention that the community itself has all but torn itself to bits. This was partially due to the "Wait for the stable" mindset, but mostly, it was our fault as a whole. Admittedly, I'm more guilty here than anyone else, but I'm pretty sure the ZC community can't possibly hate me any more than it already does, so I'm alright with that. Above everything else, what happened is that needless, mindless disputes broke out that did nothing but divide the ZC community, and these divided parts all collapsed under their own weight. Remember the whole Z3 Scrolling fiasco? _L_ suggesting to remove Big Link? Lost Isle? All of the other countless things that flared up (Freedom, Peteo, and I all had major parts in this)?

And so what if 2.5 is stable? For most questmakers, the betas were only so interesting because they had fun and exciting new features that they wanted to try out. Well, new features stopped being added long ago, and the "Wait for the stable" mindset has already convinced these people to put their projects away into a dusty attic where they've already been covered with toxic mold and been mostly devoured by rats. The excitement of working with the new features has already faded away from most, and the shiny new label of "Stable!" isn't going to respark any interests. Once more, many people have already left the ZC community almost entirely thanks to the "Wait for the stable" mindset, and their interests have turned to other things, and they probably have things other than ZC to think about now. To them, ZC is just an old hobby that crosses their mind once in a while, and a new "stable" version isn't enough to make them want to come back. I know that I'm not coming back.

A "stable" label on a new release will do hardly anything to rekindle ZC's dying flame, and what good is code if it isn't used? You can patch up that bowl as much as you like, but the table you're going to put it down on to eat dinner is lying in burning pieces on the floor, all the food in your fridge has spoiled, and your wife has already called for Pizza.

Nicholas Steel

08-26-2008, 12:05 AM

I believe Zscript needs to be dropped, all THAT has done was open the door to jillions of bugs! I'd be more then happy for you guys to restart from scratch, just make sure you do your research before choosing a new system to base it on (SDL, Allegro etc.) and choose one that best fits your needs!

Freedom's analogy is somewhat perfect in my eyes. fix the big bugs now! (excluding zscript which is currently in a evil incarnation!) and release a version then work on a new one from the ground up!

Lemon

08-26-2008, 12:27 AM

Why do you guys need so create so much drama for such a silly thing? You can make a fine game with any of the previous versions of Zelda Classic, and if you don't go in depth to many of the newer features, you can avoid a decent amount of the so-called crippling bugs. Even those though you can avoid as long as you make sure to make plenty of back-ups (I have a folder dedicated to daily backup saves).

You can do more with the program than ever before (Look in the scripting showcase), dev's are working as much as they can, and so are the committed users. You can be as pessimistic as you want about the future, but whatever comes out, we'll get. If they can figure out a way to remove the last 25 big bugs, than hurrah. They can take as long as they need to do it.

jman2050

08-26-2008, 12:40 AM

I believe Zscript needs to be dropped, all THAT has done was open the door to jillions of bugs!

1) ZScript is not being dropped. Period
2) Those jillions of bugs are usually all the user's fault. Which is unavoidable in any sort of scripting system. I can add integrity checks of course, but it's really impossible to check for everything.

jman2050

08-26-2008, 12:43 AM

blah blah blah

Yeah, I never liked you anyway, and this is why.

Freedom

08-26-2008, 12:52 AM

Yeah, I never liked you anyway, and this is why.

Kudos
Go gettum J man

Pointing a finger ain't going to get it done folks, the state of ZC is everybody's fault.
When the devs were busting ass, then people wouldn't test, and follow up on the bugs that they did report.
Others just kept whinning for more more more.
So now it is what it is, and those same people are bitching at the devs.
They gave you your chance and you sat on your asses.
NOW they have things to do in their lives, so go sit on your ass some more and STFU.

And Revfan, you've never brought anything but insult and misery to the community.

Nicholas Steel

08-26-2008, 12:52 AM

1) ZScript is not being dropped. Period

2) Those jillions of bugs are usually all the user's fault. Which is unavoidable in any sort of scripting system. I can add integrity checks of course, but it's really impossible to check for everything.
Ok, sorry then! I do agree with some people that Pikaguy should ask around for help in working with the ZC code because at the moment (like he said) he isn't able to really do much with it! The sooner he gets help/started the better it is for the community!

of course, I don't intend to pressure you pikaguy since you hopefully WILL be able to help out at some point in the near future.

pkmnfrk

08-26-2008, 01:00 AM

But the thing is, 2.5 is getting stabler than ZC has ever been. And that is awesome. But what I am worried about and kinda still am, is Large Mode. I am just thinking since Large Mode is still being made, it is going to take a lot time for you guys to finish it. Say for example you finish it in January (Large Mode), well, bugs are going to be coming from the new code so that is more bugs to deal with. I am just saying this, without Large Mode, I see ZC 2.5 being released sooner, because of the few bugs for it at this point. However, with Large Mode, I don't know how much time it is going to take as I don't know when it will be finished and what kind of bugs are going to come out of it.

Truthfully, I haven't really been paying too much attention to the community, but I do pay attention to the change log and to the ZC Development forum. In addition, I use ZQuest, Large Mode exclusively. And, I wasn't aware that Large Mode was broken.

Sure, there's a few things that need to be tweaked. Old dialogues need to be resized, etc. But, the major UI bugs I'm aware of (Init Data dialogue freezing, mouse wheel in the tile page, maybe others?) are not specific to Large Mode.

PS. pkmnfrk should be a new developer. *runs*

QFT- er, I mean, naw. >_>

Shoelace

08-26-2008, 01:07 AM

Well, since they already put Zscript in and it has been in for Quite some time, you can't just drop it now. That would cause so much destruction. So that won't happen. lol

Well yeah, but it's still Phantom Menace's program. I think the devs should at least go let him know that we're gonna ditch NES consistancy, ya' know? Or, maybe we could just put 'Zelda Classic' to rest and when we rebuild it from scratch, we could call it 'Zelda Classic, But it's Not so Classic Anymore'.

Well I am not saying to ditch it now. I am saying after this release, move on. Zelda Classic of the LoZ clone has come and gone, it is time to move on from it.

Edit: I so didn't refresh the page and there were a lot of replys. >_<

Anyways:

Truthfully, I haven't really been paying too much attention to the community, but I do pay attention to the change log and to the ZC Development forum. In addition, I use ZQuest, Large Mode exclusively. And, I wasn't aware that Large Mode was broken.

Sure, there's a few things that need to be tweaked. Old dialogues need to be resized, etc. But, the major UI bugs I'm aware of (Init Data dialogue freezing, mouse wheel in the tile page, maybe others?) are not specific to Large Mode.

I have been using Large Mode too. It is not broken at all. My point is it isn't finished. And I was wondering the time frame of when it was going to be completed so had an estimated time frame. Because once it is completed the only thing left is fixing the bugs for Large Mode. But we can't fix the future bugs now, and that was why I was wondering a time frame. But yeah, it works great as I hear now, just a lot of things need to be resized and such, like the tilepage. *awaits the new beta so I can work on tiles in Large Mode*

pkmnfrk

08-26-2008, 01:17 AM

Well, since they already put Zscript in and it has been in for Quite some time, you can't just drop it now. That would cause so much destruction. So that won't happen. lol

If Zscript was dropped, that would be a major regression. One which would actually cost me money (http://zctut.com) (hey, domain names aren't free).

Well I am not saying to ditch it now. I am saying after this release, move on. Zelda Classic of the LoZ clone has come and gone, it is time to move on from it.

I really thought this happened... Ages ago. An LoZ clone doesn't have a level 4 sword, a level 3 shield or boomerang, a hammer, flippers, magic, roc's feathers, >2 bit colour, hi-fidelity music... I'm running out of things to list, so I hope you get the idea by now.

Edit: I so didn't refresh the page and there were a lot of replys. >_<

Edit: er, me too.

I have been using Large Mode too. It is not broken at all. My point is it isn't finished. And I was wondering the time frame of when it was going to be completed so had an estimated time frame. Because once it is completed the only thing left is fixing the bugs for Large Mode. But we can't fix the future bugs now, and that was why I was wondering a time frame. But yeah, it works great as I hear now, just a lot of things need to be resized and such, like the tilepage. *awaits the new beta so I can work on tiles in Large Mode*

True, when you put it like that. Although, resizing windows shouldn't cause any major bugs, only little ones like "Why is that caption... uh, wayyy over there?"

I too await the next beta, so I can finally understand what _L_ says when he says "Note also that the font choice for the new dialogs shouldn't be considered final just yet."

Revfan9

08-26-2008, 01:20 AM

And Revfan, you've never brought anything but insult and misery to the community.

That's what they pay me for, you know.

Nicholas Steel

08-26-2008, 04:43 AM

If ZSCRIPT was implemented properly, then they would just need to comment out some lines and it would be gone from the compiled EXE :P anyways, too many people demand it etc. so it isn't going to be dropped.

pkmnfrk

08-26-2008, 01:48 PM

If ZSCRIPT was implemented properly, then they would just need to comment out some lines and it would be gone from the compiled EXE :P

Smiley aside, you only wish it were that easy.

jman2050

08-26-2008, 02:59 PM

Smiley aside, you only wish it were that easy.

Well, to be fair, with the design we established we'd only have to comment out a few lines to remove the scripting functionality from quest playing. All the residuals and the system itself would remain though :P

Linkus

08-26-2008, 04:37 PM

Well, I say to patch up whatever big cracks you've got in the current bowl, and leave it be. Enough work has been invested in this bowl, so you might as well start collecting another batch of clay the for the next bowl.

After all, I'm used to waiting now. If you are used to 2.10's bugs, then you won't have a problem dealing with 2.5's minor bugs (if they are present).

(On a side note, the new "bowl" should not be called Zelda Classic, but instead Zeldit, in my opinion.)

beefster09

08-26-2008, 05:08 PM

Maybe in the future, it would be better to only have a semi-open beta to prevent the kinds of things that Revfan was talking about. On the other hand, the beta would take longer to get out if you partially closed it off. Then again, considering that really only well-established members report bugs.

So ALL bug reports should be ignored unless they require one line to be changed or are critical or detrimental.

I am not really worried about large mode, other than the lag in said mode. We just need most of the menus expanded and tested.

The_Amaster

08-26-2008, 06:12 PM

Well, aren't the current builds we use actually Alphas? I remember the not-so-old days back when I first joined when Beta releases were big events, once a month type things with huge threads of comments.

*sigh* I kinda miss those days. On the other hand, the speed for updates that Shardstorm has given us has been awesome.

...so I'm kinda on the fence.

SpykStorm

08-26-2008, 07:37 PM

Well, aren't the current builds we use actually Alphas?

Yup.

I think we should fix the remaining bugs, and then re-write the whole program.

pkmnfrk

08-26-2008, 08:05 PM

I think we should fix the remaining bugs, and then re-write the whole program.

That would be pointless. Plus, think about what you're saying.

"You should take the time and effort to resolve the issues that people have with this program... and then toss it out, and start anew."

Plus, as I mentioned earlier, rewriting the whole program is not easy, nor is is fast. And, it's not a cure-all either. If the design is fundamentally flawed, then it doesn't matter how many times you code it, the design will still be flawed.

Not that I'm saying the design is flawed, quite the opposite. ZC has achieved what it set out to do, and much, much more.

And, I'm also not saying that there aren't parts that probably should be written either. There probably are... In fact, I'd bet money that there are. Rewriting them should be done at the beginning of a development cycle, like after a major release.

I discuss the software development cycle about half way down this blog entry (http://mike-caron.com/2008/08/upgradomancy/)

DarkDragon

08-26-2008, 08:09 PM

In addition to taking a very long time, a complete rewrite probably wouldn't be compatible with current quests.

Nicholas Steel

08-26-2008, 08:49 PM

Well, to be fair, with the design we established we'd only have to comment out a few lines to remove the scripting functionality from quest playing. All the residuals and the system itself would remain though :P
Yep, thats what I was thinking. It should be easy to remove the zscript functionality, not the code in the source code though.

Dark Nation

08-26-2008, 10:21 PM

(moving away from the bowl analogy to a house analogy): The current house doesn't just have holes. It has structural water damage. The foundation has to be replaced. Every addition you make to the current house adds more stress on the already overtaxed foundation and floor jacks are having to be installed to keep the whole thing from collapsing. Even just fixing problems in the walls causes stress on the foundation because you are screwing around with loadbearing structures. While it is possible to replace the foundation of a house, it is easier and cheaper in the long run to bulldoze the whole thing and lay down a new, properly waterproofed foundation and build a new house on top of that.

jman2050

08-26-2008, 10:44 PM

In addition to taking a very long time, a complete rewrite probably wouldn't be compatible with current quests.

The only thing we would have to address from the outside is the Allegro packfile format. Given that there's no restrictions on Allegro's usage, stealing that code would be a trivial matter.

Compatibility in every other respect could be taken cared of during the development process.

Shoelace

08-27-2008, 12:05 AM

But once ZC 2.5 is out, we can use that program for all quests. The new ZC's after don't have to be compatible with old quests. As if you wanted a compatible version for old quests, you download 2.5. If you want to make new quests you make it with 3.0 or whatever. It is kind of like this:

What if nintendo keep doing backwards compatibility with there systems. The wii would be able to play NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube etc. that is just too limiting as it is hard to add things without screwing up there compatibility. So since 2.5 is the version where it is to play the other earlier quests, have that the compatibility version, then move on after that without worrying about old quests messing up. Because old quests are to be played on the platform it is meant for ie. 2.5.

Not sure if you understood, but yeah, I'll shut up. lol

DarkDragon

08-27-2008, 12:14 AM

I was saying more that maybe it shouldn't be, not that it couldn't be. Continuing DN's analogy, each .qst file is a polaroid of the house, with a post-it attached to it saying, "new house *must* look exactly like this from this angle." Problem is, peering closely at the photo, you can see the water damage in the basement, termites crawling all over the walls, shingles missing from the roof, etc. Building a new house to match the old photos isn't a problem. But building a new one that's structurally sound on the inside, yet looks like shit from every outside angle? That's the trick.

If you will, it's a question of whether you want something like OS X, which is a complete rewrite of (and incompatible with) OS 9, or Windows Vista, which is almost perfectly compatible with XP, but some might argue a scant improvement.

pkmnfrk

08-27-2008, 12:29 AM

What if nintendo keep doing backwards compatibility with there systems. The wii would be able to play NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube etc. that is just too limiting as it is hard to add things without screwing up there compatibility.

Strictly speaking, the Wii does play all those, and a bunch more to boot.

But, in general, what exactly is causing the "structural damage" in ZC? Is it backwards compatability with 1.90, 1.92bwhatever.0, 2.10? Or, compatability with the NES? Or, what?

While it is possible to replace the foundation of a house, it is easier and cheaper in the long run to bulldoze the whole thing and lay down a new, properly waterproofed foundation and build a new house on top of that.

How long of a run are you speaking?

<speaking type="hypothetically">

If you're going to start over, you have to do it properly. You have to sit down, and think of what, exactly, you're trying to do.

Are you creating a Zelda-style engine? Well, that's what we have now.

Or, do you want to create a generic, 2-d engine? Depending on how you do this, you can get away with a graphics engine, a sound engine, and a script engine, and call it a day.

But, either way, you need goals. Even if you are going for ZC 3.0, a total rewrite from the ground up.

Then, once you have the goals, you need to design your program. How does it work? How much stuff is hard coded/customizable? How much stuff is accessible to scripting? What type of scripting do we need? What colour depth? What resolution? What operating systems? Are some items built in, or are they all scripted? Is there such a concept of items from the engine's point of view? Etc, etc, etc...

Then, once all of that is settled, can you begin to code. But, even as you write, you realize that... oops, design facet X is very difficult to get to work with facet Y. Ok, well, if we change X, are there any goals that cannot be accomplished? What about Y? Maybe we can change the goal... But, that affects Z. Cyclical revisions ad nauseum.

</speaking>

I'm directing this at the people saying "Rewrite!", since I've been burned by not paying attention to these details.

I cannot say whether or not the rotting foundation in the basement can be fixed, since currently I'm restricted to peeking in the window. All I'm saying is that you should think carefully before renting that bull dozer.

Nicholas Steel

08-27-2008, 01:34 AM

But building a new one that's structurally sound on the inside, yet looks like shit from every outside angle? That's the trick.
You mean like making the code work perfectly but looking at the code is a eye sore?

pkmnfrk, the issue is that everything is entwined with other stuff thus making it not easy to do anything without screwing something else up. Rebuilding the exact same thing but from the ground up and making sure nothing depends on something else, will be better overall for fast development, less bugs and the code will be much more pleasurable to work with. The end result, will be something that sports the same degree of compatibility and features while being a ton easier to manage and code with.

pkmnfrk

08-27-2008, 01:52 AM

You mean like making the code work perfectly but looking at the code is a eye sore?

pkmnfrk, the issue is that everything is entwined with other stuff thus making it not easy to do anything without screwing something else up. Rebuilding the exact same thing but from the ground up and making sure nothing depends on something else, will be better overall for fast development, less bugs and the code will be much more pleasurable to work with. The end result, will be something that sports the same degree of compatibility and features while being a ton easier to manage and code with.

What I'm trying to say is this:

http://zctut.com/picktwo.png

If you want features, and want them now, the codebase is going to be ugly.

If you want a clean codebase, and still want a new features and bugs fixed, it's going to take a long time.

If you want a clean code base, and still want frequent releases, then each release is going to be incremental or buggy.

(The features/bugs aspect has a triangle of its own, but it's irrelevant here)

The_Amaster

08-27-2008, 08:09 AM

If you will, it's a question of whether you want something like OS X, which is a complete rewrite of (and incompatible with) OS 9, or Windows Vista, which is almost perfectly compatible with XP, but some might argue a scant improvement.

As long as you can be sure that the new ZC isn't as crappy as OS X.

Linkus

08-27-2008, 09:36 PM

There is one thing I do have to say about the house, and it's not the exterior. The shrubbery around it is getting a bit too wild and the fencing deters onlookers too much, leaving curious pedestrians guessing on what the certain parts of the house look like, or even finding a pathway to the house.

So, if a new house is built, it's going to need a serious landscaping redesign around it, where pedestrians can see everything that gives them an idea of what it looks like to their own extent.

beefster09

08-27-2008, 09:53 PM

I say that the rewrite should be completely incompatible with previous releases, focused slightly more toward power and user expansion without outright removing the fundamental staples of the 2D Zeldas. (basic arsenal, map engine, real-time battling) Call it Zelda Pro or something. It's high time we turn this heavily modded NES into an SNES. (after V2.50, of course) Or I guess turn a shack with a million non-regulation expansions into a nice middle-class house.

Majora

08-28-2008, 03:01 PM

Can't the house bowl be broken into individual parts, said parts fixed one by one, and then rebuilt? Seems like it'd work better than trying to fix it as a whole. Of course, not broken down into molecules, but like in big enough chunks so that the total number of parts isn't outrageous for a team of like 6 people (unless I counted wrong, I just guesstimated)

Ebola Zaire

08-28-2008, 05:16 PM

Because while rebuilding the bathroom, I might move a few pipes, and when we put it back together the faucets might spew natural gas.

Majora

08-28-2008, 07:16 PM

I was implying rebuilding everything back exactly, but instead of using half-rusted pipes and eroded bricks, you'd fix them (codes can be fixed no matter what, rusted pipes and bricks can't, to an extent... bear with me here), and replace.

The_Amaster

08-28-2008, 08:27 PM

Ebola Zaire does have a point though. When different people work on different parts, you get different techniques. After everything was finished, you'de have to have one last person go through and make sure all the gas pipes connect to gas pipes and water pipes to water pipes, adding extra pipe to connect where need be.

Think of it like taking four individually designed puzzle pieces, then having someone add extensions and cut notches to make them into fit. This, however, tends to be a weaker structure.

If you compare strengths of something molded from solid plastic and something made of smaller pieces and connected, the solid molded version is usually stronger. Less stress points.

Similar with a program: if everyone works on their own individual parts, and they put them together at the end, the program tends to function at less than optimum because people didn't know what other people were doing, and failed to take advantage of others work, so everything is that less integrated, and different parts can't take advantage of the strengths of other parts because they were built in a vacuum, instead of in parallel.

Mind you, this is a worst case scenario, in which the devs don't consult with each other at all. Still, I think it's best if everything is done as a team. Divide and conquer might work for a patching up of parts of ZC, but a ground-up build should not be built in parts.

(Wow, I think I just burned through three metaphors and returned to "program")

*b*

08-29-2008, 02:54 AM

To be honest, I'm all for a new house to play around in, but I would like to see 2.5 finished beforehand. I'd rather live in a leaky, yet stable house while I wait for a new house to be finished, rather than wait out in the rain while the new house is built

The only problem is, since ZC is a strictly fan-based, off-the-clock project, a complete rebuild (Metaphor not implied) would take forever. Development as is takes long enough, and we've got, what, 4 or so core programmers? I can only guess how long it would take for ZC to reach this state in a rebuild, assuming more current Zelda features aren't added in the process

Which brings up a question; Should a Zelda Classic rewrite occur, what would be the plan? Follow the original intention as a Legend of Zelda clone and add on from there? Or create a more modern, general Zelda game maker? Or even rebuild Zelda Classic to matching current features, with easier ways of adding more?

Gleeok

08-29-2008, 07:40 AM

Maybe you guys need to get Bob Villa in here to determine whether it's a fixer-upper or not, and to asses the damage. There's nothing a few thousand pounds of duct tape can't fix imo. :P

As for re-writing an entire Zelda 1 clone that's been in development for 9 years, I'm assuming you guys are talking post 2.5/2.6 here. I've got to ask though, was the reason of a re-write simply to port this project away from allegro, or to upgrade it or create a new game engine? To make everything more customizable by the user in the same way it behaves currently, or something more modern? Perhaps to increase both power and accessibility, or mainly for the sake of making it easier to fix bugs?

It seems to me that right now ZC is like the six-million dollar man....exept we don't have that kind of money. What we've got is saran wrap, popsicle sticks, heat-shrink tubing, and a cafeteria full of first-graders - and we've just run out of tater tots. :p

Nicholas Steel

08-29-2008, 10:38 AM

As for re-writing an entire Zelda 1 clone that's been in development for 9 years, I'm assuming you guys are talking post 2.5/2.6 here. I've got to ask though, was the reason of a re-write simply to port this project away from allegro, or to upgrade it or create a new game engine? To make everything more customizable by the user in the same way it behaves currently, or something more modern? Perhaps to increase both power and accessibility, or mainly for the sake of making it easier to fix bugs?
I believe it is so they can undo all there wrong doings since getting access to the code and making it easier to fix bugs :) it also opens up the ability to port the program to another engine but that may break backwards support. (hence most likey post 2.5)

The_Amaster

08-29-2008, 11:10 AM

So, we're currently living in a shack that's had so many additions and extensions that it's about to collapse under it's own weight.

We should invest in some good heavy concrete pillars to hold it up for a while, to keep it lasting for a while while we build a new, huge, well put together, above all cohesive house.

(Heh, this is fun)

pkmnfrk

08-29-2008, 02:46 PM

I personally, would love to help with a rewrite. I'm sure the engine needs it, and I'm sure that it could be done in a reasonable time frame.

However, you have to understand that "reasonable time frame" means 2-3 years before it gets back to an equivalent level of... uh... featureness.

However, Gleeok, gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the technology. We have the capability to make the worlds first bionic Zelda engine. Zelda Classic will be that engine. Better than it was before. Better, stronger faster.

THE
SIX MILLION
DOLLAR ENGINE

beefster09

08-29-2008, 05:35 PM

I would help with the rewrite. I don't think I could deal with the map engine, but if I knew a little more C++, I could probably deal with the UI. So I can make the doors and windows. That leaves the foundation, garage, kitchen, shed/workshop, utility lines, and bedrooms to be made by others.

Personally, I'd rather deal with Java due to flexibility and portability. On the other hand, C++ is more powerful and is faster. So are we going to build the new house with pine or cedar, like before?

And for backwards compatibility, will we just not allow any T-Model cars to park in the garage, or will we make a special machine down the street that rebuilds those T-Models as Volkswagen Beetles?

Nicholas Steel

08-29-2008, 11:14 PM

However, you have to understand that "reasonable time frame" means 2-3 years before it gets back to an equivalent level of... uh... featureness.
Thats the kind of time frame I would expect, DD, DN and Jman2050 all have a decent idea of what to do and have improved in coding ability since the good ol' days. I'm not sure about you _L_, since you seem to have done mostly bug fixing (yes the community did shun you into just bug fixing, i am aware of that) and as such, you have been fixing what others have done instead of adding your own work.

Petoe

08-30-2008, 04:05 AM

I'm not sure about you _L_, since you seem to have done mostly bug fixing (yes the community did shun you into just bug fixing, i am aware of that) and as such, you have been fixing what others have done instead of adding your own work.

Where the hell were you at that time when _L_ started his developing duties and added tons of his new stuff that made ZC buggier than it had ever been? There's a good reason why _L_ is only fixing bugs nowadays you see.

beefster09

08-30-2008, 12:24 PM

You know what? I think maybe we should have started the rewrite all the way back at 2.10, before it would get massively bloated. Right now our priority is to exterminate all the major bugs and release the last Z1-based ZC version once and for all.

The original Zelda Classic was meant to be a simple clone of Z1. Look at where we've taken it. I'm not bashing anybody; all I'm saying is that the developers have far strayed from that original purpose, which can be interpreted as either bad or good.

On the bright side, ZC hasn't been this stable for a long time. Aside from quest corruption, there are very few other bugs. I think we're actually close this time.

And as a potential dev for the rewrite, I would like to make the editor and engine about as user friendly as a Mac, while maintaining power like Linux. (for the longest time, it has been more like Windows because of all the annoying bugs and bloat) I was the one who made the original mockup for the current Large Mode, remember? I don't mean to be arrogant, but now you know what I'm capable of designing.

Linkus

09-09-2008, 03:32 PM

Sorry to open this again, but it's just a suggestion. If we did have to use a certain library, I say that GTK+ would be the best one to use mainly because it is accepted on most major OSes, which doesn't mean having to convert large sections of code just for one OS, and it is public and kept current. Also, with it's multi-window support, ZQ's tools can be separated into separate windows, meaning that we no longer have to keep anything to a to certain size and scale; we could even go further and give those windows separate processes ala Google Chrome. One example is that you don't have to keep the same 4x14 combo window size, but adjust it to your liking. Also, tiles can be preloaded and kept in separate pages, such as different types of architecture and and regional foliage. No longer do we have to go through several pages just to find one tile!

Finally, the support of add-ons; while not making the whole script public, but instead providing a skeleton for an add-on, ZQ can be expanded greatly. This way, we can keep optional tools separate, in which the beginner has the basics, while the more advanced user can add a script editor to expand the dimensions his game can take.

The player is designed to be basic, much like Game Maker's; all it does is read the file, and executes the scripts associated with objects. Debug provides warnings and errors, accessable through a passworded(for security and to discourage cheating, of course) dev console, which is set through the quest file.

Pryex

12-10-2008, 07:04 AM

Can I please just request a link to the beta version. I hear it has an enemy editor, and many new features.

Gleeok

12-10-2008, 07:34 AM

You mean this? (http://www.shardstorm.com/)

Pryex

12-10-2008, 04:08 PM

Wow thanks

Say, can this one, unlike it's predecessor have tilesets imported?

Beta Link

12-10-2008, 04:34 PM

You could import tilesets into ZQuest since, like... The dawn of time. ;)

rocksfan13

12-10-2008, 04:55 PM

I know what Pryex meant. There is a know bug in 2.10 that would not allow you to import graphics packs. Files with a .zgp extension.
I'm pretty sure you can do that with this version now.

Revfan9

12-10-2008, 05:11 PM

And as a potential dev for the rewrite, I would like to make the editor and engine about as user friendly as a Mac, while maintaining power like Linux. (for the longest time, it has been more like Windows because of all the annoying bugs and bloat) I was the one who made the original mockup for the current Large Mode, remember? I don't mean to be arrogant, but now you know what I'm capable of designing.

Oh god no...

I seem to be the only person who dislikes large mode, so I'm most likely alone in this opinion, but...

If the person who designed that atrocity is now going to have a huge say in redesigning every aspect of ZC? The entire project is doomed.

Sorry to open this again, but it's just a suggestion. If we did have to use a certain library, I say that GTK+ would be the best one to use mainly because it is accepted on most major OSes, which doesn't mean having to convert large sections of code just for one OS, and it is public and kept current. Also, with it's multi-window support, ZQ's tools can be separated into separate windows, meaning that we no longer have to keep anything to a to certain size and scale; we could even go further and give those windows separate processes ala Google Chrome. One example is that you don't have to keep the same 4x14 combo window size, but adjust it to your liking. Also, tiles can be preloaded and kept in separate pages, such as different types of architecture and and regional foliage. No longer do we have to go through several pages just to find one tile!

Finally, the support of add-ons; while not making the whole script public, but instead providing a skeleton for an add-on, ZQ can be expanded greatly. This way, we can keep optional tools separate, in which the beginner has the basics, while the more advanced user can add a script editor to expand the dimensions his game can take.

The player is designed to be basic, much like Game Maker's; all it does is read the file, and executes the scripts associated with objects. Debug provides warnings and errors, accessable through a passworded(for security and to discourage cheating, of course) dev console, which is set through the quest file.

GTK is a fantastic GUI toolkit... just make sure that the installer also puts GTK onto a Windows system when it installs automatically, or you'll get major problems with people coming onto the forum saying "OMG how do I get ZQ to workz!?"

ZC has long outgrown its skin and it would really be better to dump the bulk of the current code and start working on something completely new.

Also, why can't the new project be open source? I understand that with the current ZC we're under agreement with Phantom Menace to keep the source code unreleased to the public, but with the rewrite there's absolutely no excuse. The only programs that ever benefit from being closed source are ones whose only goal is to suck money out of your wallet, and for christ's sake I hope that isn't how the new project will be...

Plissken

12-10-2008, 05:19 PM

I seem to be the only person who dislikes large mode, so I'm most likely alone in this opinion, but...

Oh, there are more of us who still much prefer the small mode. ;)

jman2050

12-10-2008, 05:30 PM

Also, why can't the new project be open source? I understand that with the current ZC we're under agreement with Phantom Menace to keep the source code unreleased to the public, but with the rewrite there's absolutely no excuse. The only programs that ever benefit from being closed source are ones whose only goal is to suck money out of your wallet, and for christ's sake I hope that isn't how the new project will be...

The biggest remaining hurdle is that quest security would be compromised in that case. Not everyone wants their work to be used. On the same note, I think if a programmer simply does not want his work to be available to others freely, then that's his prerogative and no other justification is really needed. No one is entitled to anything by default.

Russ

12-10-2008, 06:11 PM

So it wouldn't be open source because of quest passwords? Sheesh, isn't there another way around that?

Revfan9

12-10-2008, 06:14 PM

The biggest remaining hurdle is that quest security would be compromised in that case. Not everyone wants their work to be used. On the same note, I think if a programmer simply does not want his work to be available to others freely, then that's his prerogative and no other justification is really needed. No one is entitled to anything by default.

Since when does "Open Source" mean "No Security"? OpenBSD would like a word with you... Using other people's work is more of a community issue than anything else anyhow. If a quest is found to contain another author's work, and that author requests it to be taken down, it can be taken down. Hardcracking a password isn't necessarily difficult, and this fact doesn't change whether the source is available or not. In the end, the best way to enforce that people's work isn't stolen is through the community, not through the software.

And I wasn't saying the users of the program have a right to the source code, I was saying having the source code public would bring nothing but good things. I was putting forth a proposal, not a demand.

Shoelace

12-10-2008, 06:19 PM

Well I remember Dark Nation mention that the big reason why it wasn't open source was because the original programmer Phantom M... I forgot his name at the moment. O_o... Anyways, what I was saying, the original programmer of Zelda Classic, requested that it wouldn't be open source. And since it really is his program, we have to respect his decision.

Russ

12-10-2008, 06:30 PM

I think we're talking about if ZC 3.0 is completely re-written. It would technically be a different program.

While we're at it, if ZC were re-written, would it be possible to ditch allegro altogether so it could be ported to other systems?

Revfan9

12-10-2008, 06:37 PM

For 2.5, yes. I completely understand that. But if we are going to start over from scratch, why should we still have to abide to the old rules? The entire point of starting over would be to get rid of ZC's old limitations.

Dark Nation

12-10-2008, 08:02 PM

What is the complaint against large mode?

Joe123

12-10-2008, 08:09 PM

I tried large mode for a bit and didn't really like it, but it's probably just cause I'm so set in my ways using small mode more than anything.
And at the time I wasn't making screens I was only scripting, so I didn't really need the three combo tables.

ShadowTiger

12-10-2008, 08:12 PM

Can you program nostalgia into it? :blah: Kidding. Actually, my only problem with it is that I have to squint at the Tiles pages because everything is so small, but I know that that's unavoidable due to the inability to take proper screenshots of tiles pages if it were any different.

Actually, could there be a "screenshot" button added? I keep forgetting the key to take a screenshot in it. It's different than the key to take a screenshot outside of the pages. Counter-intuitiveness is something we should focus on getting rid of in ZC.

Nicholas Steel

12-10-2008, 09:50 PM

What is the complaint against large mode?
I don't like the appearance of the buttons under the minimap (bottom left) nor do I like the really small minimap... every screen is a minuscule box... in small mode each screen is easily clickable on the minimap :/

lucas92

12-10-2008, 10:11 PM

I like so much more Large mode because of its 3 rows of combo pages, user commands (just like shortcuts but easier to use), also the fact that we can see what's solid in the next screen so there isn't walkability issues.

Small mode screen is just too big. I don't like seeing those pixels being that big. :S

Revfan9

12-11-2008, 03:32 AM

What is the complaint against large mode?

What's the complaint? Just look at it. It goes against every decent UI standard ever made. Let's look at a screenshot, shall we?

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/3259/zelda002kd3.gif

Holy fucking crap. This thing is a BEAST. And not in the awkward porno way. It's an insult to good UI design. Let's list through the problems here.

1. Bad placement. The golden rule of GUIs is to place the most important things at the top left, and the least important things at the bottom right. The whole thing is a mess. There's no real logical order to anything.

2. Too many options thrown at the user at once! Things are hidden behind sub-menus in most GUIs for a good reason. Throwing everything right into the users face is more likely to intimidate the user and wastes time, as the user has to spend more time visually scanning trying to find what they need. The only options that should be thrown directly into the user's face are the ones that need constant access.

3. The entire interface is... Cryptic, at best. Everything, when presented to the user, needs to be completely, 100% obvious. Any time that the user spends trying to figure out how to do shit is wasted productivity. Icons are almost always a big no-no, except for the most common, most obvious functions (New, Open, Save, Close Program, etc.)

4. Too big! Keyboard shortcuts are king. While they require a bit of memorization for new users, for experienced ones they're a godsend that shaves hours off of your work time. Not only is this interface not friendly at all to keyboard shortcuts, but the real estate the user has to move their mouse through just to get to stuff is daunting. Taking an extra second to do something may not seem like much, but when that something is something you have to do every few seconds... The wasted time and the frustration adds up quickly.

These are just my major complaints. I could go on all night about this if I felt like it.

_L_

12-11-2008, 04:00 AM

1. Bad placement. The golden rule of GUIs is to place the most important things at the top left, and the least important things at the bottom right. The whole thing is a mess. There's no real logical order to anything.
Well, ranked by importance, Favorites < Commands < Main Panel < Combo Selectors < Main Screen. What's your point?

2. Too many options thrown at the user at once! Things are hidden behind sub-menus in most GUIs for a good reason. Throwing everything right into the users face is more likely to intimidate the user and wastes time, as the user has to spend more time visually scanning trying to find what they need. The only options that should be thrown directly into the user's face are the ones that need constant access.
* The entire point of Commands and Favorites is that they're always present. You think some kind of menu option should disable them? Turn them into menus instead? Or are they just too large where they are?
* Well, there could be a visual distinction between screen tabs and the layer bar. Rounded edges, perhaps?
* You think we should throw out the Main Panel icon buttons altogether? They do seem like odd ducks, now that you mention it.

3. The entire interface is... Cryptic, at best. Everything, when presented to the user, needs to be completely, 100% obvious. Any time that the user spends trying to figure out how to do shit is wasted productivity. Icons are almost always a big no-no, except for the most common, most obvious functions (New, Open, Save, Close Program, etc.)So, more labels? Maybe some visual shorthand to show that the Layer Bar, Screen Tabs and the Main Screen are 'connected' to each other?

4. Too big! Keyboard shortcuts are king. While they require a bit of memorization for new users, for experienced ones they're a godsend that shaves hours off of your work time. Not only is this interface not friendly at all to keyboard shortcuts, but the real estate the user has to move their mouse through just to get to stuff is daunting. Taking an extra second to do something may not seem like much, but when that something is something you have to do every few seconds... The wasted time and the frustration adds up quickly.
So, you think there should be, say, a hotkey and a cursor to change the selected combo? Maybe press the Tab button to cycle through layers?

(i don't know what to suggest with regards to their being too much space to move the mouse through. Maybe you need to increase your mouse pointer's speed? Or use the Commands more often?)

These are just my major complaints. I could go on all night about this if I felt like it.
No! Please continue.

ShadowTiger

12-11-2008, 09:04 AM

In terms of the "Obviousness" thing, .. I know I've said it before, but I think it's an important enough subject to keep returning to. Not everyone reads the ZScript.txt or knows where to find the documentation, much less this very forum, even if they downloaded it from here.

Thus, if there was a way to hover your cursor over something and gain a basic description of what something is. That's a lot of text to write though, and I don't think the GUI would support it.

Even better, would be to have a "Help" item in the etc. menu in ZQuest. All it'd do, is pop up a little dialog box with a single line of text: "To find out how to use this program, please visit the following link." And then it would have, directly underneath it, a text box with the link already in it. Clicking on it would highlight it, and you could then copy it to your clipboard, if it can't already do that automatically. Obviously even better would be to just have a button to open up the ZC Wiki, but that's a bit much.

Is it possible to have "Shift+<key>" combinations for hotkeys in ZQuest? I.e. if for some reason the "t" key is occupied, perhaps there could be a Shift+T combination to access the tiles pages?

Nicholas Steel

12-11-2008, 12:00 PM

there already is a help file :) but maybe they can replace it with a link to the wiki during the "beta" phase or until the official documentation is finally updated.

maybe go for a "Flat Interface" instead of depressing buttons/icons you instead add a thicker/coloured border to the active icon/button? also maybe remove the icons for the MAIN buttons under the minimap, instead make them text descriptions.

Petoe

12-11-2008, 02:44 PM

State of Zelda Classic 2.5, what is it at the moment?

Sorry for asking dumb questions but around last spring I finally got tired of waiting and I forgot ZC for many months. Now I'm kind of semi-back to see what's going on, so anyone care to update me what's new with ZC 2.5? Is there any hope for it to be ever released? Everyone probably knows my opinion on that matter but I am asking seriously. I'm not asking a release date but is anything certain yet when it comes to getting ZC 2.5 in a stable and releaseable state? Thanks.

Revfan9

12-11-2008, 04:32 PM

pkmnfrk

12-11-2008, 06:50 PM

More bugs have been fixed! That's about it. Nothing else truly notable to be said, really. Progress is slow, but steady. Most of the crippling bugs seem to be gone, it's only minor things now. The alphas as they are right now are the most stable that ZC has been in years (Aside from the occasional build getting released that will corrupt your quests...)

I'm going to hazard a guess that this is the most stable... ever? I wasn't around for the earliest days, but this is leagues ahead of 1.90 and 1.92

(Trivia: I played a quest recently that was designed for 1.90. I wanted to play it in its intended version so that I wouldn't encounter any bugs. Of course, since it was Dos only at that point, I had to run it in DosBox. Turns out, it doesn't like DosBox very much, and would frequently crash! So, I played it in 2.5 instead, and other than a few graphical glitches, it works just fine!)

Pineconn

12-11-2008, 10:12 PM

I've been pretty quiet lately, but the newer builds of ZC 2.5 are getting better and better. The bug fixes seem to get less critical (there are a few exceptions, like the hammer-doesn't-work bug :p). Some nice recent features are that you can rename shop types and click on the minimap in the tile warp editor in order to select the destination (rather than having to type in the screen number, which you can still do).

jman2050

12-11-2008, 10:20 PM

What's the complaint? Just look at it. It goes against every decent UI standard ever made. Let's look at a screenshot, shall we?

Holy fucking crap. This thing is a BEAST. And not in the awkward porno way. It's an insult to good UI design. Let's list through the problems here.

1. Bad placement. The golden rule of GUIs is to place the most important things at the top left, and the least important things at the bottom right. The whole thing is a mess. There's no real logical order to anything.

2. Too many options thrown at the user at once! Things are hidden behind sub-menus in most GUIs for a good reason. Throwing everything right into the users face is more likely to intimidate the user and wastes time, as the user has to spend more time visually scanning trying to find what they need. The only options that should be thrown directly into the user's face are the ones that need constant access.

3. The entire interface is... Cryptic, at best. Everything, when presented to the user, needs to be completely, 100% obvious. Any time that the user spends trying to figure out how to do shit is wasted productivity. Icons are almost always a big no-no, except for the most common, most obvious functions (New, Open, Save, Close Program, etc.)

4. Too big! Keyboard shortcuts are king. While they require a bit of memorization for new users, for experienced ones they're a godsend that shaves hours off of your work time. Not only is this interface not friendly at all to keyboard shortcuts, but the real estate the user has to move their mouse through just to get to stuff is daunting. Taking an extra second to do something may not seem like much, but when that something is something you have to do every few seconds... The wasted time and the frustration adds up quickly.

These are just my major complaints. I could go on all night about this if I felt like it.

These are all things we can take into consideration. The one thing that people seem to not be getting is that Large Mode in its current iteration is not final. Large mode will become the standard because I can no longer stand to shoehorn the GUI into a 320x240 pixel space. That doesn't mean that what you see is what you're gonna get no matter what. Obviously we can't please everyone, but we can look at different options and see what will work and what won't. The comments about things not being obvious, for example, is one I tend to agree with.

But, just to be clear, large mode is here to stay, so everyone please spend time thinking of how it can be improved instead of complaining that we should keep small mode around forever.

Dark Nation

12-12-2008, 12:55 AM

I'd like to add that if someone can design a better GUI for the main screen (even if it means practically gutting the current way of doing things), then by all means, submit some mockups. If you want to generate text for your mockup, you can use the subscreen editor and edit a text object, then set the font to "Proportional", the screencap whatever you type. If you want the small font used on the main GUI, you can type your text into a message string, then assign it to a room, then look at the room info panel at the bottom to see the text in the small font.

I'd love to see what other people come up with.

Maybe we should have a contest or at least a collaboration.

Pineconn

12-12-2008, 02:19 AM

I wouldn't say much of anything is wrong with the current GUI. My only complaint is the atrocious button icons at the bottom. If one thing needs to be fixed, we need to fix those icons.

Deviance

12-12-2008, 02:32 AM

I wouldn't say much of anything is wrong with the current GUI. My only complaint is the atrocious button icons at the bottom. If one thing needs to be fixed, we need to fix those icons.

*Snickers* I do have to agree with the button icons. They are confusing as all hell. Maybe we should dump allegro and go SDL *gets shot*

Ebola Zaire

12-12-2008, 02:33 AM

Yeah, instead of having little checkered boxes that we're supposed to see and think "Oh, those are the room warp destinations! Duh!" We could have, you know, text or something.

Nicholas Steel

12-12-2008, 08:09 AM

They are confusing as all hell. Maybe we should dump allegro and go SDL *gets shot*
how does moving to SDL affect the interface design? I know, sarcasm :/

Petoe

12-12-2008, 08:32 AM

More bugs have been fixed! That's about it.

Yeah, and more new bugs have born, right? :rolleyes: Like always, it's a neverending cycle.

But thumbs up to the developers that they still haven't abandoned this hopeless project. However, seeing Dark Nation this active gives at least some hope, the guy is just that awesome. :)

ShadowTiger

12-12-2008, 08:57 AM

Yeah, and more new bugs have born, right? Like always, it's a neverending cycle. Holy crap, dude! Stop aging! Every second that you live, you get one second closer to death. Do you WANT To die!? Until you find that magical elixir, you're going to keep on aging no matter what you do. Same concept applies here with bugs. At least they're minor bugs and can be easily squashed. I mean, you say bugs like they're totally and completely game-stopping. Getting hit by a bus, for example, is a game-stopping bug. Getting a bad haircut is not.

Look forward to the future with a smile on your face. It's all we really have in this otherwise bleak human world.

Or, y'know, at least drop the pessimism. What good is it doing anyone?

Shazza Dani

12-12-2008, 12:14 PM

Getting hit by a bus, for example, is a game-stopping bug. Getting a bad haircut is not.

Dude. A bad haircut SUCKS. ;_;

cbailey78

12-12-2008, 12:41 PM

I am very proud of Dark Nation that he has been on task recently, I would say keep up the great work, Dark Nation! If I ever see him in person, I would make Christmas Cookies for him!

Freedom

12-12-2008, 01:08 PM

Merry Christmas everyone!

I've sold my house in Idaho after a 2 year wait, and moved north of Atlanta and bought and closed on, as well as getting mostly moved in to a new house.
Moved 2 huge u-haulem' trucks full of shit 2200 miles.
bought a Harley and spent most of last month riding it around.
Spent most of this month making improvements to my house.
Got all the Christmas decorations up
Got DSL back up and going.......
So now the big question.....
Is this year going to see a stable release?
If I can get all of what I've gotten done in the last 6 months done, being the bum that I am, it seems that a stable release should be a cake walk for the team here.
;O)

And ShadowTiger.....
If Petoe stops aging how can he look forward to that future in the second half of your post you speak of, he'd be dead right?
He just wants a stable release before that day comes.
;O)

Freedom

12-12-2008, 01:11 PM

Merry Christmas everyone!
some tunes
http://view.playlist.com/14058078731/standalone

I've sold my house in Idaho after a 2 year wait, and moved north of Atlanta and bought and closed on, as well as getting mostly moved in to a new house.
Moved 2 huge u-haulem' trucks full of shit 2200 miles.
bought a Harley and spent most of last month riding it around.
Spent most of this month making improvements to my house.
Got all the Christmas decorations up
Got DSL back up and going.......
So now the big question.....
Is this year going to see a stable release?
If I can get all of what I've gotten done in the last 6 months done, being the bum that I am, it seems that a stable release should be a cake walk for the team here.
;O)

And ShadowTiger.....
If Petoe stops aging how can he look forward to that future in the second half of your post you speak of, he'd be dead right?
He just wants a stable release before that day comes.
;O)

I'm not here to put pressure on anyone, my free time from now on will be spent fixing up my house and sitting in the saddle of my Low Rider, but I can't help but think what would have been if a release had come two years ago before my best two quests got abandon to spending eternity in a folder in this computer.
They could have been sweet, had they lived through the delay.

jman2050

12-12-2008, 02:36 PM

Yeah, and more new bugs have born, right? :rolleyes: Like always, it's a neverending cycle.

But thumbs up to the developers that they still haven't abandoned this hopeless project. However, seeing Dark Nation this active gives at least some hope, the guy is just that awesome. :)

So you ask a reasonable question, get a reasonable answer by someone who's qualified to answer, and then completely ignore his reasonable answer in order to spout the same rhetoric for the 50th time.

Do you have any idea how annoying you sound at times?

Joe123

12-12-2008, 02:55 PM

Dude. A bad haircut SUCKS. ;_;

True, but it beats getting hit by a bus.

Revfan9

12-12-2008, 05:58 PM

True, but it beats getting hit by a bus.

What universe do you live in?

Christian

12-12-2008, 06:17 PM

What universe do you live in?

getting off-topic people ^_^

Joe123

12-12-2008, 06:36 PM

Same one as you I'd hope Rev.
I spose if you walked into the side of a parked bus, it might not be so bad as if you woke up after a party and your friends had shaved off all your hair.

And on a side note, interesting first post that one.

Christian

12-12-2008, 08:26 PM

Hehe ;-) that would be some party. So the current GUI in large mode would be the standard one for 2.5? No more small mode? :( and i really do hope 2.5 will be the last zelda 1 clone program. It's time to move on already to the classic SNES. So a new bowl would be great. And yea joe, congrats on my 2nd post ^_^.

Revfan9

12-12-2008, 10:13 PM

If I understand correctly, Small Mode will be in the final version what it is now. Still there, but not enabled by default.

Nicholas Steel

12-12-2008, 10:20 PM

Yes it will still be there but it won't be maintained or anything, so you may need to switch to Large Mode to do some things.

beefster09

12-12-2008, 10:51 PM

pkmnfrk

12-12-2008, 11:06 PM

I love the command buttons.

If I had to suggest improvements, they are (in no particular order):

- Maybe allow each of the three combo panes have its own CSet? Like, so I can put CSet 2 in the first bar, and CSet 3 in the second, etc.

- I dunno about getting rid of the buttons altogether (although, I navigate with PgUp and PgDown), but does anyone actually use the Flags page? Or, the Paths page? I would zap those, and merge the Guy page with the Main page (maybe reformat it a bit to fit: "Room: Take One Item (Shop: 0)")

- A kickass feature would be to allow the user to resize the combo panes vertically, by taking room from the Favourites pane (or, vice versa). I don't use the Favourites at all, and would rather have that space as the combo sets.

- Or, maybe an option to put the mini map where the Favourites pane is, so we can have it double-sized?

Christian

12-12-2008, 11:33 PM

I agree with matthew. It would be so awesome to put the 3 combo rows to each cset so we won't use the plus and minus keys. And please take away that favorites part, i don't use it at all and it would be great to have that for something more useful.

pkmnfrk

12-12-2008, 11:41 PM

I agree with matthew. *all the stuff that pkmnfrk suggested*

Um? Who's Matthew? My username is pkmnfrk (and, my real name is Mike)

Shazza Dani

12-12-2008, 11:43 PM

Um? Who's Matthew? My username is pkmnfrk (and, my real name is Mike)

Then obviously he wasn't agreeing with YOU. :P

Christian

12-12-2008, 11:56 PM

Oops sorry got you confused with the new zc developer. But i agree with you mike ;-) that favorites section in my oppinion does not have a purpose since i barely use it. But this thread isn't for suggestions though.

Revfan9

12-13-2008, 12:51 AM

About the button icons:
When I designed the mockup for a similar-to-now Large mode, (I ought to get a bit more credit for that) I only doubled the main panel and main bar at the top leaving not a whole lot of room for actual text rather than icons. The icons are indeed my design and I would actually agree that changing the page button icons to text is a good idea.

At the time, (almost?) everyone liked my mockup design. (Though it is quite different now from my original design.) Why didn't you complain about it 2 years ago-- when I made that mockup-- Revfan?

I find the command buttons extremely helpful for taking care of under combos and secret combos quickly. The menu really slows you down.

I either:

A. Wasn't around at the time. I've left the community for long periods before, it's highly possible that this was during one of my absences.

B. Was too busy flaming Peteo and Freedom to care.

C. Didn't care because I never thought it would actually become the standard GUI in ZC.

I honestly don't remember when you posted this mock-up. Watch. Someone will find an old post in that topic and it'll show me saying how great it is. I didn't start studying usability until about 6 months ago, so I probably couldn't tell how bad it was just by looking, and didn't start hating it until after I started trying to use it...