Half-life 2 Cut Content - Is it me or dose the cut content look better than what we got? - Games

[QUOTE=Cvoxalury;43070684]In-game or in-code? Basically you just attack1'ing on a floor where you want a rollermine (npc_rollerbuddy) to roll over to, and it rolls there with cute beeping and buzzing. IIRC, attack2'ing makes the mine roll back to you but its reverse pathfinding might be tweaky.[/QUOTE] How do I test it? Is it on the axel project?

[QUOTE=Cvoxalury;43070279]Why does it concern you in the first place? If you make everything open, if you act more friendly, then there is no really a point in stealing anything. And if someone does, you can, at any time, just show, if needed, that 'we have been there first; see the dates, that's our stuff, this has been posted here first', and people will support you, they will like you. To me it looks less of a headache than having a tight grip on all your stuff and then you may or may not prove that something has been stolen (e.g. someone takes your model, changes some anims or puts a mesh through tesselation, and there you go - how do you prove it was yours?). Besides, if you let sources out in the open it becomes so much easier for others to take your stuff, use it as a basis and give you the credits than finding a model somewhere and using it without even knowing. Too bad I don't know how to create tools, 'cause I'd definitely make them open source for all to use. I'd certainly gain more in this way. Right now I can only do this with my maps, source code. edit Also, it isn't always a sign of bad intentions when someone's using your content. E.g. when I first started doing all the beta stuff, I didn't even speak English and I didn't search outside Runet. I'd use anything I can find and I won't be able to give any credit, because I'd simple not know who made the stuff. Now, there are certain other types of people and exemplars for each in Beta community. Some disregard giving the credit. Some would envy you. Some would do it just to oppose you as you try to keep the rights on your content. And by making things open-source, you leave them unarmed. It's kind of a paradoxal defense when you strength comes from your openness.[/QUOTE] You perfectly stole my words and put them here. Thank you kind sir :)

[QUOTE=otaviomad;43071389]How do I test it? Is it on the axel project?[/QUOTE] I've no idea honestly, sorry. I only used it when I myself ported it for the retail Source. But since TAP is basically a fixed leak version (as I see it), it should be there as there was no need of reimplementing/porting it. Kinda wonder why isn't it in MI… probably because the team disregards a lot of leak material as being uninterested, perspectiveless or dumb.

I just recently realized how fun one of the more "Future-retro" designs of the Manhack arcade was in terms of Multiplayer gameplay.

The rollerwand. We don't know what it would've looked like. It could look like an EMP Tool. Maybe it's this wand like stick. Doubt it, but who knows. If anyone here is going to recreate it, what will it look like?

Also, why the hell is there a manhack weapon on TAP?

[QUOTE=otaviomad;43073867]Also, why the hell is there a manhack weapon on TAP?[/QUOTE] It's a remnant of being able to play the Manhack arcade cabinets in the Arcade.

[QUOTE=ProZak;43056152]That's one of the biggest reasons why I don't want to release anything. There are a shit load of morons in this community that steals models, maps etc. from Missing Information and thinks that's alright because its stolen in the first place. We do not own the content, but we spend time on fixing it up, and that wasn't an easy job when Missing Information was first released. We had 3ds Max 6 with the MDL importer like everyone else. There are a lot of people that feels entitled to our content and updates (see comments on our moddb page). There seems to be this notion that we do this for their sake. Everything that's been done with Team GabeN and Missing Information has been for our sake, and because we like doing it. We are not doing it for fame or to please some dumb fucking kid that feels we owe him to finish whatever. Fuck off already. Edit: Excellent post to prove my point. [url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1164550&p=43050080&viewfull=1#post43050080[/url][/QUOTE] So, you spent time fixing up things and then other people include it in their mods? You care so much about being credited, and not about your work actually having a use somewhere and people will enjoy a better mod, even if it doesn't have your god damn name on it. That's a terrible mindset for a human being. When I was making maps for gmod in 2006-2008, I specifically stated that everyone is welcomed to do whatever they want with them. Film, change, include in packs, whatever. I was contributing to the community. There were a lot of good and shitty remakes making them bigger, rainy, night time, adding new buildings, whatever. And it felt great. Much better than feeling guarded by a credit no one besides you will care about. You probably played one or more of them. And tell me, any of you, as an end user, did you had a slightest care if it said "made by *name*" or not? And if it did, did you care about the name? No. You just enjoyed a good map, that's what stayed in your memory after all these years, and anyone who creates content should keep that in mind and make sure as many people as possible have access to it.

[QUOTE=Thevaultkid;43073886]It's a remnant of being able to play the Manhack arcade cabinets in the Arcade.[/QUOTE] Oh, I remember reading something like that, where the citizens played the arcade believing it's a game when they're killing actual people

Guys, we can't let this thread be lost just by people arguing, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing to what you're saying, just don't let it bring down the thread... Please?

[QUOTE=otaviomad;43077091]Oh, I remember reading something like that, where the citizens played the arcade believing it's a game when they're killing actual people[/QUOTE] It's the opposite. People thought they were playing a game, when in reality, they were controlling real manhacks. But I suspect you meant just that, but just worded your post poorly :smile: [img]http://combineoverwiki.net/images/6/61/Manhack_arcade_2.jpg[/img] Personally, with all my respect to Valve, I think that was the most retarded idea ever :v: First, who would believe they're playing an innocent videogame that's in a huge building, with huge machinery and armed soldiers guarding you. If they knew they were killing people but afraid of punishment if they refused to play, I think most would let them be killed than kill a bunch of innocents, or just join the metropolice, where they are not guaranteed to slice open a bunch of folks daily. Second, look at combine technology, teleportation, laser guns, advanced surgery, scanners (remember, the things that fly and follow you), and they spend all this effort of making a manhack arcade and convincing people it's a videogame, instead of just making a scanner with blades, like they did in retail. I remember reading Marc Laidlaw emails, where he answered one of the unrelated questions about old storyline/level design: "To answer your question about how would it work. It wouldn't. That's why we had to cut it."

Looking at the Manhack Arcade, I'd have to ask myself and Valve how the players (the people playing the Manhack games) would react if they flew into the Arcade and ended up finding somebody who looks just like them? You see, I bet Dr. Freeman wouldn't be as silly as to nearly try cutting his neck with a Manhack [I]he is controlling[/I]. ..But surprisingly, you can actually control Manhacks in the mod [B]Human Error[/B]!

[QUOTE=Spor;43077670]It's the opposite. People thought they were playing a game, when in reality, they were controlling real manhacks. But I suspect you meant just that, but just worded your post poorly :smile:[/QUOTE] That's exactly what I meant. I never saw a picture of it. But well, you learn more every day.

[QUOTE=BenjaminTennison;43077926][B]Human Error[/B]![/QUOTE] is that the mod with the cringe-worthy models and voice lines I thought a hl2 update broke it forever

[QUOTE=Hell-met;43078453]is that the mod with the cringe-worthy models and voice lines I thought a hl2 update broke it forever[/QUOTE] Why so surprised? I'm pretty sure the inside joke of Hey Alex and Derek'll never be forgotten... At least its concepts and features could be useful, if it was actually possible to play as the Combine in GMOD (like with the HECU in Opposing Force, but that was better don't you think?).

I strongly disagree with the statement that M.Arcade is terrible as a concept. I actually find it to be so good. Why were people playing? To get out of the terrible reality. You'd try and find anything enjoyable. It may be a bit far-fetched but I'd compare it to Soviet lotteries or whatnot. Second, regarding the Combine technology. Well, they could've replaced everything with bots… could they? See, their tech did not evolve the same as ours. They rely less on computers and use stalkers to control the machinery. They are far more advanced in some areas for sure, but not in all of them. Besides, the scanners aren't that advanced, it's something Google can probably build nowadays lol. So I don't see the Arcade idea as being so dumb. You can put people on one more hook you control, and you spend less resourced on fighting rebels. And you can dull the masses further, leave them less time for thinking. This might be one more reason for Combine to build massive factories with, when viewed from our point of view, lesser efficiency. Actually, retail citizens look a bit too free from caring, they don't have to work and all. Just sit on your couch all day. P.S. And Valve's / Laidlaw's excuses, 'it wouldn't work', are kinda lame. They simply did not try hard enough, and this is not the only time.

The only thing I find ridiculous about the Manhack Arcade is how in the earliest versions it was right beside the Citadel Inner Wall... seriously why would a freaking arcade building be alongside probabily the most protected and well-guarded concrete wall in the entire planet?

The only thing I find even [i]more[/i] ridiculous and obscure is how the early [URL="http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091223233611/half-life/en/images/5/59/Citadel_star.jpg"]concept[/URL] of the Citadel shows it growing literally from the Arcade roof...

[QUOTE=Spor;43076438]So, you spent time fixing up things and then other people include it in their mods? You care so much about being credited, and not about your work actually having a use somewhere and people will enjoy a better mod, even if it doesn't have your god damn name on it. That's a terrible mindset for a human being. When I was making maps for gmod in 2006-2008, I specifically stated that everyone is welcomed to do whatever they want with them. Film, change, include in packs, whatever. I was contributing to the community. There were a lot of good and shitty remakes making them bigger, rainy, night time, adding new buildings, whatever. And it felt great. Much better than feeling guarded by a credit no one besides you will care about. You probably played one or more of them. And tell me, any of you, as an end user, did you had a slightest care if it said "made by *name*" or not? And if it did, did you care about the name? No. You just enjoyed a good map, that's what stayed in your memory after all these years, and anyone who creates content should keep that in mind and make sure as many people as possible have access to it.[/QUOTE] it's not about the sharing itself, it's about the total disrespect of the creator's wishes

I've kinda thought about fixing up a build of the leaked source code, and releasing it. However since the 2007 code was leaked it seems rather pointless. I guess its pointless either way.

[QUOTE=ProZak;43083320]I've kinda thought about fixing up a build of the leaked source code, and releasing it. However since the 2007 code was leaked it seems rather pointless. I guess its pointless either way.[/QUOTE] What would there be to gain from doing it? is there different features in the leaked source code version? (not 2007 code beta code)

I don't think there are. The engine itself did not really change that much: the physics are pretty much the same, material system, animation — ditto, format changes aside it's just different versions of the same engine, not two different engines. The interface is somewhere between HL and HL2 visually, but Source 2007 and Source 2003 interface core is practically the same. The AI and other entity programming is all well known and it works the same. Now, that would be another story if we had some real old builds and specifications for stuff that isn't in the leak; e.g., the oldest maps have pieces of the old particle system that had its own file format which is missing from the leak. Or the old lighting system (IHV) and the first physics engine HL2 had (forgot the name, it was used before Havoc). The beta is newer than this, it is a bit newer than the E3 2003 demos (as they cannot be played in the leak). Generally speaking, the leak is 'too new' to be interesting apart from the content itself. Well, that's my opinion, anyway.

Interesting, Although I could see a fixed sourcecode compile being very useful for any potential beta restoration mods.

[QUOTE=Cvoxalury;43085856] it is a bit newer than the E3 2003 demos (as they cannot be played in the leak)[/QUOTE] Is this a typo? Because I remember compiling e3 2002 and 2003 maps from wc-mappack and they ran fine. I only had trouble opening 2000-2001 maps. Someone who lives nearby needs to go to Valve and ask to see "Get your free TV's!", and then tell us all about it. I highly doubt they will allow to film it.

I think they're talking about the already compiled ones. Oh and I just released this conversion: [img]http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/510327954167953576/729835ACC56140AE441333429733958A1716C51D/[/img] if you're subscribed to this: [url]http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=185012052[/url] You got it now. The improved version will get it's own standalone release.

[QUOTE=Spor;43086739]Is this a typo? Because I remember compiling e3 2002 and 2003 maps from wc-mappack and they ran fine. I only had trouble opening 2000-2001 maps. Someone who lives nearby needs to go to Valve and ask to see "Get your free TV's!", and then tell us all about it. I highly doubt they will allow to film it.[/QUOTE] I'm not talking about the maps, Im talking about .dem files. They won't play if a map and/or the engine was even slightly changed (going as far as refusing to work if you simply recompile you build, I believe), and the leak Source changed a bit more than that (it can't use v35 models which are present on the demos (e.g. the physgun). Well, it's not entirely correct to say that the engine has changed [I]since[/I] the E3 demonstration, as it probably was shown being a tiny bit outdated already. When the E3 took place, Gembe already had the leak, and by that time Source had already gone through two MDL version changes and various engine changes which rendered the .dem files obsolete and unusable.

[QUOTE=Glaber;43086760]I think they're talking about the already compiled ones. Oh and I just released this conversion: if you're subscribed to this: [url]http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=185012052[/url] You got it now. The improved version will get it's own standalone release.[/QUOTE] [quote]Now you too can "Get Your free TVs" on your way to "Vance's HQ"[/quote] I'm still dying.

[QUOTE=Proj3ct_ZeRo;43084963]What would there be to gain from doing it? is there different features in the leaked source code version? (not 2007 code beta code)[/QUOTE] A stable release of a leak project instead of TAP that seems to fuck things up for some. Give people a mostly non-crashing leak experience with the untouched content. [QUOTE=Cvoxalury;43087685]Well, it's not entirely correct to say that the engine has changed [I]since[/I] the E3 demonstration, as it probably was shown being a tiny bit outdated already. When the E3 took place, Gembe already had the leak, and by that time Source had already gone through two MDL version changes and various engine changes which rendered the .dem files obsolete and unusable.[/QUOTE] Wrong but at the same time not completely wrong. Gembe had access to the source code contentiously and said Valve's source control contained a lot of different branches. He grabbed one of the bigger and newer ones.

It's so annoying how obsolete entities in this build work differently than newer ones. In the old days of Hammer, there was multi manager; but trigger_multiple doesn't work the same way and breaks many old trigger events

[QUOTE=ProZak;43090794] Wrong but at the same time not completely wrong. Gembe had access to the source code contentiously and said Valve's source control contained a lot of different branches. He grabbed one of the bigger and newer ones.[/QUOTE] What I meant is that the leak per se is already newer than the E3 version, that's all. I only stated it to show that there wouldn't be any really old secrets on the inside of the leak. And the leak would've been newer anyway, I don't think the team made the demos a day before the E3. And while it's true that it doesn't take a new engine version to break recorded demos, and, for example, the weapon drop might've been cut or it might've simply been unimplemented in the leaked engine branch, there are other signs that the leak [I]is[/I] newer than the e3 version (model formats are probably the most apparent sign). So the timeline is something like that: ----> Valve records E3 demo files, packs the demo version that is to be played on the screens (must be left untouched so the demos won't get screwed), this version has v35 support; -----> Valve continues their work, Gembe's stealing files ----> E3 demo shows the seemingly stable version which is already a bit outdated so the leak we know can't play either demo maps or the demos ----> finally, Gembe compiles a more or less runnable leak version and uploads it, in the 2003 fall. Now, the one question that I always had is if Valve really does have -all- of their dev branches. Wouldn't it be a unfathomable mess? Did they ever state it clearly if they have like 2001 HL2, 1997 HL, 2006 EP2, etc., all untouched? Or is the only thing we can still dream about are some press preview CD's? [QUOTE=SimplePlanz69;43091973]It's so annoying how obsolete entities in this build work differently than newer ones. In the old days of Hammer, there was multi manager; but trigger_multiple doesn't work the same way and breaks many old trigger events[/QUOTE] Why would you try and replace multi_managers with trigger_multiple's? The correct substitute is logic_relay and/or logic_auto. If I'm not mistaken the numbers in the m. manager's smart edit are output delays. On the other hand, it's kinda funny how 'obsolete' static_props are still working in place of prop_statics while being undocumented.