Hmm, yes that's a fair response, I have adapted some elements to use the diagonal custom graphics taken from file "RocksScreenWide.png". However rather than CEs, I chose some of the 'DC_STEEL_WALL_' elements. The reason I chose some of these is that they have a diagonal-ness to their names and graphics - I'm talking about the ones that are 'corner elements', ie a combination of a vertical direction and a horizontal direction. The problem with their native graphics is that they are too subtle for my poor vision and hasty way of working, so I have chosen to 'upgrade' their graphics to more obvious ones, hence the red and blue diagonal arrow graphics.
So why don't I use the CEs? First let me say that any CE that has not been configured at all behaves basically like a wall element, I can't remember if normal or steel. And so do the built-in wall elements. So there is no incentive to create more wall elements from CEs; it seems like a waste.
Secondly, why don't I create a bunch of zany CEs? Well I don't have the config skills of Alan Bond, say. But I have created one or two that I am proud of. There is one that travels through dirt without digging it, at high speed, and hunts down the player, from a starting position far below the player [in a very big level], so the only way to complete the level is travel right as far as possible, collecting some speed pills on the way, and trigger a switch, which turns the hunter-killer CEs into something harmless and lets the player explore the rest of the level in the normal way?
But where is that level, and have I used that CE in any other level? a) somewhere in a levelset of hundreds of levels, and b) no. The truth is that I find the management of CEs very problematic, and it puts me off using them. I know there are tools for storing CEs commonly within a levelset and so on, but I don't trust them. BTW, if there was a conf file 'CEs.conf' stored in the levelset, or even better in a common folder in the exe's directory, and its contents were mainly human-readable rather than all binary glop, then I would feel a lot more confident in building up 'one set of CEs to use in all my levelsets'.
Holger you said that the RND engine has far too many elements. Speaking personally, I say that is one of the RND engine's charms, and I use it for that reason - it has more 'easy flexibility' than other engines, although I appreciate that the BDX engine is a competitor. I don't play MM/DF levels so I cannot really comment on the range of elements therein.
Looking at the tokens for the elements, I think we are up to 1600 or so; in a 4-digit numbering system, there is plenty of room for more. Off the top of my head I can think of dozens of anomalies or gaps in the elements available across all the engines:
- no gem elements with values 2, 4, 6, 7 or 9
- no gem elements that float rather than fall
-- [I know there is the floating/flying diamond in BDX]
- for many of the gems, no 'fly' monster that explodes to give that gem
-- or, one 'configurable fly' that can be configured to give whatever you want
--- although, a set of these would be better, to allow a varied mixture within one level, a bit like the 16 Empty Space elements
--- maybe with an additive graphic option, so that a base 'fly' graphic can be optionally overlaid with a mini-graphic of the element it will give rise to
- no built-in elements starting with J or V [except for Voodoo Doll in BDX engine]
- no highly configurable magic wall,
-- eg with the option to specify pairs of 'from' and 'to' elements
-- I think this could be done with CEs but it would be beyond the capacity of most users
- no water element that is swimmable/travellable through, like in Cave Chaos
I could go on, all day.
From my point of view the CEs are:
- powerful
- bold and imaginative
- barely scratched the surface of
- not really successful,
-- because the custom elements configured and made into special 'things' don't ever go on and populate lots of levelsets, the way standard/built-in elements can and do. I mean, Alan Bond's 'Snakebite' red/green snake is great, and the closest thing I have ever seen to the beautiful player+tail of gems I have seen and played in Cave Chaos, but:
--- who has added/copied it into one of their own levelsets?
--- who could? how easy would it be? how long would it take? how bugfree would the copy and usage in a new levelset be?
---- I suspect the answers to these last questions are not very promising or inspiring.
I understand this post is presumptuous. I certainly don't think of you Holger as our/my personal creator of more elements. I just wish that the RND project, which I think is very high-quality, had a bunch of developers, and not a release went by without a few more built-in elements being added; that would ensure that every release created a good deal of excitement, in my heart at least.
So I think there is a user [only me?] vs developer divide where the users want more more more, and the developer perceives the workload, the technical debit and the heightened expectations that could come from adding elements, and comes to see more built-in elements as a negative, a dark thing, whereas the users see them as a good thing.
I would say (I think I have said this before) is that it is the flexibility of level creation taking from a large playbook that makes RnD special, compared to other BoulderDash clones, and to my mind more built-in elements, the more special RnD becomes.
I suppose I should just make my own fork of RnD, but as I have never managed to compile it in Windows, and haven't ever programmed in C, and am struggling to earn a living, that just doesn't seem feasible. About eight or nine years ago I decided I wanted to build by own RnD that allowed levels of say 256 by 256, and I never did it - well I did it easily enough in a Linux distro I was experimenting with, with the word 'make' - but as it wasn't cross-compatible, and I haven't kept any Linux distros going, it didn't help. Anyway I no longer want levels bigger than 128 sq
John
John
