Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ggeezz]

Having an API won't stop people from doing what they're already doing now, hacking into the memory.

Probably not now that the cats out of the bag, but there would be a real shift.  Therapist would most likely use the API.  I wonder whether DFHack would even exist.

I'm just saying that by promoting certain things, making them easy, stable and somewhat future proof, you make the other things that require memory hacking seem much harder by comparison.  The API would get MUCH more attention.

What it does do is transfer responsibility to Toady, responsibility he said he didn't need, and would take the fun out of working on DF.

He has the luxurious position of being able to do what he loves for a living, and is able to say no to (the speculative) mo' money that an API might bring. I don't think there is "pressure" as such. If random people start shouting they want an API, he can say "no", and get on with what he likes doing. I'd like to plead to Toady to ignore us all, and keep on having fun 

I'm not anti-Toady.  If that's still his position, I won't even question him.

It just seems to me his opinion may be changing.  The situation has certainly changed over the last two years.  I at least think this is an opportune time to ask if things have changed and if not to definitively put the issue to rest for another two years.

[Siquo]

as much responsibility as he wants it to be.

Read responsibility not as: "A whole lot of work" but as "The guy who gets all the blame if it fails"
By having the game still in alpha, no-one can blame him for bugs, or a game that doesn't work. He could do the same for the API, but expectations will still be there, and expectations mean pressure.

Having an API won't stop people from doing what they're already doing now, hacking into the memory.

Probably not now that the cats out of the bag, but there would be a real shift.  Therapist would most likely use the API.  I wonder whether DFHack would even exist.

Yeah, I probably meant "can't" instead of "won't"

In any case, you're right, as outside help is creeping in (OGL). All that us lowly sycophants can do is speculate.

[cephalo]

Read responsibility not as: "A whole lot of work" but as "The guy who gets all the blame if it fails"

Ah, you know that people don't need reasons to assign blame. It's a non-issue. Sticks and stones will break my bones, but blame will never hurt me.. uh yeah that's it.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Read responsibility not as: "A whole lot of work" but as "The guy who gets all the blame if it fails"

Ah, you know that people don't need reasons to assign blame. It's a non-issue. Sticks and stones will break my bones, but blame will never hurt me.. uh yeah that's it.

You are making it too easy for your argument now. I have not had much direct contact with Toady One, but what contact I did have showed me that he is a very decent and responsible person. By inviting people to use such gadgets, he does take on responsibility for the results, and I think that he is the type of person who does take that seriously.

Besides, encouraging third party tools also invites desires by people - via the tools they may come to make demands and try to pressure him via the tools' creators. Thus, I really see the danger of him losing his freedom.

Deathworks (who does not use third-party tools)

[Siquo]

Yeah, what DW says! 

[ggeezz]

Besides, encouraging third party tools also invites desires by people - via the tools they may come to make demands and try to pressure him via the tools' creators. Thus, I really see the danger of him losing his freedom.

My point is not that an API isn't a threat to his freedom.  It is.  My point is that not having an API is a threat too.  People tend to focus on the risks stemming from action and ignore the risks stemming from inaction.  But sometimes the latter risks are greater.

As far as third party tools go, they're already here.  Some pressure from third party tools will exist with or without an API.  With an API, the users focus ends up on Toady.  Without an API the focus is (mostly) on the tool's creator.  But with an API there should be less problems to focus on.  There are two sides to the issue; pros and cons.

[cephalo]

You are making it too easy for your argument now. I have not had much direct contact with Toady One, but what contact I did have showed me that he is a very decent and responsible person. By inviting people to use such gadgets, he does take on responsibility for the results, and I think that he is the type of person who does take that seriously.

I'm sure you are correct that Toady is a man of the highest character, and I would never suggest that he behave otherwise.

Let me tell you a true story. One rainy night a man knocked on my door and said he ran out of gas, and that he needed a few bucks to get home. I didn't care what his reasons were, he clearly needed some money so I gave him $20. I felt good about it too as he smiled and thanked me.

Two nights later he knocks on my door again. I open it and he says "This time..." and I cut him off! I told him straight out that it was not appropriate to go door to door begging for money. I asked him whether I made an enemy by giving a man $20! He left with a scowl.

Because I gave him a handout, am I then responsible for him from now on? What was my mistake, the giving in the first place or the cessation of giving? Am I responsible for him, or is he responsible for him?

We as a community also have a responsibilty to be reasonable with our requests, and if some of us can't do that, it is not Toady's problem at all. He has no moral responsibility to be compelled into giving more than he is comfortable with. Giving us an API, even a poorly conceved half-arsed one, does not change that.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

My point is not that an API isn't a threat to his freedom.  It is.  My point is that not having an API is a threat too.  People tend to focus on the risks stemming from action and ignore the risks stemming from inaction.  But sometimes the latter risks are greater.

As far as third party tools go, they're already here.  Some pressure from third party tools will exist with or without an API.  With an API, the users focus ends up on Toady.  Without an API the focus is (mostly) on the tool's creator.  But with an API there should be less problems to focus on.  There are two sides to the issue; pros and cons.

I do not really see a risk for Toady One by inactivity there: He is doing his project at his pace, and since he is the sole programmer (okay, now with support by Baughn) he has no special responsibilities or other things to take into account. And if third-party tools don't live up to the expectations of their users, that is really none of his worries - he has never encouraged those tools, and thus everyone is using them at their own risk.

And the complaint about the UI may be loud, but that does not really prove anything about how big or how little an issue it is. (As I mentioned before, I am playing with the default graphics and I am quite happy with the UI as it is and would be rather annoyed if it shifted to a GUI).

I'm sure you are correct that Toady is a man of the highest character, and I would never suggest that he behave otherwise.

Ah, I did not want to suggest that you saw him otherwise. I merely felt that you underestimated what that may curtail.

Because I gave him a handout, am I then responsible for him from now on? What was my mistake, the giving in the first place or the cessation of giving? Am I responsible for him, or is he responsible for him?

The responsibility question is a bit more difficult. For instance, what about those who regularly feed wild animals to the point that these animals can't feed themselves anymore? By handing out that food you are influencing the animals, just as Toady One is influencing people by sharing his creation and how he shares. Thus, there is always a basic responsibility for him. How far that responsibility reaches is of course something that is based on personal perception and may vary from person to person. Which is why I rather err on the side of caution when making assessments about other people.

We as a community also have a responsibilty to be reasonable with our requests, and if some of us can't do that, it is not Toady's problem at all. He has no moral responsibility to be compelled into giving more than he is comfortable with. Giving us an API, even a poorly conceved half-arsed one, does not change that.

Those are very rational and very good points. As I described before, there is at least a basic responsibility (it simply comes with every action) and there is the potential for a feeling of responsibility which is a personal aspect of perception and not bound by what you consider rationally to be the case.

As for the community, I want to draw your attention to the fact that we are a very diverse bunch here: from teenagers, it seems, up to persons of somewhat advanced age, from very aggressive types to more gentle types, with lots of different attitudes and different feelings. Not everyone always acts responsibly (as was already shown by the incident that started this very thread), and if you look into the more heated suggestion debates (like about the channelling, for instance), you can even find people stating that "Toady One should do this or he will lose money" or "he owes us that" or "we got a majority for this in the poll so he must implement that" or "that is so easy to implement". The above are not concrete quotes, but the kind of things I have seen in the various suggestion threads (the long, heated ones, of course). By embracing third party tools, Toady One opens up a whole new can of worms from which to feed these demands and feelings of deserving something from him.

So, besides the actual extra work to co-operate with other programmers, he will also have a lot of fun cleaning the board when the debates get even more heated thanks to that "perceived legitimation".

Thus, I only see additional trouble for Toady One for questionable gains.

Deathworks

[Footkerchief]

I do not really see a risk for Toady One by inactivity there: He is doing his project at his pace, and since he is the sole programmer (okay, now with support by Baughn) he has no special responsibilities or other things to take into account. And if third-party tools don't live up to the expectations of their users, that is really none of his worries - he has never encouraged those tools, and thus everyone is using them at their own risk.

You don't see a risk?  This topic exists because someone was so frustrated by the lack of both a good interface and an API that they're creating a clone.  It's much more than a risk at this point.

[zwei]

I do not really see a risk for Toady One by inactivity there: He is doing his project at his pace, and since he is the sole programmer (okay, now with support by Baughn) he has no special responsibilities or other things to take into account. And if third-party tools don't live up to the expectations of their users, that is really none of his worries - he has never encouraged those tools, and thus everyone is using them at their own risk.

You don't see a risk?  This topic exists because someone was so frustrated by the lack of both a good interface and an API that they're creating a clone.  It's much more than a risk at this point.

He also failed to recruit any other developer to help him and last update was 10 days ago ... Risk is still very small.

Of course, well managed group of experienced and motivated people could catch up and overcome DF.

But think how unlikely that is ... it is not project game studio signs on to unless it has death wish, opensource games without exception turn out terrible because of "design by comitee" style and/or internal feuds and single guy working on it has no chance to catch up unless he dedicates his life to it.

It is not risk, it is cry for help from certain part of community just like angsty teenager demonstrativelly putting razor on his wrist in front of his parents. Attention? Deep issues needing to be solved?

[ggeezz]

Of course, well managed group of experienced and motivated people could catch up and overcome DF.

But think how unlikely that is ... it is not project game studio signs on to unless it has death wish, opensource games without exception turn out terrible because of "design by comitee" style and/or internal feuds and single guy working on it has no chance to catch up unless he dedicates his life to it.

I noted Torchlight before.  It was made by 14 people over 11 months.  They had no publisher backing them, just money they had made themselves from previous successes.

Imagine a handful of talented developers who've made enough money to support themselves for a while, have seen DF, think they can do better and capitalize on it.  It's not that far-fetched.

[Footkerchief]

I do not really see a risk for Toady One by inactivity there: He is doing his project at his pace, and since he is the sole programmer (okay, now with support by Baughn) he has no special responsibilities or other things to take into account. And if third-party tools don't live up to the expectations of their users, that is really none of his worries - he has never encouraged those tools, and thus everyone is using them at their own risk.

You don't see a risk?  This topic exists because someone was so frustrated by the lack of both a good interface and an API that they're creating a clone.  It's much more than a risk at this point.

He also failed to recruit any other developer to help him and last update was 10 days ago ... Risk is still very small.

Maybe it is in the grand scheme of things, but the risks being compared here are the risk of having an API vs. the risk of not having one.  The risk of having an API, as stated by Toady, is "a constant amount of pressure on me and a general disruption in the forums."  The risk of not having one?  Well, Toady's reaction in this thread clearly indicates that he's feeling some pressure, even if Impaler's project is unlikely to amount to anything, and we do have some disruption in the forums.   I think ggeezz's point about the risks of inaction is a very valid one.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

However, you are comparing a singular incident that is already over with a constant situation of discontent. And I don't think that Toady One really felt pressured by Impaler. It seems more that Impaler was lacking respect, was attacking Toady One directly and was outright insulting. I don't see any pressure there. I see behavior which is intolerable on most good forums I know. Toady One was only pressured to police his forum and maybe check whether his copyright has been violated, both very normal things.

Deathworks

[zwei]

I noted Torchlight before.  It was made by 14 people over 11 months.  They had no publisher backing them, just money they had made themselves from previous successes.

Imagine a handful of talented developers who've made enough money to support themselves for a while, have seen DF, think they can do better and capitalize on it.  It's not that far-fetched.

Torchlight developers were very experienced people used to working together: They worked on Diablo 1/2 previously and were basically ripping of themselves. They basically had ideal conditions for pulling off this kind of project.

Maybe it is in the grand scheme of things, but the risks being compared here are the risk of having an API vs. the risk of not having one.  The risk of having an API, as stated by Toady, is "a constant amount of pressure on me and a general disruption in the forums."  The risk of not having one?  Well, Toady's reaction in this thread clearly indicates that he's feeling some pressure, even if Impaler's project is unlikely to amount to anything, and we do have some disruption in the forums.   I think ggeezz's point about the risks of inaction is a very valid one.

He now has api whether he likes it or not (dfhack) ... and even if he is not maintainer, pressure not to break it is, imho, there.

[sadis]

Maybe it is in the grand scheme of things, but the risks being compared here are the risk of having an API vs. the risk of not having one.  The risk of having an API, as stated by Toady, is "a constant amount of pressure on me and a general disruption in the forums."  The risk of not having one?  Well, Toady's reaction in this thread clearly indicates that he's feeling some pressure, even if Impaler's project is unlikely to amount to anything, and we do have some disruption in the forums.   I think ggeezz's point about the risks of inaction is a very valid one.

He now has api whether he likes it or not (dfhack) ... and even if he is not maintainer, pressure not to break it is, imho, there.

I would suspect the main difference is whether he feels that he's responsible or not.