i was thinking maybe you should make a map editor which allows the user to manually place down squares to impliment into their quest game. im currently designing the main interface of the editor in which you can view and take ideas from it. it could replace the compass option tab in QDK, as the map will automatically layout the directions when the squares are placed down. My next post will include the design

the map editor exe can be found here. have a look at this because i think ive done a really good job in the tabs sections, making it look like QDK as much as possible. http://www.angelfire.com/mo3/themudcircle/QDK_Map_Editor.exe

this is the screenshot:



Full size

[ Edited by Alex Warren - resized picture so I can read this thread without scrolling left and right! I've added a link to the full-size version ]

How exactly would this work? I agree it would be nice to have a map view of the game, and it's something that I'm hoping to implement at some point. There are complications though - what about when you have non-standard exits, such as in a maze, where going north and then south doesn't end up in the same room? Can a grid-based map system cope with exits of varying distances - say a room to the west that could also be accessed by going south-west, then west, then north? How do you represent the up, down and out directions on a 2D map? What about "place" exits?

If anybody has any ideas please let me know! I had a brief start at implementing a map for Quest 3.5 but quickly realised just how tough it would be to get the implementation right, so any suggestions would be appreciated.

yeah i guess so. well, i suppose at the top of the grid could be tabs to show levels. when implimenting a down script, it could then ask you, down to where? and you can choose which level, and which room on that level its going to 8)

the point of my project was so that you didnt have to mess around with rooms and directions all day, but i suppose it would still be easy if you added the compass tab, atleast you still have a visual of the map.

of course it'd be a good feature. When I looked at Quest for the 1st time, I thought a map editor was lacking, but now I've used the QDK more, I don't miss this at all. It's probably also because the automatic connect to other room is conveniant to use. So I created my map on paper, and added all the rooms in Quest.
I think it'd be better to have this as an option, but not replace the actuel system which is very good.

i suppose at the top of the grid could be tabs to show levels. when implimenting a down script, it could then ask you, down to where? and you can choose which level, and which room on that level its going to

yes, it's how SUDS works if I remember well. There are tabs for each level.

By "the automatic connect to other room is conveniant to use", do you mean the feature (new in 3.5) that automatically creates a corresponding exit e.g. if you make an exit west from room A to room B, the corresponding exit east from room B to room A is made automatically?

If so, I'm glad it's working. It was actually a bit more difficult to implement than I thought it would be, as I wanted it to allow the creation of non-standard exits easily as well (by which I mean what I said before, e.g. you could go north from one room and then south and end up somewhere different, so in this case you would uncheck the "automatically create corresponding exit" box). I hope this is working well - any problems please let me know. As it's a new feature I'd also be very happy to hear from people who are using it without any problems

By "the automatic connect to other room is conveniant to use", do you mean the feature (new in 3.5) that automatically creates a corresponding exit e.g. if you make an exit west from room A to room B, the corresponding exit east from room B to room A is made automatically?

yes, this one
I looked at Quest a few time ago, but it's only with the release of the 3.5 that I tried it for real, so I don't know how it was without it. For having designed some rooms in Inform without such a feature, I can testimony that in Quest it's much conveniant !
I had no pb using it. It found it was cleverly implemented because if no connection is made, it will create the other one, if one exists the other way (B->A) it won't change it if I change A->B (the box is automatically unchecked), and in the case one doesn't want to use this feature in a new link, it's possible to uncheck the box.
Well done

The only pb in this section is when we want to display the list of the possible exits it always crashes, unless we don't click on the arrow button but on the list directly and change the room with the arrows on keyboard.

Btw I noticed also QDK tends to crash more easily when the help file is opened. Sometimes in QDK when we have to go deep in the sub sections (conditional of a command that is determided itself by an other conditional etc...), it crashes also, like it's out of memory (I have 200 Mb of ram).
So I only have to save often, but it's not a real pb.

aaannnndddd, back to the map editor lol. wot u think of my idea about level tabs Alex?

If you can tell me exactly how to reproduce a crash when editing a condition depending on a condition (send me your ASL file if you need to), I'll take a look into it.

The problem with selecting a compass direction in Win9x/ME in 3.5 Beta has been fixed but I haven't released it yet. I shall release an update this weekend I think.

The tabs idea for up/down is a good suggestion I think.

I think you're doing it wrong!
A grid like system should NOT be used - basically because of the afore mentioned problem.
A set of boxes should be used to signify the rooms, lines going between the two signifying the exits (very similar to MS ACCESS when setting up quieries).

Of course these may use an internal grid, or a very light grid to show to the user, but the boxes can be moved to different locations - maybe a place defined by the user, maybe a place defined some other way - but that's the key. The rooms move location (maybe just one square or two) and can show which exits go where.

And for your information Ste - we (mainly ITID & I) don't criticize (I checked in Word...) you because of your questions, but because of the content in your posts... Search for all the posts by you (pretty easy, goto your profile and click for all the ones by you) and you will see most of your posts are 1 - 5 liners with basically NOTHING to say.

Oh, and a point on your GUI. You might want to resize your windows to below 800*600 because some people haven't even gone past it (although I like it at 1024*768).

_________________
Computer Whizz
==Insert Sig Here!==

Currently Listening To :
Donovan - Mellow Yellow
Using Winamp.

wots criticizing me gotta do with this map editor suggestion? take that crap someplace else, this topic is to help develop the QDK program, not for you to come in here and start talking about me again, jeez.

Anyway, yes, lines to show room exits would be better, and will probably solve the problem with fiddling about with compass options.

and the size of the program, i dont care, i dont know VB atm, it was just a demonstration

Lines to show exits are the standard in this sort of mapping program, but the idea of this as an add-on is infantile. It shouldn't be a built in feature either. Quest's original intention was to create interactive fiction games, and while it is capable of doing much more, it's not necessary to make it even easier for any whiny teenager to open up QDK and make a game without reading a single piece of the documentation.

If someone doesn't care enough to sit down and map out on paper, or a text document, or even mspaint the design of an area before they jump into designing it, that is merely one of their own shortcomings. If someone can't remember where "this" room is, wether in conjunction to another room or in the game, because they haven't made notes or whatever, it's easily feasible that the project is either to grand in design for their ability or their attention span is far too little.

It doesn't need to be a QDK feature, add-on, or given anymore thought. If you need help in visualizing your mazes/dungeons/etc., I'd recommend looking into the dungeon mapping tools already out there as they provide the features you are looking for, are already developed, and it gives Alex incentive to work on more important features for his products rather than catering to the, "do everything for me, because I don't want to learn" crowd.

i reckon the whole point of QDK is to help those who have no coding knowledge AT ALL to make a good adventure game using one of Alex's successful tools out of many more to come. ASL is for the advanced person. I dont see why quest should have limits on who should use the program, every person, computer literate or not, should have the oppertunity to use such a great, and easy adventure game maker. IMO, this is one of the best ones out there, the others involve hard coding, or are just a complete waste of time. You wont HAVE to use the map editor, the main aim of it is not to make people lazy, but so you have the basic layout of your map on screen, where you can edit, change it, and even save your map layout, print it, or upload it to web space to help people navigate around your world. You have a valid point, but i see this as an advantage for those less able to learn how to script ASL.

Ste wrote: i see this as an advantage for those less able to learn how to read...

Ste makes a good point. Why not make things easier for a complete newbie? Why not put in a visual representation of places? Even though this may be a good idea, however, I am concerned about its implementation.

I think Alex has more important issues to address.

If someone else develops a library to add this feature, I'm all for it, even it it leads to the production of more lousy games. Maybe the person who writes a lousy game and gets some constructive feedback from other Quest developers will go on to write more brilliant IF. Personally, I'd like to see some additional screening of Quest games that are uploaded to the website, other than the rankings of potentially biased reviews.

Finally, I'm getting a little put out by the sniping on this board. I appeal to your maturity and devotion to Quest. Focus on helping every single person who posts here, no matter how "stupid" you think the question or idea. We ALL are here for the same thing. To learn to use Alex's great tool and help others with what we have learned.

Leave the testosterone strutting and chest thumping for other message boards. That adds nothing to the community we should be building here. So.... Ste, I think your idea has merit. I hope you continue to work on it so someone new to Quest will find the program more attractive.

Thank for your support and possitive comments about the idea. And from what ITID just posted, yes, perhaps it IS making QDK too easy, but do you use QDK? you told me QDK was useless and that you only code by hand, so the map editor tool wont be used by you, i dont see how this will effect you in anyway, infact, i dont see how this will effect ANYBODY, apart from those only trying to enjoy the program. i see alot of questions about how to use the program all the time, i know as a new starter to the program i also asked alot of questions, so maybe we SHOULD make things so obvious that even the brainless person can work it out, after all, isnt QDK there to help people make the game? why make it harder when we can make it easier? maybe you just dont want to see people half brainy as you making better games, i dunno, but i think it would be a great idea to impliment such feature, only my opinion, and i do respect yours aswel.

I'm thinking maybe I just hold the immersive-ness that a good text game can provide in a different regard. I guess I just imagine(or expect) that a good game(or even a thought out one) is going to be planned, it's gonna be a labor of love. I see the tools currently available as more than capable of almost anything one could want.

I might stand alone in this opinion, but I think QDK is already about as straight-forward and simple as I could imagine... You want to make a complex conditional?

IF> GREATER THAN *THIS*> AND> EXISTS *THAT*> THEN IF ( #Blah-blah-blah# <> #Blee-bloo-bloo# )> DO *MAKE MOMMA SOME GRAVY*> ELSE ...

Like I said, in my opinion QDK(despite crash-type errors, that can hinder progress), is just about as simple as it can be.

i agree, QDK is simple, the whole coding and scripting is simple once you take time to learn it as well as you have because you're extremelly knowledge in ASL, and i look up to you for that. But there are some people who just dont have a clue, and with the help of this map editor, its making things easier for the creator to see what s/he is planning. But we'll see how it goes, i think ive stated most of my opinions on the design, so i'd like to see what other people think about the implimentation of the map editor

Ste - I was (was?? I remember explaining why I criticised your past posts - not this one for sure!) criticising you because I don't like posting loads of times when I can just add it to one post. It was at the end with comments about the actual program so I thought it would be out-of-the-way.

ITIB - I also agree that QDK is very simple, but I also think a map veiwer would be nice. I think editing using this map feature would be a bad idea - that SHOULD be left to pen & paper or planning. I also agree that an IF game (and any game in reality) will show what planning it had behind it - so to create a good game you need good planning!

I think personally this should not be a map EDITOR but simply a map displayer, showing the current rooms and exits.

_________________
Computer Whizz
==Insert Sig Here!==

Currently Listening To :
NO SONG
Using Winamp.

imo, why should you get out a pen and paper when you can simply plan out on a computer by laying squares, it saves so much time! you dont even see professional HTML webmasters coding by hand now-a-days, its good old dreamweaver, or in some cases, front pages

Plenty of people still hand-code HTML. I do.

Alex, I think hand coding is always preferable to WYSIWYG. I use Dreamweaver to originate all my HTML coding. But I also do a lot of code mining when I know what I want to have happen but can't figure out how to do it in Dreamweaver.

The ONLY reason I chose to invest time and effort into learning Quest was because of the QDK. All the work you have done to create this interface and to constantly work on its bugs is well worth it because it is the gateway for people like me.

Everytime I accomplish something with QDK, I print off the result to examine the code. Gradually, I find myself becoming more comfortable with doing *some* things by hand-coding. But QDK is still there to provide a crutch.

So... I applaud Ste and anyone else who tries to make things simpler. Even so, when I teach HTML programming, I tell students to learn the underlying code so they better understand what Dreamweaver is doing and how to fix something that it doesn't seem to work. The same is true for QDK. More experienced users should be constantly encouraging newbies to print off the code that QDK generates and study what it does.

I understand that new ideas have to be implemented. Someone may suggest what you think is a weak idea and ask for your help to implement it. I hope you kindly decline so you can stay focused with your limited time on the big issues. I want to see Quest grow stronger. That's only going to be possible if you can prioritize and focus your efforts. You have done a great job. I hope everyone who has enthusiasm for Quest gives you the space to continue to make it better in fundamental ways.

Chuck

A map editor might be a good idea. There are 2 things I think should be able to be done in Quest and QDK.

First of all, if the user has created an image showing the layout of there game in a map, they should be able to import that so that players can see the image by going intoa menu

Another thing might be, in Quest, to add a place finder or map function. How this would work is such: As a player finds a new room, this is added to the map. A player can look up this map by going into a menu and selecting it. From this you can see where you are and which rooms you have visited. This feature can be disabled through an option in the game properties window.

Those a are a couple of things that could work in coming versions of QDK and Quest!

Matthew G.

Once QuestNet supports telnet(which I'm not saying will be soon, but it's planned), you could just use Zmud for this.

What is Zmud?

Matthew G.

a program which connects and runs to telnet games if i remember correctly

you can still use telnet itself to play, but i think there is an advantage in the program, like it saves address or looks generally better

Where can I get Zmud?

Matthew G.

It's shareware, and you can google it, I'm sure it won't hurt you.

lol, less posts wouldnt hurt either. you make it look as though this forum is alive....

Do you mean me?

Well, I think it's good that this forum is alive

Plus, I have had a lot of things I wanted to sort out with Quest and QDK

Matthew G.

well posting 1 word replied is really annoying. read my post about you man

I don't make one word replies. Find one for me if u think that.

Matthew G.

Ste - YEAH! He does post more than one word. . . May not be MUCH more, and the actual post can be summed up in one word - BUT it *is* more.
CM - Put more reason behind your posts.
CW - WOOT again!

I do put reason behind my posts, all the time. You guys need to stop flaming me and grow up. Seriously

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:I do put reason behind my posts, all the time. You guys need to stop flaming me and grow up. Seriously

Matthew G.

Computer Whizz wrote:Ste - YEAH! He does post more than one word. . . May not be MUCH more, and the actual post can be summed up in one word - BUT it *is* more.
CM - Put more reason behind your posts.
CW - WOOT again!

LMFAO!!! that was a good one C.W. lol

CM, im not flaming you, its just that i dont see the point in posting a reply like...

codingmasters wrote:Thanks Al

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:I know that

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:Thanks

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:I know!

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:Thanks Alex

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:Cool

Matthew G.

codingmasters wrote:Thanks Al

Matthew G.

you asked me to point out your 1 word replies, if you can count you will see how many there are, you said you didnt post ANY. well i went through 9 pages of your posting and found some.

and i dont care if you find 100 1 word replies in mine, the fact that you have bumped over 20 threads which were dead from months ago is quite annoying. i have to go through all these useless posts just to see if anybody has posted anything important. im skipping posts which have been replied by you last because i cant be bothered going through a load of crap, therefore i could be missing out on something important. so cut down a bit please?

There you go again. You're flaming me

And each one of those has at least 2 words in them, which proves I don't make 1 word replies. You wrecked yourself.

Matthew G.

Thanks Ste. . . Although I'm not sure how thankful I should be.

CM - We aren't flaming you. I'm just replying to your posts (every one of them) and Ste is just posting here asking you to cut down.

And your just being plain stupid. the both of you.

Listen. If you stop flaming me right here right now, I'll cut down my posts. That's a promise. But one more snide remark and i'll go back and reply to every single thread here, cos I've had enough

Matthew G.

Ste isn't being stupid (well - no more than usual).

I'm just replying with the truth.

i'm serious. If you want me to cut back on my posts, just stop flaming me

Matthew G.

PS It certaintly looks like flaming to me

I'm not flaming you. Flaming you would be insulting you over and over again. I'm pointing out stuff.

It certaintly looks like flaming to me.

Alright then. Stop pointing things out to me all the time and I'll cut down my posts

Matthew G.

Why should I stop pointing things out?

1. Because I'm sick of being told things that most of the time i know.
2. Because it's annoying
3. It's also Ste

Matthew G.

1) why do you ask questions to things you know the answer to then?
2) And, you're replying is annoying to me.
3) Ste hasn't posted since earlier on today so it looks to me.

1. I don't. I posted several topics on Friday morning (Australia time) because I wanted some answers on things I don't understand. Ste thought I was posting to much in 1 go and started flaming me

2. how is my replying annoying you?

3. i know Ste hasn't been on since earlier today, but it's still been him

Matthew G.

You just said people are replying with things you know the answer to. You are again contradicting yourself!

Your replying is annoying me because it is pointless.

And - then how is he flaming you? He's replied about 5 times MAX!

1. you got it wrong. It's the other way around.

2. It's not pointless, i'm trying to make a point

3. With flaming, size doesn't matter

Matthew G.

1)Erm, so I'm wrong that you contradicted yourself here....
You didn't say :
"Because I'm sick of being told things that most of the time i know."
and:
"because I wanted some answers on things I don't understand"

And obviously THAT isn't a contradiction.

2)And that point would be?

3) If size doesn't matter then how can you say I'm flaming you?

1. Those were two seperate things. The first time, I wanted answers. over the past couple of days, you guys have been bombarding me
2. to prove that I know that I'm doing
3. You said that Ste replyed 5 times max. if you ask me, he is flaming me, and the amount he flames me is small

Matthew G.

Yes, Ste is probably having a light go at you. Still wouldn't call it flaming though.

The rest of your reply I can't be bothered to even think about.

I rather like the idea of a mapping utility, if even just for the maker to use to ease his mapping needs. there is a place for noted and such for rooms, why not an area (or map utility) to position rooms and such. It could be easy to use, more newbie types will try the demo, like its ease of use and buy it (hopefully). That is the point of programming, is it not? to make ca$h. I like Ste's idea, and I may not program or write much down on paper, but I still like to make a game every now and again.

i agree. As alex said, he was going to do this in an earlier version of Quest, but realised it couldnt really be done. but, it can be done, i assure you, we just need to discuss the idea together and work around any problems we encounter.

CM - The forum hasnt made me laugh so much before u were here. but if u spam u'll just be banned. have a nice day.

Guess what! I don't spam

Matthew G.

99% of people here will agree with me, you DO spam, that 1% left is just your sad little self.

I concur with Ste

i really don't think a map editor is a good idea cos you would probably have to change the hole 'room' thing which i don't think would be very good another reason bieng there are alot of editors like that, none of them any good so it makes QDK special and soooooo cool plus if you did make the map editor i think it would be very hard to actually create and there would be lots of bugs.i'm dead agianst it. i suppose a graphic editor picture thing to show you where you've been(like crating a line map with boxes for the rooms might be o.k. oh yeh alex i couldn't get the alteranting exit thing to work it might have been cos screwed up in the download cos it errored.

the point of me suggesting the idea was to work on it. Trust me, there is always a way of implementing such features. I'm not in the right 'state' right now to start expanding my brain again, coz ill probably just colapse and die BUT when im 'better' again, i shall try and work out something if i can.

I have done some VERY sketchy plans for a little demo... BUT I haven't done much, and all it would do was take an actual asl file and display the rooms with the exits.

Until I have my laptop I'm not even going to actually start on this as a project as I have ALOT of other stuff to do.

::Tiptoes in::

Er... The map editor link is dead... has been dead... with copy and paste too. Just sayin'... I'd love t'try it.

::Tip toes out::

Resume your battles.

that's because this was discussed ages ago, and the image and exe was deleted ages ago, all u see is that little one

Excuse me, but is there anywhere you can still get that? That looks cool and I would like to try it....

It's sort of pointless. It's simple enough already so there's no need to make a cool-looking app just for the sake of it looking cool.