If ever. ERM is not readable, has limited set of variables (conflicts between independently developed mods) and has no support. It might be better idea to rewrite scripts in other language (possible Python) instead of providing support for ERM.
Still, VCMI at the moment does not support any scripting languages. I’d like to have at least cheat-proof multiplayer mode done before adding scripts that affect game logic. This’ll take time.
Likely it is. We do however make unusual choices from time to time.
ATM the final decision has not been made, whether we will support Lua or Python. I am weakly for Python (I’d like to write Python rather than Lua), however I am more concerned with scripts<->engine interface and their relation to my planned cheat-proof MP model. Which scripting language will be chosen seems like an implementation detail.
(Or we could just integrate clang and have scripts in C++. No interfacing between languages problem. Just need to wait a few years, till they get done with VC ABI. )
Until you need to write in pure language, without any ‘import’. Using RoR you might get almost no touch with ruby structures, just like in Django. And it’s all about embedding interpreter into game engine, so in fact both of them are IMHO wrong choices.
Do you know, what will be the most annoying forum topic with python? “I’ve copied this piece of code from that page and it doesn’t work” - answer: “fix your spaces!”
Why’s lisp worse than python for embedding? They’re both too complicated (ruby too).
Why’s whitespace worse than python for amateur user? They both depend on whitespaces.
Why’s BF worse than ERM? They’re both unreadable, like perl golfs.
Elaborate please - Lua was designed for the work you are going to do. But if you know (lua) better or just “want to write python”, no need to convince me, just say “thanks for your advice, we don’t need them” and I’ll save my time and your forum space by not giving them.
The only big turn-off I see in replacing erm support by another language will be incompatibility with all maps/campaigns and mods done for WoG, about 8 years of work. This assumes that Heroes III content will have to be started from scratch, specially for VCMI.
There is no possibility that ERM scripts will work the same way. Because registers are other, and there is much more that 9 towns and 199 creatures.
So better choose human-readable and logic language, than try to reproduce magic passes of ERM gurus.
ERM is a workaround to change H3 exe file functioning. VCMI is not H3 exe.
PS Content will not be changed (the main and most difficult part). Only scripts must be rewritten.
PPS Nobody forbids you use of WOG. If you need ERM scripts, you play WOG.
If you need new towns, artefacts, creatures and spells - you play VCMI.
Kinda strange this dissociation. At first it was about recreating wog, now erm is dismissed, IMHO this will turn back a large fan base, and particularly the creative one. I am all for new towns, but it will be a very long time until you get a few of them at required standards, for now I only see HoTA and Grove (minus the grove creatures which stink visually).
Making a new town require at least one year of work for a full team.
Nobody said that ERM is dismissed, it’s just difficult to make fully sciptable AND well-designed game at same time with all the old AND new features.
Any statemenet made my Macron1 is NOT official. Macron, could you please stop sharing unconfirmed speculations over all the internet? You won’t help us with this disinformation. Before you claim something, ask devs if it’s actually true. So far you make everything up.
I’am not official, but I must say that:
a) VCMI is about recreating Heroes 3, not WOG, at least, to 1.0 release.
b) “I only see HoTA and Grove” - there are officially published Cove, Preserve, Forge. Grove is not official release.
And making a new town can be made in a day (of course, with already existing graphics an dunits on Internet). I think VCMI is for fans, because it’s easy to make new content. Maybe it will be not polished and incomplete (compared to Cove), but it’s will be people’s works, not some closed despotic groups (and there are many towns, that still not out and made by “groups” for over several years without any result).
I not talking about ports of any towns from WOG - it’s more easer, because all content is present, you need only write properties.
PS Again, i’m not official and not a member of VCMI.
Valery19, it is not like we’re against ERM or something like that. It is just impossible to make ERM 100% compatible.
Examples that come to mind:
Direct memory access (UN:C) - won’t work at all. This is dangerous and all addresses will be different in vcmi anyway.
Script that (for example) checks mouse position AND changes mechanics. VCMI consists from separate client and server meaning that one script can not access both game mechanics and GUI
Using another scripting language (lua/python/whatever) is much more easier.
Macron1, check project title:
a) VCMI Project - Heroes 3: WoG recreated
b) Some teams think that new towns must consist from new graphics, not some random pieces found on Internet.
a) But in fact team focused on H3 features for 1.0, and WOG is moved to optional - by you . If you recreate WOG, why you make it disabled?
b) This teams in result don’t produce anything. HotA is the only successful example. And we are talking of mods, not addons (from word “modify”)
Ivan, thanks for explanation. True, UN:C are different even from 3.58 to Era (4.00) but there are very few mods using it, and I guess they can be translated in a more elegant way once we have access to VCMI configurations.
1.0 release is not the end of the road. 1.0 is just meant to be a decent, fully playable product : Single Player + Multiplayer + AI + Campaigns + hopefully RMG (tbc). The purpose remains to have WoG recreated, but that will not be fully accomplished by 1.0. You can see today we already have Commanders, stack experience, etc, so WoG features are slowly making their way in anyway.
As you know, from the plethora of WoG features, some were more popular than others, and some were incompatible with each other. And you can imagine some are easier, while some are more difficult to implement. So 1.0 will be OH3 + basic WoG. To be seen what that “basic” will actually mean, which depends on the skills and maybe even more important the time (and number) of our coders. So if 1.0 will be a stable, playable platform/product, it will hopefully attract even more coders, who will help coding the remaining WoG features, or code new mods for it (which may be even more interesting then some WoG elements not yet in).
Another note about making WoG optional: it was not in the original plans, but several voices from the community asked for it. So nobody’s tossing it aside. I think everybody in the current VCMI group is a WoG fan, but if the VCMI platform can be of use to Heroes fans who don’t always like to play with WoG elements, then why not create it as such?
b) This team is not aiming to create any mod or addon, but to deliver an open source product which others can use for mods and addons. It does take us (way) more than anticipated, but on the positive side, the project always moved on. Every few months there is a new release which is better than the previous, closer to a fully playable product. It depends on where you set you expectations, that make where we are now look like a failure or not. As long as the project doesn’t go “on hold”, or coders reach a “dead end” in an important area, or we start seeing important members of the team leaving disappointed, I don’t think this project is at risk.
Bottom line: the challenges of recreating the game from scratch are different than those of creating a mod (like HotA, etc); so the fact that one mod or the another was or will be ready before VCMI, does not mean that one project had better coders than the other, or that it was more or less successful. Same as chess, I feel H3 will never die, so when we’re ready, I’m sure there will be players out there who will be happy VCMI arrived; better later than never!