Quick question about Win KQ6 mouse pointers

General chat related to ScummVM, adventure gaming, and so on.

Moderator: ScummVM Team

Post Reply
Lambonius
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:18 pm

Post by Lambonius » Thu Nov 04, 2010 11:22 pm

I joined specifically to give my two cents on this issue. :) As both an artist and a hardcore Sierra fan, I have to adamantly state that I agree with MusicallyInspired in full.

The undithered mode looks artificial and actually makes the screens look MORE bland than they did before. Those backgrounds were designed with 16 colors in mind and with the intention of making the most out of the dithered, textured aesthetic. To arbitrarily make the choice to take that away totally disrespects the original artists' skills and intentions. Not to mention it looks terrible (in my opinion ;).)

Seriously though, I can't believe this is a debate. Any subjective aesthetic changes to the games should absolutely NOT be the default options. That's just common sense.

User avatar
m_kiewitz
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:09 am
Location: Daventry

Post by m_kiewitz » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:17 am

LordHoto wrote:While I agree that this looks like the research was not done properly, I can't agree that you blame him for not researching properly how the undithering works internally (or that caching of views). I mean it is not documented anywhere at all (except maybe in code form, but I wouldn't assume that everyone can read C(++) code).
He used the internal debug console for switching. Anyone using it should actually know a bit of the internals. Otherwise he shouldn't use it in the first place.

Next time, someone changes global variables and complains afterwards that the game went havok.
MusicallyInspired wrote:They weren't repeatedly thinking all the while "I have to envision these dithered pixels as solid colours". It's just not that simple. You're trudging on an artistic expression.
The dithering was actually introduced, because the artists / Roberta Williams wanted to be able to use more colors. It was a workaround to get almost VGA quality without VGA hardware.
Yes it is. But you're rating your own interpretation over mine (or anybody's who disagrees, which includes a lot of Sierra fans) by having it enabled by default. That's the problem I have.
So you are assuming that your opinion matters more than the one from users that really like it. Note: You already had and have the option. You are just trying religiously to get it disabled on default.

Actually it should get decided, if ScummVM as a whole should have enhancements enabled on default. Not having enhancements would disable not only undithering, but also font adjustment, no ScummVM save/restore, no mouse cursor in AGI and so on.
Who are you to dictate if anyone's taste is good or not? This is exactly what I'm talking about. It seems like the Sierra community (for whom the games were actually supported for, otherwise there would be no SCI integration at all; no Sierra fans no Sierra implementation) are just getting a big "screw you" from the ScummVM team because their opinion matters more than their's.
Again: there is an option. ScummVM is also open-source. You are free to fork it and do your own MusicallyInspired port. No one is forcing anyone to use anything. Actually you try to force your taste/opinion upon everyone else.

Also we wasted lots of time and we were also not paid a dime for it. Oh yeah, that's a big screw you from us, right.
Again, the backgrounds were created and optimized for a dithered look. That is the way they were meant to be viewed, regardless of any "enhanced" palette configurations you could ever put on there. You'd never get that palette configuration on an EGA card on your 386 in DOS because Sierra never created the engine with that capability.
The backgrounds are actually almost 256 colors. We do not invent those colors. The colors are there. Sierra had a hardware limitation and wanted to use more colors. They managed to do this by using dithering. If there were VGA adapters back then, they would have shown the full colors.

Anyway again: if you don't like it, just disable it. It's easy. It's now even a gui option.

And if -devel comes up with disabling EVERY enhancement, then it will also be gone. But we won't do here enhancement and there enhancement, but not this enhancement because MusicallyInspired personally didn't like it.
As such, the artist took advantage of the disadvantages of 16 colours and used it to make their art look more impressive and as realistic as possible. The minute you take dithering out of the picture you're destroying that artistic expression and utilising of those dithered pixels.
So you drew those backgrounds? Otherwise you don't know what the artists actually did and thought. The artists definitely wanted to use MORE COLORS. In fact Roberta Williams even wanted more colors on Apple II and Ken Williams went for it. The hardware just wasn't capable of doing so. Dithering was a workaround, not a stylistic tool. I would really happily talk to some Sierra artists about it. If they (or one of the game creators) said, they didn't like it, I would immediately remove it and probably even throw the undithering code away.
muck with everybody's nostalgia without the option to enable it
There was and is an option. It's now even a GUI option.
Actually, SQ3 does play digital samples if you have the correct sound blaster driver that came with the original disks.
In the version that I own on floppies, there is no soundblaster driver. Only ADL.DRV, which is Adlib. Which doesn't support samples.

I already got Codename: Iceman, which came out much later. It also doesn't include any soundblaster driver.
And I still am asking and have been asking for the option to choose whether you want the digital samples or the Adlib equivalents (that goes for SCI1.0 games as well).
Impressive.
So you want this and that and everything, but on the other side you just told me that ScummVM would screw sierra fans and muck with their nostalgia, although there was and is an option for switching.

I guess we muck with their nostalgia, because we didn't implement every possible option and feature into the interpreter on first release free of charge.

You remind me of OS/2 users. Instead of being happy, that they get something really nice for free, they complain and complain. And then wonder, when everyone leaves them.
The Sarien engine was designed from the get go not to be reminiscent of the original DOS interpreter.
So?
The DOS interpreter had no mouse support. If ScummVM is supposed to be preserving nostalgia, then in fact there should be no mouse cursor on default in DOS AGI games. But I see, you just use the nostalgia argument, when it helps. You will happily ignore nostalgia at the moment, when you personally like the enhancement.
Honestly, it just seems like many of you don't care as much about Sierra game implementation as you have about SCUMM game implementation.
I didn't write one line of code for SCUMM. I don't know what you are talking about.
Why does it have to be internal? What matters are the fans opinions not the dev's opinions alone, if you're going to make any ethical sense at all here.
It's easy. We are a team of developers. We actually discussed, before enabling undithered on default. So it would seem logical, that we would also discuss the issue, before disabling it. That's called teamwork.

Or do you propose, that we just change it and as soon as someone else complains, we change it back? Or maybe just react on your opinion alone?
Why are you so hung up about the feature being disabled by default when people like you were asking me the same question about complaining about having it enabled? Doesn't feel fair does it?
Because I worked lots of time on the whole code for free. I don't want it to get disabled because 2 people whined. Disabled on default means that most users won't see it at all and I personally love the undithered graphics. They look almost like VGA-graphics now. I can't really play any 16-color SCI game anymore without it.

Anyone, that dislikes it, WILL notice that its an enhancement. Then he will just look for a way to disable it and tada, everone would be happy.

Anyway, what did you do for SCI support? Did you write one line of code?
I (and the many Sierra fans I speak for)
The same way as speaking for sierra artists without ever having talked to them?
I'm asking for it to be disabled by default so we have the choice of using it or not
You already have the choice to use it or not since the official release.
Last edited by m_kiewitz on Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LordHoto
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Germany

Post by LordHoto » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:27 am

m_kiewitz wrote:
LordHoto wrote:While I agree that this looks like the research was not done properly, I can't agree that you blame him for not researching properly how the undithering works internally (or that caching of views). I mean it is not documented anywhere at all (except maybe in code form, but I wouldn't assume that everyone can read C(++) code).
He used the internal debug console for switching. Anyone using it should actually know a bit of the internals. Otherwise he shouldn't use it in the first place.

Next time, someone changes global variables and complains afterwards that the game went havok.
I searched the forums a bit and found this for example:

viewtopic.php?p=62260#62260

This doesn't sound like you think using the console is a bad thing.

Also there is this: viewtopic.php?p=59761#59761

Of course this is clone2727 saying how to disable it, he might not be aware of that either.

I found also this in a even old topic: viewtopic.php?p=55158#55158

There you seem to say that it only works after reentering the room, so I guess it was at least documented somewhere...

So all in all I think it would be more than fair not to flame him for not knowing that.

User avatar
m_kiewitz
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:09 am
Location: Daventry

Post by m_kiewitz » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:35 am

LordHoto wrote:I searched the forums a bit and found this for example:

viewtopic.php?p=62260#62260

This doesn't sound like you think using the console is a bad thing.
If you know what you are doing, yes.
In this case, I even told him to use the parameter in scummvm.ini instead.

And in fact the original posting from MusicallyInspired "bit of a nuisance to have to keep disabling the function through the console every time you start an SCI0 game." actually would have been the right usage.

The other posting is from december 2009, it was about using an SVN build and almost nothing worked right back then, there also was no other way to change the behaviour at all unlike now. Also I was massive sick at that time.

Collector
Posts: 549
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 6:58 pm
Contact:

Post by Collector » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:52 am

Not to fan the flames, I mean no disrespect to anyone here, especially to any of the devs. I acknowledge the impressiveness of the code, but it seems to me that you are getting a little too defensive about it. We are not asking for it to be removed, after all, some do want it. However, a point seems to have gotten lost. Yes, the original artists would have used more colors if they could, but had to work within the framework of their limitations. Yes, the dithering is the compromise that they used to compensate for the limited pallet.

That does not mean that with an increased pallet that they would have done what the undithering does. The undithering is an extrapolation what they might have done with a larger pallet. The undithering is making an artistic change to the game. It is not a matter of what you, MI, I or any other user thinks looks best. It is a matter of respecting the original art as default.

Please don't take this the wrong way. I do respect and appreciate your contributions. Nor to I wish to step on your toes, just please don't force artistic decisions that may or might not be what the original artists would have done on these classics.

User avatar
clone2727
Retired
Posts: 1592
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 8:23 pm
Location: NJ, USA

Post by clone2727 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:16 am

m_kiewitz wrote:He used the internal debug console for switching. Anyone using it should actually know a bit of the internals. Otherwise he shouldn't use it in the first place.
Disagreed. The console is able to be used by anyone.
m_kiewitz wrote:So you are assuming that your opinion matters more than the one from users that really like it. Note: You already had and have the option. You are just trying religiously to get it disabled on default.
Well, you're trying to put your opinion on everyone.
m_kiewitz wrote:Again: there is an option. ScummVM is also open-source. You are free to fork it and do your own MusicallyInspired port. No one is forcing anyone to use anything. Actually you try to force your taste/opinion upon everyone else.
Again, you're forcing your taste/opinion on everyone else.
m_kiewitz wrote:So you drew those backgrounds? Otherwise you don't know what the artists actually did and thought. The artists definitely wanted to use MORE COLORS. In fact Roberta Williams even wanted more colors on Apple II and Ken Williams went for it. The hardware just wasn't capable of doing so. Dithering was a workaround, not a stylistic tool. I would really happily talk to some Sierra artists about it. If they (or one of the game creators) said, they didn't like it, I would immediately remove it and probably even throw the undithering code away.
Did you talk to the artists? Can I see where they wanted to use the undithered colors?
m_kiewitz wrote:It's easy. We are a team of developers. We actually discussed, before enabling undithered on default. So it would seem logical, that we would also discuss the issue, before disabling it. That's called teamwork.
The only thing I see is this where I don't see any consensus. However, Eugene did say:
sev wrote:Yeah, leave it and activate through rendering options.
m_kiewitz wrote:Anyway, what did you do for SCI support? Did you write one line of code?
Now what the hell is this supposed to mean? This is not an argument, this is the Chewbacca defense.
m_kiewitz wrote:The same way as speaking for sierra artists without ever having talked to them?
Have you? Transcripts, please.



@Collector: Well said.

User avatar
MusicallyInspired
Posts: 1033
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 8:03 am
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Contact:

Post by MusicallyInspired » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:46 am

m_kiewitz wrote:The dithering was actually introduced, because the artists / Roberta Williams wanted to be able to use more colors. It was a workaround to get almost VGA quality without VGA hardware.
You're missing my point. Dithered pixels hide harsh transitions of colour when using at least one of the same colours. In undithered mode the colours are completely different. They don't blend. This can (and is in Sierra games) utilised in artistic ways in ways that undithered mode can't possibly recreate without some kind of blurring effect or soft transition into the next colour, which would be impossible to implement seeing as not every colour is meant to have a smooth transition into the one next to it.
So you are assuming that your opinion matters more than the one from users that really like it. Note: You already had and have the option. You are just trying religiously to get it disabled on default.
And you're trying religiously to keep it enabled by default. See how easy it is to turn that back on somebody? Don't go down that road. I'm not demanding my own personal way. I just think that a game should be represented in its original form with all optional aesthetic enhancements disabled until the user wants to enable them. That's the safest route to not tick anybody off with. Even the people who disagree with my distaste of undithered mode agree with that.
Actually it should get decided, if ScummVM as a whole should have enhancements enabled on default. Not having enhancements would disable not only undithering, but also font adjustment, no ScummVM save/restore, no mouse cursor in AGI and so on.
That's not the same thing, as has been stated multiple times. I'm not getting into it again.
Again: there is an option. ScummVM is also open-source. You are free to fork it and do your own MusicallyInspired port.
Actually, I have done that and when I expressed my intention to do such a thing I had quite a positive response from those who were interested in my port just so that dithering was the default setting. This was before I realised about the fix you can add to the scummvm.ini file, but the reaction alone should tell you something.
No one is forcing anyone to use anything. Actually you try to force your taste/opinion upon everyone else.
I'm not forcing my opinion on everyone else. Everyone else agrees with me except for you and a couple other devs. You, on the other hand, are forcing everybody ever who uses ScummVM to play these games in a way that they never were before by default.
Also we wasted lots of time and we were also not paid a dime for it. Oh yeah, that's a big screw you from us, right.
What are you doing right now by talking to me this way if not saying "Screw you." I've not done anything to deserve that kind of attitude. You just disagree with me and somehow deduce that I deserved to be attacked for that.
The backgrounds are actually almost 256 colors. We do not invent those colors. The colors are there.
I think you're assuming too much here. Technically the colours are there. Artistically they most definitely aren't there. An artist doesn't think technically, they think artistically. Especially where visual art is concerned.
Sierra had a hardware limitation and wanted to use more colors. They managed to do this by using dithering. If there were VGA adapters back then, they would have shown the full colors.
I don't see how that matters at all seeing as the original artists created those images with no more than 16 colours to begin with. IT DOESN'T MATTER how many more colours you can interpret from it. They're not the same colours. Like I stated before, the dithered colours are all made up of the same colours. This causes the colours to blend in together in a way that completely flat colours (bigger palette or not) just can't replicate. No matter how you look at it they're all completely different colours and you can clearly see the divisions of lines between each colour in undithered mode. In dithered mode this is hidden. Yes, it improves the somewhat jarring (to some people) appearance of checkered colours but you're just trading in one aesthetic problem for another. And seeing as the backgrounds were made with visually 16 colours to begin with, I say we go with the way it was optimized best with the palette the artists had at the time by default.
Anyway again: if you don't like it, just disable it. It's easy. It's now even a gui option.
Yes, for the seventeenth time I see that. That's great. Hurrah. But that doesn't excuse the argument of whether or not ScummVM should be enabling such features by default. And don't throw the save restore or AGI mouse cursour argument into this again because it's not near the same level of altering artistic expression as completely changing the perceived palette selection. It's the same thing as playing an old game in 32-bit colour mode instead of 8-bit colour. It's just not going to look the same. Some can argue that it's better, some will argue that the colours are actually deeper and more dynamic in 8-bit mode. Easy solution? Keep the original as default so people can play as they remember it from the get go and add the colour enhancement as an optional toggle if they want to spice things up. Having it the other way around just ruffles too many feathers as is happening here.
And if -devel comes up with disabling EVERY enhancement, then it will also be gone. But we won't do here enhancement and there enhancement, but not this enhancement because MusicallyInspired personally didn't like it.
Stop pinning me like that. I'm not the only one who feels this way. I just have more to say on the subject. Don't be so rude.
So you drew those backgrounds?
What about the backgrounds I have drawn? What about the backgrounds of other SCI fangames?
Otherwise you don't know what the artists actually did and thought. The artists definitely wanted to use MORE COLORS. In fact Roberta Williams even wanted more colors on Apple II and Ken Williams went for it. The hardware just wasn't capable of doing so. Dithering was a workaround, not a stylistic tool.
Again, how does that matter? It's not the point at all. Yes they all wanted more colours. That doesn't mean that automatically giving those colours to the games is going to make them look the way they always wanted. It just doesn't work that way. Regardless of why they created dithered colours the way they did, it has been used to hide some harsh jagged lines. Those lines on that tree in that KQ1 picture or the lines on the grass in QFG1 don't lie. They look like an amateurish mess undithered while dithered they look more natural.
I would really happily talk to some Sierra artists about it. If they (or one of the game creators) said, they didn't like it, I would immediately remove it and probably even throw the undithering code away.
Talking to the original artists doesn't make a shred of difference to the point I'm trying to make. You can visually SEE in those examples I've posted how dithering worked to their advantage in hiding harsh and abrasive lines. And again, what about the artists of fangames? How come their artistic expressions don't matter?
There was and is an option. It's now even a GUI option.
Playing the "no, you" game again? The same reasons you use for that line of thinking are also perfectly valid for my line of thinking. We're just going to talk in circles about it if this keeps up.
In the version that I own on floppies, there is no soundblaster driver. Only ADL.DRV, which is Adlib. Which doesn't support samples.

I already got Codename: Iceman, which came out much later. It also doesn't include any soundblaster driver.
Then why are the samples even in the game resources? And why does it work with the correct sound blaster driver? In DOS? It shouldn't work if it wasn't meant to be that way, but it does. Your argument holds no ground here. The dithered pixels on the graphics, however, weren't meant to be viewed in near 256 colours because that's not how they were created. They may have WANTED to have them in more colours, but the fact is that they weren't and they weren't created with that in mind.
Impressive.
So you want this and that and everything, but on the other side you just told me that ScummVM would screw sierra fans and muck with their nostalgia, although there was and is an option for switching.
Seriously? You're pinning me for being greedy about asking for an Adlib/Sound Blaster sfx option? And no, there wasn't and isn't an option for switching between Adlib and Sound Blaster sounds. I've tried everything and nothing works. If there's some other console command that was failed to be documented than that's another story. But I've asked before and people have given me suggestions and none of them have worked. ScummVM always favours the digital sound effects and there's no way to enable Adlib sound effects. It would just be nice as an option. There's an option for everything else for other games.
I guess we muck with their nostalgia, because we didn't implement every possible option and feature into the interpreter on first release free of charge.
I'm not blaming you for not having every feature available at launch. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying you enabled a feature that wasn't in the original game. It's not an alternate way of doing things like the save/restore feature or the mouse in AGI games (which you can just move to the bottom of the screen and ignore), it's changing the entire graphics of the game. And you enabled it by default. It's not representative of what the artists originally wanted. If they actually had that palette they'd have created those graphics with other methods. Are you even an artist? Do you understand this concept?
You remind me of OS/2 users. Instead of being happy, that they get something really nice for free, they complain and complain. And then wonder, when everyone leaves them.
If you would stop labeling me as being demanding and unreasonable and start listening to what I'm saying you'd know that that's not my stance at all.
So?
The DOS interpreter had no mouse support. If ScummVM is supposed to be preserving nostalgia, then in fact there should be no mouse cursor on default in DOS AGI games. But I see, you just use the nostalgia argument, when it helps. You will happily ignore nostalgia at the moment, when you personally like the enhancement.
Actually, I don't use the mouse at all in AGI. But all I have to do to simulate DOS is move the mouse off the screen and ignore it and bam I have the authentic experience (except for the fact that the 16 colours used in AGI now are not the authentic EGA 16 colours but that's another matter entirely). There's no point in having a toggle for such a simple solution. You can't compare the two. The undithering mode is not what the original games looked like. Adding a mouse on a screen is not the same as changing the graphics themselves.

And my arguments are based on preserving the authentic gaming experiences for all games for players. If they like a feature then they can enable it. It's no different for me. If I ever like a feature then I'll enable it if I wish. I'm not on a crusade to remove all enhancing features from ScummVM, I'd just like to see the authentic gaming experiences preserved by default for everybody because that's the safest route to take. Anyone who wants add-ons and enhancements should have to enable them if they want not the other way around. It's just common sense.
I didn't write one line of code for SCUMM. I don't know what you are talking about.
My mistake. I don't know what developers have been working on with regards to ScummVM. All I know is that they worked on ScummVM in some capacity. I apologise for my generalisation.
It's easy. We are a team of developers. We actually discussed, before enabling undithered on default. So it would seem logical, that we would also discuss the issue, before disabling it. That's called teamwork.
That's great, I'm just saying it might be a good idea to include the fans in this discussion as well since they're the ones ultimately who are going to be affected the most by it.
Or do you propose, that we just change it and as soon as someone else complains, we change it back? Or maybe just react on your opinion alone?
Again with the labeling. If someone else has a problem with the way the original game was designed then they can enable an enhancement. It shouldn't be the other way around. The point is that these games should be represented in all their glory as much as possible. Any enhancements or subjective effects should be the ones that are optionally enabled/disabled. Not the other way around. How much simpler do I have to make it?
Because I worked lots of time on the whole code for free.
Maybe you shouldn't do it for free anymore if you can't take criticism? Or if you just can't take the fact that people just don't like your undither feature?
I don't want it to get disabled because 2 people whined.
It's not just 2 people it's basically everyone. Almost everybody who posted in this thread doesn't think it should be default.
Disabled on default means that most users won't see it at all and I personally love the undithered graphics. They look almost like VGA-graphics now. I can't really play any 16-color SCI game anymore without it.
So you're so proud of your option that you force everyone to see it whether they like it or not? Whatever happened to "it's right there in the options GUI if you want to change it"? It's a subjective enhancement and should never have been implemented as a default from the very beginning for that sole reason alone. It's not about complaining, it's about the games being represented as they had been. Enhancements should always be secondary. I'm not just arguing for my own opinion at this point, even if I hated dithered mode I'd still be fighting for this point.

You're obviously taking this rather personally since you worked so hard on it and I apologise for that. Cognratulations, it's a nifty feature and does a decent job at what its meant to do. But just because you like it doesn't mean everyone else has to and it doesn't mean it looks best for the game. It's SUBJECTIVE. And whenever there is subjectivity things should always resort to the original by default to maintain the original expression.
Anyone, that dislikes it, WILL notice that its an enhancement. Then he will just look for a way to disable it and tada, everone would be happy.
So you're whole problem is that you want everyone to see the great work you did? Aren't you being rather full of yourself here?
Anyway, what did you do for SCI support? Did you write one line of code?
I created fangames that your code is supposed to support.
The same way as speaking for sierra artists without ever having talked to them?
Did you? More importantly, are you an artist? Do you understand the importance of preserving the medium of which a piece of art was prepared for? Of course you do, you're a programmer. If somebody went in an mucked up your undithering code because they didn't like the way it was presented and programmed it in a way that altered the display of backgrounds in a way you didn't like you'd be just as upset. You are upset. People are asking for it to be taken off default because they don't like it and you're acting like a child about it. Only in this case it's not warranted because your work alters another's work in your own subjective way.
You already have the choice to use it or not since the official release.
Should be the other way around for reasons everyone has mentioned. Including a reason you mentioned yourself, most people won't know how to disable it.
Last edited by MusicallyInspired on Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:14 am, edited 12 times in total.

blueskirt
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:37 am

Post by blueskirt » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:49 am

If the point of SCUMMVM was to provide the best possible playing experience for games, then it wouldn't let me play Floppy or CD or FMTowns or Amiga versions of the early SCUMM games, it would give me whatever version the developers prefer by default and I would have to mess with SCUMMVM's options and config files to disable it.

But it's not the case. I just downloaded the latest version of SCUMMVM and ran the 16 colors version of Loom through it, and it allowed me to play it like it was originally designed, with square pixels and dithering without any hassle. Why should it be different for Sierra's games?

SCUMMVM should reproduce these games as faithfully as possible. When one doesn't like the blocky pixels or simply prefer smooth graphics, they can go in the graphical options and set them however they like. Why should it be different for dithering? If undithering is set by default, why isn't supereagle set by default too? Why is a game like Loom reproduced as faithfully as possible but a game like Quest For Glory I isn't?
So you are assuming that your opinion matters more than the one from users that really like it.
I gave a quick try at some games with undithered graphics and I must say I'm really impressed by their look and the next time I'll play those games I'll use that feature to spice things up. But if you ask me if it should be enabled by default, no, I don't think so. Not anymore than any other graphical options should be. If the other are set to off, so should be undithering.
Last edited by blueskirt on Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

KuroShiro
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:42 am
Location: Miyazaki, Japan

Post by KuroShiro » Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:43 am

You guys are such drama queens. :P

blueskirt
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:37 am

Post by blueskirt » Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:34 am

KuroShiro wrote:You guys are such drama queens. :P
Haha, indeed! :D

User avatar
PokerCrow
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:01 am

Post by PokerCrow » Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:57 am

After reading the whole thread I get the idea that you m_kiewitz are acting a little over-defensive about your undithering feature. Well, it's understandable, it's your baby after all and I'm sure you want as many people as possible using it or at least seeing it. However you should try to see beyond your personal interests.

The undithering can indeed look very nice in some instances and disastrous in others. But it's not even a matter of how good/bad it looks or how much I/anyone loves/hates it. I'm of the opinion that by default the original artwork should be respected. Whatever change it's made to it WILL DIFFER from the vision of the original artist. It's fun to tinker with enhancements, but that option should be left as an opt-in to the end user.

I'm an artist as well, and I totally get what MusicallyInspired is talking about. It's like, if I drew a painting on a textured canvas I could incorporate that texturing in an artistic way into my painting. However if I had to do the same painting on an untextured surface I'd certainly have to compensate the coloring in some way to achieve a similar result. The same thing happens with dither, and if you remove it some of the artistic effects that depend on it will break. However your filter doesn't compensate for that. The bigger color palette certainly fools the untrained eye into thinking something is prettier, but personally I think some stuff is lost in the color translation. Of course, this is my artistic opinion and anyone is free to disagree with this last paragraph. However the subjectivity of this last point is yet another reason to default to the original graphics. When in doubt, the original is the safest bet.

BobbinT
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 6:26 pm

Post by BobbinT » Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 am

Things really got heated up here. Anyway, you guys should cool down a bit. In my assumption, each other party were really do a bit forcing their own opinion.

For one thing, I do like the undithering version. However, I understand how he (MusicallyInspired) feels about the dithered version. It's just that (I think) dithered works best because the hardware limitation back then, plus... if you views it in smaller screen (like in mobile phones or portable game devices), the dithering effect really helps creates better scene's drawings.

Maybe this undithering problems can be compared as if playing the EGA version of AGI games. Those games didn't have dithering (or does have in a very minimum, didn't remember which games). That's why I did welcome the changes in SCI games from dithering into undithering. Plus, in some ways it has the similar feeling as if playing current games that has cell-shading featured. At least that's how I feel on the undithering version.

However, when I'm looking at this example and then zoomed out of it:
Image

it does show how dithering clearly creating blends of colors and it makes screen in smaller view looks beautiful. However the undithered version looks uglier (sorry ScummVM) as if the picture were a bit blurry. If your browser has zooming capability, try it. Undithered works best on bigger screen, while dithered are still strong candidates for smaller screens.

Btw, I think @MusicallyInspired should tone down his opinion for a bit. The rest of us are really grateful that SCI engine are finally supported and enhanced. Let them do their own version. It doesn't mean your opinion doesn't matter, because they did add that feature.

Anyway, I'm not sure I have the same opinion regarding the digital data in the games, especially for SQ3. I have played games since XT-8086, which later on shifted to AT-286 and finally had Sound Blaster card. Back then I didn't hear this voice sample in the opening, just the BGM. Plus, SCI games until QFG2 didn't have Sound Blaster driver, only Adlib at most. And although QFG2 did have SB driver, it was a custom made so that it can playback digital samples in QFG2. And even this driver is unique and SCI 2 (SCI-VGA) are using entirely different SB driver.
Anyway, I did have tried copying versions of SB driver in SQ3 and setting it into that driver. The result was blank screen as if the program cannot run at all. This also includes the custom SB driver created much later on.
CMIIW, but I think the digital sample was meant to be played on MT32, because it did came out when using real (or emulated) MT32.
I have played each Sierra games at least ten times up till today. It would be really funny if I didn't notice this digital sample back then.

And @m_kiewitz should calm down too. You guys already did a great job supporting this. Don't get roused up easily, keep your head cool. :)
There one of your comment that makes me wonders:

"The backgrounds are actually almost 256 colors. We do not invent those colors. The colors are there. Sierra had a hardware limitation and wanted to use more colors. They managed to do this by using dithering. If there were VGA adapters back then, they would have shown the full colors. "

Now that current specs doesn't have that limitation, and if you guys can; Could you show me this example? Or do you guys preferring to this undithering version again?
[/u]
Last edited by BobbinT on Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
envisaged0ne
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:17 am
Location: United States

Post by envisaged0ne » Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:00 am

Since it seems to be an attack on MusicallyInspired, saying he's the only one that wants this change, I 2nd his opinion. And I know not everyone is saying it's all him, but there have been a few posts (specifically by one dev) that seems to keep acting like he's alone in his wishes. Yes, I think the undithered look is kinda kewl. And I'll replay a few games with it just to see what it looks like. But, I don't think it should be enabled by default. As mentioned many times by several people, I think it should be an option you can enable/disable through the GUI and have it disabled by default. I guess I'm kinda confused why this is so highly debated. I kinda feel it's common sense. I mean, no matter how much I might absolutely love an enhancement feature, I don't think it should be the default. I don't think I've ever seen a request so highly debated that seemed like a no brainer.

User avatar
m_kiewitz
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:09 am
Location: Daventry

Post by m_kiewitz » Fri Nov 05, 2010 8:48 am

clone2727 wrote:
m_kiewitz wrote:So you are assuming that your opinion matters more than the one from users that really like it. Note: You already had and have the option. You are just trying religiously to get it disabled on default.
Well, you're trying to put your opinion on everyone.
First of all, undithering on default was decided by ALL the sci developers. it wasn't me alone or at all.

I have a problem with just changing the default, because a few people complain. There should be a standard, how ScummVM behaves as a whole. Otherwise it also doesn't make sense to the user. And if we just change it immediately without properly discussing it, we would also have to change it immediately back as soon as another user complains.
m_kiewitz wrote:Actually you try to force your taste/opinion upon everyone else.
Again, you're forcing your taste/opinion on everyone else.
The team as a whole decided, not me alone. So in fact the team would force their taste/opinion on everyone else. Which is not really true, because there is an option. No one is forced to use any specific music output either, although there is also a default.
m_kiewitz wrote:So you drew those backgrounds? Otherwise you don't know what the artists actually did and thought. The artists definitely wanted to use MORE COLORS. In fact Roberta Williams even wanted more colors on Apple II and Ken Williams went for it. The hardware just wasn't capable of doing so. Dithering was a workaround, not a stylistic tool. I would really happily talk to some Sierra artists about it. If they (or one of the game creators) said, they didn't like it, I would immediately remove it and probably even throw the undithering code away.
Did you talk to the artists? Can I see where they wanted to use the undithered colors?
The more colors argument is a fact. It's written in the LSL book. Other than that - like i said - I would actually like to talk to them and depending on their reaction remove it asap.

Maybe I could just try to ask Roberta Williams about it. If she likes it - fine. If she doesn't like it, I would actually even remove the whole undither code completely without even have an option anymore. Although I guess, if she would like it, some people would still complain.
m_kiewitz wrote:It's easy. We are a team of developers. We actually discussed, before enabling undithered on default. So it would seem logical, that we would also discuss the issue, before disabling it. That's called teamwork.
The only thing I see is this where I don't see any consensus. However, Eugene did say:
[/quote]

First of all, I was talking about the internal discussion of all the sci developers on IRC. I was NOT talking about any -devel conversation.

Secondly
sev wrote:Yeah, leave it and activate through rendering options.
the quote above that was
- Disable dithering by default, and offer an option to nable it, for purists

So I guess sev actually also wanted undithering to be default. I'm not sure though, because the sentence is a bit confusing. At least the "Yeah" means "yeah, disable dithering by default", which would mean enable undithering as default.

And finally it's also interesting that I MYSELF didn't write one word about the thing at all on -devel. Which actually means I didn't have a strong opinion on it. However, I do have a strong opinion about just changing the default on one call and it also doesn't make sense to have all sorts of enhancements everywhere, but then disable one of those, because some people don't like it ALTHOUGH it's possible to disable it.
m_kiewitz wrote:Anyway, what did you do for SCI support? Did you write one line of code?
Now what the hell is this supposed to mean? This is not an argument, this is the Chewbacca defense.
It makes sense in the way, that he is actually acting as if he paid the sci team and he would be the one to decide everything. That he matters more than the people that actually did all the work. The people that did the work should at least have a word about changes and also they should be the ones allowed to discuss any issue internally first instead of just granting everyone a wish.

I didn't change the default at that time just because I wanted it that way. I properly asked everyone from the sci team. For the -devel posting, you see I didn't even write that. Anyway the same is true for the default gfx and sound engines. No one decided that all by himself, it was decided as team.
m_kiewitz wrote:The same way as speaking for sierra artists without ever having talked to them?
Have you? Transcripts, please.
I didn't say that I was talking in behalf of the artists nor any sierra fans. Hell, I'm not even saying that I'm talking in behalf of the sci team.

User avatar
ScottT
ScummVM Developer
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:08 pm
Location: .au

Post by ScottT » Fri Nov 05, 2010 10:03 am

m_kiewitz wrote:I have a problem with just changing the default, because a few people complain.
*cough*

No double standards please. I seem to recall it being argued that the console only had a few complaints too, and technically the current default is show console.
First of all, I was talking about the internal discussion of all the sci developers on IRC. I was NOT talking about any -devel conversation.
I'd suggest there was a bit of confustion here. 'We' sounds like the ScummVM team, which is generally how it is used. That is actually how I initially read it as well - only to then question it with 'we did?'.

Post Reply