Neverwinter Dark Ages - A Reimaging of Project Q

So, I’ve been thinking for awhile about what it would take to make Project Q compatible with the latest builds of the EE. But my musings have left me with a few questions and concerns about doing so.

Firstly, would such a project, knowing it probably wouldn’t be backwards compatible with previous versions of Q even be a worthwhile endeavor?

The compatibility issue simply stems from the fact that, given the content added to NWN EE, there is now a LOT of duplicated content in Q that I’d be inclined to strip out.

Secondly, what should a new version of Q look like?

I’ve gone back through a lot of notes from Q’s inception and, others may correct me if I’m wrong, but the original purpose of Q was to provide high quality content that was unique in nature and to also upgrade vanilla assets.

That said, I’m of the inclination that any new iteration of Project Q should follow that mandate - no rips from other games, no absorption of other projects other people have already done, etc.

Lastly, should this new iteration of Project Q be CEP compatible?

Simply put, CEP is simply too big and too widely used to ignore, and it was a gross error on the part of the original Project Q team to forego compatibility with CEP. Therefore, I’m inclined to view any new iteration of Project Q as having to be CEP compatible.

I have reserved space in various 2da files beneath space reserved by Beamdog/Ossian and CEP. This will, if CEP is at some point revived and updated (unlikely given current views), ensure that the content in Dark Ages does not conflict with Beamdog or CEP.

6 Likes

Just did a quick run through the creatures in CEP v2.65 and it looks like I can omit some 125+ creatures from Q which were added to CEP.

Based on these findings, I’m sure the same can be said for placeables.

…and that’s just in Qv1.0

2 Likes

Well, after talking with the fella working on CEP v3 I’ve decided to make Q EE v4 an overriding pack that can sit on top of CEP or beneath CEP - however Builders want to place it.

So for Qv1.0 creatures, that cuts them down to 5 new ones - mounted goblin, ogres (x3), and gobo chief C. Keeping those as they all match the design/textures of Q vanilla overriding appearances. That doesn’t count the several dozen overriding appearances.

2 Likes

I agree with you, and am happy to see you back on Q. An override that is compatible with CEP would be just perfect!

1 Like

Working alpha - https://neverwintervault.org/project/nwnee/hakpak/combined/neverwinter-dark-ages

Being its an alpha, don’t expect a lot - well, maybe a lot of little 2da issues :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

Who’s working on a CEP 3? That is, one beyond the 2.65?

@DM_Wise that person will be making an announcement very soon.

I’ve begun posting information on the Project Q EE v4.xx Wiki so people so inclined can see where this project is headed.

1 Like

So, I’m thinking I should get away from the Project Q name and associated branding to avoid any inherent confusion that may arise as this project is quite different from earlier versions. So lets have a naming contest! Submit ideas here, and I’ll pick one.

EDIT - Too late, got a name off Discord from a good friend - “Dark Ages”. Fitting, as the overall aesthetic of Project Q has always been the Dark Age imo.

1 Like

Sadly, after much discussion on Discord, the CEP3 Project is officially dead. Looks like CEP will remain in limbo as that seems to be what the greater Community - on Discord - wants. Thus, I’m amending the initial post to reflect these changes.

This, to me, is a shame for a number of reasons:

  1. The person doing CEP3 was excited to be doing something with NWN content for the community. If some in the community don’t want CEP3, they don’t have to download or use it. Those who do, can. But, not anymore.
  2. The people on the Discord are by and large CC creators, and so they harbor a disdain (if not outright hatred) for almost EVERYTHING that’s come before now, with some exceptions for specific (really good) content. But, they are vastly outnumbered by players who are not and never will be on Discord, have not and never will create a simple crate or anything else, and who want to play a NWN module without having to download and place .hak files for each one. There is the promise of NWsync for SP, and that will be an incredible step forward for NWN players, and builders. But, it’s not here right now. CEP is.
  3. CEP as it exists right now has problems. I’m not speaking about the underlying philosophy of a compilation like CEP; I’m speaking about the content. Some of it is really bad, and better models already exist in the community that could be switched out for the older ones without disturbing anything. Some of it is broken, and could be fixed without disturbing anything. Probably none of it takes advantage of the new texturing available with EE, and those could be added to great effect to existing content. Finally, there are many great pieces of content that were released to little fanfare before EE was announced, and has languished on the Vault and elsewhere. Inclusion in CEP3 would have brought this work to public attention.
  4. CEP as it is is broken, due to updates to EE .2da fies, and to the addition of great new content into the base game. Even if many builders and CC creators on Discord don’t like CEP, or hate it, there are hundreds of modules that USE it. Fixes, improvements, and sensible additions could have brought pleasure to a great deal of players of the game. But instead, old animosity seems to have got its way.
    Too bad.

-JFK

edit: I sound too presumptive when describing the Discord crowd as hating all the old stuff. I don’t know that’s true, and it may well not be, and anyway they’re all individuals with separate likes and dislikes.
jfk

4 Likes

Wasn’t my call. I was just providing technical support to Winternite.

1 Like

Yes, I agree, I think it’s ashame as well. In essence, I have already done my own fixes of cep2.65 for my project, merged the 2da’s with EE, corrected a lot of creature issues, and even added feats for all of the CEP weapons. But as JFK alluded to, there is still much more that needs addressing. I don’t necessarily need new content (CEP 2.65 is bloated as is), but some of it could use some facelifting and updates, new textures, lighting, etc.

One more thing: the decision to do or not to do should not be based on any mob voice on Discord. It should be based on need, value, and a passion to see it through. If you are checking all these boxes, then you need look no where else for answer. “If you build it, they will come…”

4 Likes

I don’t know who this Discord people you speak of is, but they sound like a terrible bunch. I’m thinking they were what was toxic about the community in days past, moving to a new platform, since I haven’t seen any dissent here for a loooong time. As for Q, you have been the project for quite a while, Paul. If you’re moving away from it in name, that’s certainly your call, but to me you’re Project Q.

Personal opinion - I’m very disappointed that anyone sees Discord as a decision-making body for the community.

I wrote privately to the author, recommending the much more inclusive and transparent approach to CEP adopted by The Amethyst Dragon, but it seems that has been nipped in the bud.

I try to avoid chat rooms myself, as there is a lot of noise and no audit trail (unless you try very hard) - a classic political environment where the last man standing makes the rules but isn’t open to public scrutiny. Goodness knows the community had enough of that back in the day!

All credit to Pstemarie for the more open approach to Dark Ages.

3 Likes

The Discord Community isn’t a bad bunch. They - well at least the people on yesterday talking with Winternite - just seem to lean towards a more negative opinion of CEP than what I’ve seen here. That said, they certainly entitled to voice their opinion and have that opinion heard. Maybe Winternite will see these comments here and reconsider, maybe not.

So enough about CEP, lets get back on Topic…

I’ve generated a good listing of content that will be included in Dark Ages and have posted a listing on the wiki under Neverwinter Dark Ages: Content - for lack of a better page name. As you’ll see if you click that link, maybe I should call it “Project Six” :smiley:

When I look through the content in Project Q, I’m inclined to including only content by certain authors and purging the rest. I want to assure you authors whose content is on the chopping block, I’m not saying the content you made isn’t good, it’s merely that its aesthetics don’t entirely match the content I’m keeping for Dark Ages or that its simply been beaten to death - e.g. Ben Harrison’s candles from his alchemy/arcane set. Really, with the Ossian candles added in vanilla, how many do we need?

So who are these authors whose aesthetics are better coordinated? Sixesthrice, Diademus, Lord of Worms, and myself with a generous helping of content by Morikahn and Tiberius Morguhn. Among the content retained, reskinned, etc., these are the authors that will stand out the most.

2 Likes

Hello, thanks for the interest, and not to derail your thread Pste, but regarding CEP:

I’ve already done a lot of things for a CEP3 update (new assets, fixed assets)

CEP is a mess as people pointed out in the Discord, there was talk of starting from square one, since CEP does indeed have a lot of bad things in it too.

I am unsure where I will go from here, either continue the CEP 3 as planned or work on other projects. Current iteration of CEP3 probably already has enough added and new things for a launch.

4 Likes

@Winternite no worries, my friend.

So, I’ve been working on tailmodel.2da and am posed with dilemma - aside from 1.69 creature scaling, is their any reason to keep all these non-mount critters in tailmodel.2da? I’m thinking with the new transform options available through scripting, it’d probably be safe for me to kill em. Thoughts?

One simple question. When looking for stuff to add to the new version of CEP, did you ask those creators who are still around (who’s stuff you’ve added) would mind having their stuff added? It’s just a matter of courtesy.

TR

Maybe we should start a new thread for CEP upgrade discussion and leave this one for Dark Ages?

3 Likes

@TR To some extent, but a lot of the things are also flagged as open source, or a note that they want credit for their work.

@Pstemarie
Yeah, will just drop this last reply and not derail your thread :slight_smile:

1 Like