Re: Updated Manual?
In Game Manual:
It would be nice to have. Better if the devs programmed it to call an external file which could be added to by the dom community.
But how would adding the overhead to the game be different than making your own clickable link to Edi's Database or to Lch's wiki? I have the same reaction when people want builtin options for screen capture or backups or all of the other things that can be done with 3rd party options. It doesnt need to be in the game, limiting our choices and adding massive overhead just for people who want it in the menu so they can find it easier
Spell Descriptions:
There is a program that will update spell descripts. And the source code is available. Its fairly easy to update it. You can also use it to change the tips that appear and other text. BUT it modifies the executable of the game itself. Thats one reason Ive been leary of linking to it on my dom3 site. It just seemed like a direction I didnt feel right in supporting.
Mod Documentation:
I think this tends to get back into the territory that the manual did. Developers should not do the documentation. By the time they get it to work, they are too deep to think and question and answer like a newbie who is looking at it for the first time. Developers of games feel their game is "intuitive".
And developers of mods feel that mods are self-explanatory. Anyone who has extensively worked with mod commands (or map commands, or command line switches) tends to look at those and feel its clear as a bell. No further explanation is needed than the code itself. In every case (as the manual itself exemplifies) documentation is best done by a 3rd party looking at it from scratch and keeping good notes on what did and didnt need explanation. I dont knock anyones efforts to document their own. I just feel it can usually be done better if done by new eyes.
|
Threaded Mode