Mod Vs. Hack

What he means is the TSC parser itself is a hack, but it doesn't make a mod into a hack because it doesn't cause notable change. Making it a hack doesn't necessitate restructuring of the logic; for example, if you manipulated the variables of a critter in such a way as for it to act "upside-down" and jump from ceilings, then that would certainly be different than a regular critter and could make a hack. However, if you just make it jump higher then that is a mod because it's still more or less a critter.

 

I think my brain is milk today

Hmm, I could start to see that, then, but I'd still be reluctent to put it as a 'Catch All'...
Unless I'm still not catching it all myself...
You're basically saying it needs to be a much larger change? Like a complete reworking of Cave Story's code to optimize it all could also go unnoticed in, say, gameplay, but would still be considered a hack as well?
Though it'd also be very noticeable if modded, for example... Like Runelancer's mod...

 

Re: I think my brain is milk today

Hmm, I could start to see that, then, but I'd still be reluctent to put it as a 'Catch All'...
Unless I'm still not catching it all myself...
You're basically saying it needs to be a much larger change? Like a complete reworking of Cave Story's code to optimize it all could also go unnoticed in, say, gameplay, but would still be considered a hack as well?
Though it'd also be very noticeable if modded, for example... Like Runelancer's mod...

I'd say a complete rewrite of the code to optimize it would be a hack, but if it was applied to vanilla CS (or if it was the only hack in a mod), then the mod could not be called a hack.

 

But Rectangles aren't Squares

That, I don't get.
Why wouldn't it be considered a hack if placed in a Vanilla copy all by itself?
Squares are Rectangles, right?

 

Re: I think my brain is milk today

That, I don't get.
Why wouldn't it be considered a hack if placed in a Vanilla copy all by itself?
Squares are Rectangles, right?

Because you wouldn't notice it, and apart from someone telling you it was a hack you would never know. This is to define the "noticable" part.

 

And thus we schism

Then I can't really say I'd agree with such a definition...
I'd still see such effort as a hack, myself, by it's lonesome or not.

 

Well you see, if you define it based on technical merit then the only people who can tell if something is a hack or not are the hackers. If it's based on visible functionality then there is a clear difference between a hack and a mod that anyone can see.

 

That does seem counterproductive...

And who are the only ones really interested in setting a definition they're only really interested in using on here...?
I don't see any real reason not to go with the 'technical' one... For us, anyways...
Wouldn't take a lot to explain it to 'non-hackers', either...

 

Well there are other difficulties with a technical definition as well
For example, what would define a "hack"? Would you need a certain amount of code, a certain degree of functionality changed? Does it count if you modify hard-coded values only? What about framerects edits? Personally I would be reluctant to call changing framerects a hack, even though it does require a degree of tedious editing; just not anything that requires "hacking" skills.

 

This argument AGAIN!?
Huh. I was never the most clear on the difference, probably because I don't really care. To me, I guess the difference would be in how well you know the engine, and how well you use that knowledge to modify and augment it. The borderline would probably be in beautiful mods, like a lot of the stuff seriousface did, such as variables, or what I discovered in the tsc parser with being able to use any ascii char as number inputs.

So hack = bending the engine to do what you want, and mod = limiting yourself in order to make the engine happy?

 

Damn reality

Well there are other difficulties with a technical definition as well
For example, what would define a "hack"? Would you need a certain amount of code, a certain degree of functionality changed? Does it count if you modify hard-coded values only? What about framerects edits? Personally I would be reluctant to call changing framerects a hack, even though it does require a degree of tedious editing; just not anything that requires "hacking" skills.

That's exactly what I was aiming for with my earlier comments.
We either can't have a rock-solid definition without a ton of work involved right now with everyone joining in to try and form a common ground thing, or leave a general definition for everyone to use their own judgment with. Which is probably the only way, which would still lead to this in various forms.
Does this suddenly feel pointless to anyone...

That's why I also popped out the 'Real World' definitions in the first place. Dunno if we can have a localized definition without it either being very, very general or everyone's being different.

 

So hack = bending the engine to do what you want, and mod = limiting yourself in order to make the engine happy?

Seems good enough.

 

So hack = bending the engine to do what you want, and mod = limiting yourself in order to make the engine happy?

unless you're GIR in which case hack = bending the engine to do what you want in such a way that anyone can tell what's different and mod = everything else

 

Re: Jenka's Nightmare Revived

Wasn't this already resolved on irc in less than 3 minutes?

 

Wasn't this already resolved on irc in less than 3 minutes?

The issue was that Lunarsoul keeps calling his mod a hack
Anyway I like Lace's definition too...

 

Simple solution: hacks are a subcategory of mods, so just call everything a mod, not a hack, and you're never wrong.

 

Simple solution: hacks are a subcategory of mods, so just call everything a mod, not a hack, and you're never wrong.

See I like this solution.

 

IMO since Cave Story has no official editor, and was never designed to, any and all custom content classifies as a hack. However Cave Editor is of such quality and flexibility, that really anything produced from CE (or for that matter SW *ew*) is a mod. Any changes to the exe beyond the limitations of CE would then be a hack. Plus, a hack is typically utilitarian in purpose and design - such as increasing the resolution of the graphics, or rendering transparency. A mod on the other hand, will add, remove, or change pre-existing content.

At least, that's what I think. Plus if a release includes material that would fit into both categories, then majority entitles.

 

Extreme examples:

Mod: Adding 1 additional critter in First Cave by use of Cave Editor.

Hack: Making doukutsu.exe into a word processor.

My personal definition is:

- if you change the engine, the changes are "hacks".

- the finished product is a "mod", which may or may not use "hacks".

- if a mod is mostly about the "hacks", then referring to the finished product as a "hack" is acceptable.



The issue at hand is Jenka's Nightmare, and I believe the term "mod" to be much more appropriate than "hack", as there's not much hacked stuff (the only hack I can think of is the Spur that goes through walls, and I'm not sure about that).

 

(the only hack I can think of is the Spur that goes through walls, and I'm not sure about that).

This can be done I believe with setting one flag in CE, so not really a hack by my standards. Still well within the realm of engine compliance.