-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
Revert vehicle cargo sizes to sane values #81191
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Revert vehicle cargo sizes to sane values #81191
Conversation
IF this only affects storage of items, I have no objections: it all seems reasonable. However: You'll probably hear complaints about not being able to store anything in aisles. Sure, in real life you can transport some stuff there if packaged suitably, especially if secured, but on the other hand tying an industrial size freezer on top of you front left wheel in not really a feasible option, so you lose at one end and get some at the other. |
That's just the thing, you can't secure anything in aisles. I could just have projectile |
A car that is notable for having almost no storage space will have very little storage space. This should not come as a surprise to you. If you want more storage space then find a big 4-door with a trunk, or install cargo spaces. In the same vein a motorcycle will no longer have a magical person's worth of storage space (seriously where would you put anything??????????) just because it has a seat. Please refrain from such meaningless comments. |
Also please understand the amount of storage space for a vehicle tile is not "fill it to the roof" it is "how much volume of items you can add as normal cargo". |
Hatchback in reality have a trunk to store item
Dont call my opinion meaningless, pls, when you also make unrealistic changes with no justification, and stop be so aggressively to me
But previously we have this function, when you cant enter the very or full loaded seat or cargo space |
That's why the space still exists even with this PR.
This is not correct, you are always able to enter vehicle tiles regardless of how cramped they are.
Again: You are always able to enter vehicle tiles regardless of how cramped they are. That is how it currently works, and as long as that is the case the cargo volumes need to go back down to representing how much you can actually store there. |
It is true there was a period where a truly awful attempt to represent total volume for both cargo and people was tried out. That was horrible, which presumably is why a more sane implementation is used now. |
"can a human body fit" and "can arbitrary items with a total volume equal to a human body fit" are not the same question. A car seat is literally designed to hold a human body, it's not designed to hold an arbitrary volume of miscellaneous stuff without it going all over the place. Also refer to my earlier post, yes we do not support filling the full volume of the storage area, to do so we would need to adjust the system to also reflect the down sides of doing that. |
If the aim of this change is to enhance realism, then the new values should be tested against a few familiar and realistic scenarios, like throwing a backpack into the passenger seat of a car, or putting a suitcase in the back seat. If everyday actions like this aren't possible with the new values then realism hasn't been served. |
It's not. |
Well... nice of you to admit it. I still think whatever the point of the change actually is, these realism concerns should be respected in the solution. |
That is something that would be nice to have in the game, but simply increasing the cargo space of a bunch of vehicle tiles is not a viable solution. Perhaps we will get something like a seat having a smaller cargo capacity plus a single item or being able to install a box on top of the seat to make impassible storage, but any such solution will have to be a separate PR. |
May be in this way limit the number of items in one seat and cargo? If somebody want to solve the problem of unrealistic storing of lots of item in one seat - he should make it realistic as in my example and other examples upper |
Or you can just drop the backpack on the ground. This is a non-issue. |
What am I "admitting" to? I haven't mentioned realism at all. You went off on some tangent about it, but that has nothing to do with this PR. Please read the summary, including the purpose of change. |
The game currently doesn't have any support for any logic where the volume/weight you can store is based on item count. There's support for liquids and rejection of them, minimum and maximum sizes in various dimensions, but the item count restriction support is basically built on "pockets". You'd need some completely new logic to support "a single big thing" while at the same time also accepting a smaller volume of smaller stuff as an alternative. |
If you got caught inside a vehicle with your huge backpack on then of course you can't just magic it out of the way. That's the point, lol. |
de7ae68
to
a83fec9
Compare
The test is obviously failing since the aisle's cargo size changed. This is something the test basically is intended to catch (to make sure that moving through an aisle is/isn't cramped) but it... no longer makes sense in the context of what we're doing. We turned off the inability to move through vehicle tiles based on size some time ago, and I don't see it coming back on anytime soon. Making it a test-specific object doesn't really help the test do what it's supposed to do. Marking it mayfail is not sufficient, it will continue to produce debugmsg and flag the github CI as failed. Therefore, my approach is to delete the test altogether.
a83fec9
to
4b9be24
Compare
For people persistently arguing in this PR, you are wasting your and our time, you're not bringing up anything new. Ignoring the replies you're getting and the limitations that led to something looking very much like this being the best current compromise isn't going to get you anywhere. If you want to contribute to your concerns being addressed, you can contribute to figuring out a better system for handling this stuff, and that can include things like outlining what things you expect to be able to do in the game that are currently an issue. Some of the things brought up are valid issues, BUT as you have been told already we're explicitly trying to maintain a balance between being too generous and not generous enough here. Some of what is being brought up is a valid concern, but NOT in THIS issue. The only reason I haven't merged this already is some of the tests are currently broken from things completely unrelated to this PR and blocking it. |
Summary
None
Purpose of change
Describe the solution
Revert vehicle size changes from #67986 (???), #70393, and #70184
Also remove the use of a livestock stall as a bed (???????????????) and clean up any CARGO flag additions which are no longer appropriate.
As it stands (and until someone wants to put in even more work) the cargo size does not prevent a player or other character from moving through a tile, so there is no reason for these absurd values to be kept.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Completely reverting the PRs in question
Testing
Additional context