OpenTTD 1.1.0-beta1

[Lordmwa]

I have just discoved this newgrf thing and was wondering wether it could be changed to allow changes in the scenrio editor. I downloaded a scenrio but the GRFs it was made with are useless but i cannot change them either when playing or in the scenario editior

[Alberth]

You'd get the same kind of problems as with normal save games, unfortunately.

[Zuu]

Scenarios are stored the same way as usual games. All these problems that can occur in a regular game can occur in a scenario when you change NewGRFs. Thus all the same technical problems exist with changing NewGRFs in scenarios.

For more information find older posts about the same subject.

[Lordmwa]

You'd get the same kind of problems as with normal save games, unfortunately.

I know there are these problems and i totally accept why you have done this but it makes old scenarios made with old GRF's eiter unuasable or no longer intersting for people - surely there must be some way of sorting this?

[Yexo]

I know there are these problems and i totally accept why you have done this but it makes old scenarios made with old GRF's eiter unuasable or no longer intersting for people - surely there must be some way of sorting this?

Is it so hard to even read the previous page in this very same topic?

[Lordmwa]

I know there are these problems and i totally accept why you have done this but it makes old scenarios made with old GRF's eiter unuasable or no longer intersting for people - surely there must be some way of sorting this?

Is it so hard to even read the previous page in this very same topic?

What are you refering to here? this:?

It has been explained multiple times now why it has been changed, just search around the forums a little bit: Changing newgrfs in-game can result in crashes or any kind of other glitches. Since a lot of people didn't read the warning and still modified newgrfs in game and after that reported issues with their game or even crashes, it's been disabled.
Those people developing NewGRFs or really needing the behavior for testing will find out how to enable it again.

I have read through the whole topic before my first post and again before this one. I simply ask is there not a way that the problem can be resolved

I am in awe of the work you guys do, it is amazing, but for the first time i feel that you are removing a feature that is useful with no alternative. I accept that people can be intesely annoying by reporting problems that they have caused having been warned but i really dont see just removing this as the best possible soloution unless there is no way around it. (What i am asking about....)

I am sorry if i have offended or annoyed

[Yexo]

Yes, there is indeed a way around it.

Those people developing NewGRFs or really needing the behavior for testing will find out how to enable it again.

It's been posted on the forums multiple times already how to do it. Having to invest a little bit of time searching for how to enable it again won't hurt anybody.

[Lordmwa]

Yes, there is indeed a way around it.

Those people developing NewGRFs or really needing the behavior for testing will find out how to enable it again.

It's been posted on the forums multiple times already how to do it. Having to invest a little bit of time searching for how to enable it again won't hurt anybody.

I appologise - i read into that, that there was a way that it would be released to them and them only. I shall look

Thank you

[planetmaker]

Yes, there is indeed a way around it.

Those people developing NewGRFs or really needing the behavior for testing will find out how to enable it again.

It's been posted on the forums multiple times already how to do it. Having to invest a little bit of time searching for how to enable it again won't hurt anybody.

I appologise - i read into that, that there was a way that it would be released to them and them only. I shall look

Thank you

It's an open-source game. So even if anyone would - how could a secret be hidden?

[Roujin]

Adding new ones can disable other ones, as such "adding" can be considered "removing" another NewGRF and as a result adding new ones is and will remain disallowed as well.

If this is the only case where an added newgrf can cause problems, wouldn't it be possible to allow adding newgrfs which do not disable any of the existing ones?

[planetmaker]

Adding new ones can disable other ones, as such "adding" can be considered "removing" another NewGRF and as a result adding new ones is and will remain disallowed as well.

If this is the only case where an added newgrf can cause problems, wouldn't it be possible to allow adding newgrfs which do not disable any of the existing ones?

No, it's not, by a long shot. E.g. I could add TTRS to a game and FIRS would disable itself in response - depending on the parameters possibly. The disabling is in this case done by the newgrfs themselves. Isses don't get easier as every newgrf can read the parameters of every other newgrf. There simply is no single save change of existing newgrfs, not even changing a parameter of an existing one.

Also it need not necessarily be to disable a newgrf. It's sufficient if it afterwards defines crucial parts differently than it did before. And as the more advanced newgrfs do exactly that: check other newgrfs and possibly their parameter in order to find the best and most compatible settings, the implications cannot be checked on a generic or abstract level.

[mrMann]

If this is the case, there was a clear warning before, I don't get why it needed disabling completely.

[Rubidium]

If this is the case, there was a clear warning before, I don't get why it needed disabling completely.

Because in a significant number of cases the reply to why they ignored that warning was "what warning?"?