Index | FAQ | Search | Memberlist | Usergroups | Profile | Log in to check your private messages | Log in | Register

Game Engine = non-linear media player; too hard Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3

| Inside3d Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion

View previous topic :: View next topic
Author | Message
--- | ---
mh Joined: 12 Jan 2008 Posts: 910 |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:16 am Post subject: |

Baker wrote:
The strongest benefit of open source is that it tends to reduce fighting in a team. If a resource isn't exclusive, the direction that it takes isn't an "end of the world" situation to most of the participants who don't get everything they want.

And I'd say probably the worst thing about open source is that it's a great enabler of fragmentation in a codebase. When anyone can grab a copy of the code and go off and do their own thing with it, my experience here (specifically in the context of Q1) is that a lot of people will.
For a real project like Firefox or whatever, at least there's a controlling body who defines what the main codebase is, and what changes are accepted into it. This didn't happen with Q1, although we did get a lot of engines based on QMB or TomazQuake back in the day, so at least something of a consistency did emerge, despite itself.
I think the current situation with fewer active projects and 3 or 4 real major engines (I don't count my own here, I'm a self-confessed accepted-it-a-long-time-ago wildcard/maverick with these things) is quite a bit healthier than things were 5 years ago.
But I'd still love to see a few people getting together and building a new Q1 "common codebase". Starting with the BJP engine (as mappers love the extended limits) but hammering it into a more suitable general purpose engine, adding basic things that should be expected in any modern port, and extending that with all the optional eye-candy anyone might want.
In other words, the first thing that should have been done after the source was released...
_________________
DirectQ Engine - New release 1.8.666a, 9th August 2010
MHQuake Blog (General)
Direct3D 8 Quake Engines

Back to top |

Baker Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 1538 |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:01 am Post subject: |

mh wrote:
And I'd say probably the worst thing about open source is that it's a great enabler of fragmentation in a codebase. When anyone can grab a copy of the code and go off and do their own thing with it, my experience here (specifically in the context of Q1) is that a lot of people will.

Source code released; people want to play, think and act upon their ideas. No harm done.
And a lot of good.
I find reading through the QIP source code a wonderful experience.
And comparing DarkPlaces versions to one another. LordHavoc had some truly brilliant ideas even in the early days.
And watching these ideas unfold or some troublesome issue vanish after 5 attempts in prior versions gives me a smile I can relate to.

Quote:
I think the current situation with fewer active projects and 3 or 4 real major engines (I don't count my own here, I'm a self-confessed accepted-it-a-long-time-ago wildcard/maverick with these things) is quite a bit healthier than things were 5 years ago.

After the excitement fades, only the serious remain ...
A very beneficial environment, really. There aren't inexperienced people jumping in making demands or that need to be educated in lengthy discussions.
(Baker from 2006 comes to mind, sheesh. What a pain in the ass I was ... now hopefully I can repay the debt somehow ...)

Quote:
Starting with the BJP engine (as mappers love the extended limits) but hammering it into a more suitable general purpose engine, adding basic things that should be expected in any modern port, and extending that with all the optional eye-candy anyone might want.

A contrarian view, but why aguirRe's engine? I'll explain ...
The main feature that aguirRe Quake has for an average player is the ability to play enormous maps.
I like enormous maps (Warpspasm) but there are maybe 15 of them and not all of them are very good. Warpspasm could have been split up a little and would have provided about the same experience.
The ZQuake engine is a Quakeworld engine with nearly 100% NetQuake compatibility, so it can be used for cooperative play or multiplayer. Source link as it is NOT easy to locate: http://zquake.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/zquake/trunk/zquake-c/ (there is also a newer C++ version in another folder that appears to have the basics of Quake 3 map support in it ...)
From Tonik:

Quote:
ZQuake's execution of progs.dat is rock solid as long as you don't abuse WriteByte() and other messaging functions: 1. WriteByte() and other Write() functions don't support MSG_ONE and MSG_INIT as parameters. What this means in practice is that bot chat and pickup messages don't work in some bizarre versions of Frogbot. This won't affect you if you stick by all the rules and norms; all other mods I tested worked fine.
2. MSG_BROADCAST and MSG_MULTICAST messages (used for SVC_TEMPENTITY - explosions, gunshots, etc) are implemented as reliable messages (instead of datagrams) for simplicity, which means they will use a little bit more bandwidth than they should. If you expect to have modem clients, might be a good idea to use FTE instead.
3. Custom physics. I hate NQ physics, so ZQuake uses its own instead and discards any velocity changes made by progs.dat in PlayerPostThink() smile

I personally view Quakeworld bunnyhopping as liability in single player (in multiplayer is just a player preference) because it can be used to break triggers or ruin the design of the map. It only takes a small adjustment in the engine to eliminate #3 or turn it into a cvar.
Playing ZQuake in single player is astonishing NetQuake like and the compatibility is incredible in my experience.
Unlike a lot of other engines, it keeps everything very basic and there aren't any gadgets to remove, it appears to be multiplatform (Linux, OSX) and does not use anything except OpenGL 1.2 so it has no video card perils. Plus it appears to have total separation of the GL and software rendering code.
Spirit has extensive experience using it and Spirit is very picky about his single player and likes ZQuake.
At least this is my take. Opinions vary on the best approaches.
Had an engine like this existed 10 years ago, I can only imagine ... !

Back to top |

mh Joined: 12 Jan 2008 Posts: 910 |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:53 am Post subject: |

I dunno man, it seemed like a nice idea until we got to (3). OK, so physics is something that the MP folks are more particular about, but it's still a gameplay change in SP, however desirable it may be. Ummm - not to convinced about the "don't abuse WriteByte" thing either; abuse of builtins is a long-standing and proud QC tradition, and I'll happily bet any sum of cash you care to mention that at some stage a modder will get upset.
At the same time, the really big advantage I can see is a single unified engine for NQ and QW use (add that to the list of "things that should have been done and documented ages ago so that every engine could have them"). Plus we already have one satisfied customer, like you say.
_________________
DirectQ Engine - New release 1.8.666a, 9th August 2010
MHQuake Blog (General)
Direct3D 8 Quake Engines

Back to top |

reckless Joined: 24 Jan 2008 Posts: 390 Location: inside tha debugger |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 2:36 am Post subject: |

im a bit like mh on this sometimes an engine pops out with features i had as an idea and wanted to test and if i found it satisfactory i shared the code so anyone who might find it usefull could have a go at it examples like early md3 support for quake alltho the base work was done by the guy behind the Qure engine i refined it enough to call it my own work in the end "newer got multimodels working tho hehe"
as for doing my own port from botton up i would if i actually had the
required code knowledge but i dont, i learned what little i can reading tutorials asking questions on qsg and a few times teaming up to squash a bug.
actually pretty funny when i first showed up on the qsg boards way way back it wasnt with the intent of learning how to code but because i needed help setting up a quake server the guys back then kinda shuffled me in to experimenting with stuff i didnt have the wildest idea about and after some trial error i got things working and the intterrest came shortly after

Back to top |

Spirit Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 476 |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:13 am Post subject: |

goldenboy wrote:
The same is possible with Quake mods and even maps. Nothing prohibits a map from growing and becoming more interesting or functional. There is zero problem with people playing "beta" maps, which are in progress, and just downloading an update when the mapper releases one, and which may allow them to see a new area. There is nothing "cheap" or "wrong" about this.

There is something VERY wrong about this. It reduces the map (mods are different, I guess it works there) to its plain mechanics, ruining any sense for surprise and other such feelings.
Imagine seeing movies that way, first the ultra sucky version, then 10 more very bad versions, then the first rather good one but you already know the gardener was the murderer. Or imagine reading the outline of a thrilling book's plot several times before you can read the finished book. Software is something very different from entertainment.

Baker wrote:
Spirit has extensive experience using it and Spirit is very picky about his single player and likes ZQuake.

Yes, but for online Coop only.
_________________
Quake Maps

Back to top |

FrikaC Site Admin Joined: 08 Oct 2004 Posts: 947 |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:01 pm Post subject: |

mh wrote:
I dunno man, it seemed like a nice idea until we got to (3).

Half the mods I wrote were broken by 1, everything else by 3. I now know ZQuake just ain't for me.

Back to top |

Spike Joined: 05 Nov 2004 Posts: 944 Location: UK |

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: |

FrikaC wrote:
Half the mods I wrote were broken by 1, everything else by 3.

I spent a lot of time trying to get your mods to work in FTE. Grr!
And very funky mods they are, too!
_________________
What's a signature?

Back to top |

r00k Joined: 13 Nov 2004 Posts: 483 |

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:12 am Post subject: |

Uniformity good, conformity bad. Attempting to unify the meager community also destroys the niche that each variant has ascertained by it's own uniqueness To quote Gordon Ramsey, " A good restaurant does one thing VERY well. A bad restaurant does too many things, badly."

Back to top |

Display posts from previous:

| Inside3d Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion | All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2004 phpBB Group