TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 7 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217222732 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 803

Thread: openDarkEngine

  1. #151
    ZylonBane
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: ZylonBane
    Quote Originally Posted by Aja
    Why use them at all? Wouldn't you want dynamic lighting in Thief 2 levels?
    Processing power aside, because dynamic lights/shadows look like crap. Precomputed lights can have soft edges and radiosity effects.

  2. #152
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2004
    Location: Back Home
    BUT THEY DON'T MOVE

    why won't they move

  3. #153
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2001
    Location: Tatry Mountains, Poland
    Quote Originally Posted by oDDity
    No one is going to want to make new missions for it with the Dark Mod available
    I wouldn't be so sure...

  4. #154
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2005
    Quote Originally Posted by ZylonBane
    Processing power aside, because dynamic lights/shadows look like crap. Precomputed lights can have soft edges and radiosity effects.
    Stencil shadows, certainly. I heard that for the next id game they would be looking at shadowbuffers, which can provide soft shadows (but not radiosity).

  5. #155
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    It doesn't matter if there's something bigger and better out, Odd. People are still going to make T1 & 2 fanmissions simply because they're the classic standard and are guarenteed to run well on everyone's computer.

  6. #156
    ZylonBane
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: ZylonBane
    Guaranteed to run well... IF you can get it to run at all.

  7. #157
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    He's managed to get the maps to display with the lightmaps. It's a small step, but still a promising one nonetheless.

    What really matters is if he's able to keep his attention on it from here on out. There's at least another year's worth of work to be done before any random FM will be playable in it.

  8. #158
    ZylonBane
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: ZylonBane
    Yeah, wait 'til he gets to--

    Act/React
    Stims/Receptrons
    Conversations
    Scripts
    Qvars
    Frobbing
    AI awareness
    AI mesh animation
    AI pathfinding
    AI efficiency
    AI combat
    Swordplay
    Physics
    Mantling
    Leaning
    Swimming
    Rope arrows
    Audio schemas
    Audio propagation
    Dynamic lights
    Particles
    Cloud decks
    Weather effects

    Y'all will just have to pardon my lack of optimism.

  9. #159
    @ZylonBane - Wow that's an impressive list, but they are arent' really difficult, just require a decent amount of man hours. Some of the ones you listed are trivial (eg. dynamic lights for example - the engine he uses will have a built in class for that, and physics - if the engine doesn't support it, there are stacks of free libraries available that will do the job more than sufficiently)
    They don't have to be reproduced in exactly the same way as the DarkEngine did, which is what would be hard - as long as they produce pretty much the same results then pretty much every FM will work with it.

    @oDDity - the main reasons I see for this project is
    • to replay the existing HUGE amount of FMs and the OMs with much nicer graphics and realtime shadows.
    • And - hopefully co-op play, on any mission you want. Even if DarkMod implements co-op, which you KNOW isn't in the near future, someone would have to re-create Calendras Legacy etc and all the other cool FMs in Doom 3 if I wanted to play them co-op with my brothers.
    • Also the requirements for this openDarkEngine would be much lower than DarkMod.

    Some or all of those reasons may not appeal to you, but they do appeal to me and I'm not alone. So there are the reasons. You dont' have to like them.

    Comparing DarkMod to openDarkEngine is like comparing Doom 3 to Doomsday. Both have their place. You can't play the old Simpsons Doom WAD in Doom 3 on co-op, and certainly not have it run on very low spec computers either.
    Last edited by Domarius; 15th Dec 2005 at 18:20.

  10. #160
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Quote Originally Posted by Domarius
    They (the physics) don't have to be reproduced in exactly the same way as the DarkEngine did, which is what would be hard - as long as they produce pretty much the same results then pretty much every FM will work with it.
    Oh, but they do! I'm not going to accept a physics engine that does not allow to make crate staircases and NPC jumping

    Anyway, maybe some of the code can be leveraged from the Dark Mod. Yes, I think that would really bug some people here

    Some or all of those reasons may not appeal to you, but they do appeal to me and I'm not alone.
    You're *definitely* not alone. If you'd like to help, come over to http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/opde

    Quote Originally Posted by ZylonBane
    Y'all will just have to pardon my lack of optimism.
    Of course. I think you're paid for that I guess in case the openDarkProject ever reaches a state that allows playing the OMs, your conscience will force you to apologize.

  11. #161
    Ah I wasn't clear, let me re-phrase myself;

    They (the features ZylonBane listed) don't have to be reproduced in exactly the same way as the DarkEngine did, which is what would be hard - as long as they produce pretty much the same results then pretty much every FM will work with it.

    As for helping - belive me I'd love to, but I'm dedicated to the DarkMod till its officially released It's definetly more important to me, as much as I am dying to see something like opensourceDarkEngine released - the idea of co-op on some of those old fantastic missions is very cool. You have my moral support though, for what it's worth.

  12. #162
    BANNED
    Registered: Mar 2005
    So they're planning on making all the textures and models in higher resolution as well are they? That's certainly ambitious for coders.
    I don't think the Thief community is big enough to spread over 3 engines.

  13. #163
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Domarius
    @ZylonBane - Wow that's an impressive list, but they are arent' really difficult, just require a decent amount of man hours.
    Which is EXACTLY the crucial point to any open source community project.

    [list][*]to replay the existing HUGE amount of FMs and the OMs with much nicer graphics and realtime shadows.
    Question is, if FMs/OMs will really work if the shadows suddenly are differntly handled. It's not clear from the start wether you can simply plug in dynamic lights and shadows and everything else works as before. Maybe the maps were designed with the knowledge in mind that the light is NOT really dynamic.

    [*]And - hopefully co-op play, on any mission you want. Even if DarkMod implements co-op, which you KNOW isn't in the near future, someone would have to re-create Calendras Legacy etc and all the other cool FMs in Doom 3 if I wanted to play them co-op with my brothers.
    Actually if this project persists, it might be much easier to write a converter for TDM as well.

  14. #164
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2005
    Quote Originally Posted by sparhawk
    Actually if this project persists, it might be much easier to write a converter for TDM as well.
    This would be a much more achievable target in my opinion. Trying to re-implement the entire Dark Engine is a massive amount of work, whereas developing some tools that facilitate conversion of legacy content to a more up-to-date engine (with assistance from the FM authors) would be a lot easier.

  15. #165
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2001
    Quote Originally Posted by sparhawk
    Question is, if FMs/OMs will really work if the shadows suddenly are differntly handled. It's not clear from the start wether you can simply plug in dynamic lights and shadows and everything else works as before. Maybe the maps were designed with the knowledge in mind that the light is NOT really dynamic.
    I'd guess that many improvements would be coded into the engine as it evolves, but that any of these could be turned off (a revert to Dark Engine "defaults") for OMs or current FMs in which the improvements prove troublesome. As you say, dynamic lighting might not simply "plug in" to existing missions and work nicely. But it would be a nice feature to add to the engine nevertheless - new FMs would surely be created to take advantage of this ability (perhaps more the realm of T3ed and TDM) and existing FMs could doubtless be tweaked. Consider the case of an emulator - not all of the supported features need be used in playing any given game; instead, the inclusion of said features permit the playing of other games (specifically written/tweaked to take advantage of..). We'd just be dealing with the original system (Dark Engine in T1/2), the emulator (OpenDarkEngine), and game modules (OMs, existing FMs, future FMs).

  16. #166
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    I think the best reason for this, as someone said, would be to "future-proof" Thief 1/Thief 2 content. One day operating systems probably won't run Dark engine games anymore, and converting them to the Dark Mod would likely make them look worse unless the missions were remade completely. Having an open source Dark engine would hopefully overcome this. Of course, we might have emulators like DOSBox that could let you play the original anyway.

  17. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by sparhawk
    Which is EXACTLY the crucial point to any open source community project.
    Yes it is - what are you trying to say?

    A map converter for TDM sounds good - but it would rule out the whole low-spec thing, and there would have to be some standard - a sword guard in T2 equals a grunt guard in TDM, etc. and having high poly AI walk around in low poly maps would look wierd. So we'd want to allow it to use the original assets... and then we're backpeddling to the openDarkEngine idea.

  18. #168
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2002
    Location: Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by Domarius
    Yes it is - what are you trying to say?
    Saying 'JUST requires a decent amount of man hours' seems to me quite a offhand remark. As if this were one of the less important points, while in fact it is the major point IMO.

  19. #169
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2005
    Location: The limbo region of hell
    I just read through this thread, and I don't really have any interest in entering the debate, but I did notice something that doesn't seem to make sense.

    If I understand correctly, one of the points being made is that this would be to preserve playability of the OMs and FMs on future operating systems? Another thing being discussed(?) is maintaining compatibility with lower spec systems? Why?

    Anyone here try to install WindowsXP on a P600? Lag, lag, crawl. Why does compatibility with low end systems matter?

    Lower end systems can already play the OMs and FMs with the original engines, and would not be able to support newer OSs anyway...

  20. #170
    Member
    Registered: Feb 2002
    Location: Go is to the fountain.
    Great, version 0.0.2 got rid of the standards error. Now I only get a linker error:
    Code:
    D:\DOCUME~1\MORTAL~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\cc6fcaaa.o(.text+0x2c00) In function `main':
    [Linker error] undefined reference to `_imp___ZN3irr12createDeviceENS_5video13E_DRIVER_TYPEERKNS_4core11dimension2dIiEEjbbbPNS_14IEventReceiverEPKc'
    I suspect it has something to do with my OS (WinXP SP2) and the way it handles oGL and/or them video drivers.


    Any suggestions other than switching to Linux? I never got the internets to work in Mandrake.

  21. #171
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Looks like the linker can not find the Irrlicht library.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mortal Monkey
    Any suggestions other than switching to Linux? I never got the internets to work in Mandrake.
    We're currently working on a setup that allows compiling on both, windoze and Unix. If you're interested in compiling the latest sources yourself, please come over to the sourceforge site (http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/opde), fetch the latest CVS sources and ask microwave_ove for his windoze Mafefile (currently he's the only one who compiles on windoze).

  22. #172
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2002
    Location: Edmonton
    Wait, are you guys debugging this for him?

  23. #173
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Sure. Any problem with that?

  24. #174
    Member
    Registered: Jul 2002
    Location: Edmonton
    Not at all, I think that's great that he's getting support.

    I, not being a programmer, really don't understand the thread and I wasn't sure if you guys were helping out with this project, or if your posts were about something else.

  25. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by sparhawk
    Saying 'JUST requires a decent amount of man hours' seems to me quite a offhand remark. As if this were one of the less important points, while in fact it is the major point IMO.
    I worded it that way in response to ZBs argument - which was that it would be nigh impossible to acheive because of technical complexity - whereas I'm saying that's not true, it'll just take time, only the amount expected if you were making your own game that contained all those things - obviously its not really a job for a single person to complete in a reasonable amount of time, but it is not any different than a project like the DarkMod in that respect.


    Quote Originally Posted by kamyk
    Anyone here try to install WindowsXP on a P600? Lag, lag, crawl.
    Well I don't know what shit computer you were using, but I upgraded my P-450 from Win98 to WinXP, and I'm not going back. It boots faster, blue screen of death is just a long forgotted bad dream, performance doesn't decay over time without a re-boot, no GUI glitches, etc.
    Lower end systems can already play the OMs and FMs with the original engines, and would not be able to support newer OSs anyway...
    But not with dynamic lighting etc. they can't. Look at our options - original Thief, or the DarkMod. DarkMod looks awesome but my compter won't really run it playably. There is a middleground - my computer can run games with dynamic lighting and shader effects at a very playable speed. openDarkEngine would be a makeover for the old engine that's not quite as demanding as Doom 3.

Page 7 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111217222732 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •