It is currently Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:10 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 4:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:30 am
Posts: 66
chucker wrote:
I don't know about you, but as far as I can tell, that pretty much speaks in favor of my idea, not AdamJohnso's. You're copying the client from Untìl Uru (which is based on Prologue-generation code, and does explicitly not support either expansion pack) into a tPotS environment.

The page doesn't go into detail on why to copy this client, but as far as I can tell, "because it contains networking code missing in tPotS" is one likely conclusion.

Ah. Generally speaking when people say "the client" they refer to that *big* program, you know, the one with the graphics and the avatar and stuff like that in it. UruSetup.exe starts up the client for you. Okay... so the CC UruSetup.exe doesn't have an option to tell the client to go talk to a server, true.

If this is what you meant, I'm sorry. Trust me, AdamJohnso is referring to the other thing, called UruExplorer.exe, and so was I. I somehow did not think you were going to call the setup program "the client" given that all your other commentary about "the client" isn't about UruSetup either. Whatever. I can be the wrong one if you like.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 4:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:25 am
Posts: 2031
Location: Sadly in Germany
a'moaca' wrote:
chucker wrote:
I don't know about you, but as far as I can tell, that pretty much speaks in favor of my idea, not AdamJohnso's. You're copying the client from Untìl Uru (which is based on Prologue-generation code, and does explicitly not support either expansion pack) into a tPotS environment.

The page doesn't go into detail on why to copy this client, but as far as I can tell, "because it contains networking code missing in tPotS" is one likely conclusion.

Ah. Generally speaking when people say "the client" they refer to that *big* program, you know, the one with the graphics and the avatar and stuff like that in it. UruSetup.exe starts up the client for you. Okay... so the CC UruSetup.exe doesn't have an option to tell the client to go talk to a server, true.

If this is what you meant, I'm sorry. Trust me, AdamJohnso is referring to the other thing, called UruExplorer.exe, and so was I. I somehow did not think you were going to call the setup program "the client" given that all your other commentary about "the client" isn't about UruSetup either. Whatever. I can be the wrong one if you like.


Does UruSetup.exe open a server connection?
Does it log in with your credentials?
Does it download data?

As far as I know, the answer to all three of those is yes.

You're blowing this way out of proportion in any case.

My original assertion was:
Quote:
Uru CC had most (if not all) networking code stripped


It appears that was I mistaken, and that much less of the code was actually removed than I had thought.

_________________
Sören Nils 'chucker' Kuklau

(Or something.)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 4:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 5:07 am
Posts: 223
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Based on my experiences, there are currently some physics inconsistencies/oddities that can be seen in the open beta, but these are being worked on.

The old Havok engine was certainly reliable.

They'll get it to the point it is reliable for gameplay...

_________________
"Oh, Rabbit," Pooh said, "is that you?"

"Let's pretend it's not," said Rabbit, "and let's see what happens."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 4:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:30 am
Posts: 66
chucker wrote:
You're blowing this way out of proportion in any case.


It was already out of proportion. I was merely backing up AJ.

Marten wrote:
There may yet be a "core" network support structure that wasn't removed in PotS, but I think it's unfair for you to call chucker "wrong" when he isn't.


chucker wrote:
I don't care to check, but before calling me wrong, you should prove such an assertion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:10 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 1:17 am
Posts: 1697
Location: Spokane, WA
Jinglish wrote:
Based on my experiences, there are currently some physics inconsistencies/oddities that can be seen in the open beta, but these are being worked on.

The old Havok engine was certainly reliable.

They'll get it to the point it is reliable for gameplay...

The Havok engine was also tested for about 3 years to get it tweaked to perfection... PhysX has been a part of the game for about 8 months ;).

That said, while things generally have been harder to move if they're tiny (like rocks or logs), when they do move, the movement seems more realistic than it did in Havok. In Prologue, everything - from rocks to logs to bones to cones - seemed like it was made out of styrofoam... it was all WAY too light. Seriously, how often do you kick a 12-inch rock and have it roll off a good 10 feet?

I think if the game were more able to let us walk into these small physics-controlled objects without simply walking over them (though how, I'm not sure), things would be better and seem even more realistic than they did last time.

_________________
Grand Master
Guild of Archivists


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


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

Search for:
Jump to: