Enemy Territory + Cube 2 = wOOt?

by ezombie on 01/19/2008 16:25, 258 messages, last message: 04/03/2008 21:39, 195304 views, last view: 09/29/2024 10:21

I made an actual thread for this, since we are still yacking about it. To bring the others up to speed:

"Some of us weirdos have been kicking around the thought of making a community edition of Enemy Territory (the FIRST one). I suggested the Cube 2 engine might be a good base...

This would be a straight port of ETPro gameplay to a standalone open source game, using new 'HD' assets. Nothing too fancy, just better graphics and netcode are what we would be looking for."

   Board Index   

#45: Re: ..

by yoopers on 01/24/2008 00:45, refers to #44

Random thought: rather than creating a new authentication system, why not use OpenID? Seems like that might lower the barrier to entry for new players, allowing them to use their email address as the account name. Also, clans could setup their own OpenID providers and truly maintain a clan identity across multiple servers.

Having said that, OpenID lives in HTTP Land, and putting a full-blown browser inside the game would be silly. Maybe some stripped-down variant could be created, where only certain HTML tags could be used. I'm imagining that each server potentially becomes an OpenID provider, and all of them speak a limited dialect of OpenID.

Feel free to shoot the idea down, I've been buried in JavaScript bugs today and my neurons are only firing intermittently. ;]

reply to this message

#46: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 02:29

Yeah, but the WTFPL is much sexier, and it's publicly recognized by the FSF :P

I'll take a look at OpenID. Just hope it's not overkill. No need for a full blown browser, I got lots'o'HTTP C++ code floating around here.

reply to this message

#47: Re: ..

by SheeEttin on 01/24/2008 05:48, refers to #46

I'd think any use of HTTP in a game like this'd be overkill...

Of course, if you'd prefer it to writing your own authentication system, it's your game. (I know I'd prefer it, I'm no coder. :P)

reply to this message

#48: BLAM!

by fdhjkhsdkjconorhfjkdshjk on 01/24/2008 05:51

I was making a sick, sick joke about the Blam! engine.

reply to this message

#49: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 06:48

Yes, it was indeed sick. Missed the joke part though <oops>

I took a gander, and OpenID seems very much like overkill. I've written a few online authentication systems (for XML payment processing gateways) - this will be cake.

So, you login to the game with your account details (username and password which can be saved). While retrieving the server list, the master server gives you a 'session key'. When logging into a server, the client passes the session key. The server queries the master server with the player's session key, which returns the player's GUID and other info. Any stats/kicks/bans would be reported back to the master server using the server key + the player session key + the player GUID.

This way there is no farming for player data by lowlifes, or messing with people's accounts. Simple, eh?

reply to this message

#50: Re: ..

by a`baby`rabbit on 01/24/2008 07:35, refers to #49

Very centralised... "The server queries the master server with the player's session key.." - better check that the master server owners are okay about storing that info and providing the necessary bandwidth.

Meanwhile I thought that the cheating was at a low at the moment... did I miss something?

reply to this message

#51: Master Server

by dfhkshjkfsdconorbhjfkdshkj on 01/24/2008 15:35

If you need a master server for this, I will gladly run it.
Great connection, 20megs down, 3 up.

reply to this message

#52: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 16:59

Thanks, but we got a dedicated server in a datacenter in Seattle. I have had it waiting for when I picked my crusade. Even ran some ET:QW servers on it. I have contributed to various BSD projects before, and now I'm in a point of my life (kid is graduating this spring) where I want to do a big hobby project.

I checked out the CVS last night and starting to sculpt a base set of projects in Eclipse (my torture instrument of choice). I see there is some md5 goodies lying around. I also noticed how thick the client really was. Not a bad thing, as I do want to keep as much on the client as possible.

I wasn't planning on encrypting anything, unless we have to. The players password will be SHA hashed. And using the 'triangle' setup means that encryption shouldn't have to be used.

reply to this message

#53: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 17:31

I just got reminded that we *will* want a secondary (and trinary) master server. So the offer is very much appreciated.

The main thing is that any additional master servers (since they will also have a copy of the master player/server DB) will have to be located in an actual datacenter, with some established organization/company/clan to keep an eye on things. You have to have something to loose, in order for everyone to trust you.

reply to this message

#54: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 17:41

eihrul:

OT - How strong is that crypto you got? I might have a client willing to license it for some banking software they are working on... email me if your interested.

reply to this message

#55: Urgh?

by Dr_Evil288 on 01/24/2008 19:09

I have downloaded it (ET:W) and I have to admit is is in the nicest way possible terrible. The fact that I have to download ten trillion files to gain access to ANY server is terrible. I am all for modding games but considering that the mods for ET:W are pretty minor, you know, stuff that turns me into an ant or something, I don't see why I have to spend half my time downloading something that I'l never use again. Even CS:S, TF2 and DOD:S are lower on the download list and have substantially better servers. Rant over and as always, peace, especialy to those ET:W players out there, whom I hope find a conciderably better set of games to play. (Sauerbraten!)

reply to this message

#56: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 21:23

Wassa?

Yes, it's a PITA to get working. Hence the need for a replacement. SD never finished it...

Yet ET is still, after 5 years, in the top 6 online FPS games worldwide.

Must be doing something right!

reply to this message

#57: Blam!

by asdfadsfconorfhdjsk on 01/24/2008 21:27

When I said Blam! I was making a sick, sick joke.

reply to this message

#58: ..

by RealNitro on 01/24/2008 21:57

ezombie: what about existing ET maps? Are you planning on converting them to Sauer maps? Or will this new ET feature only new content?

RTCW multiplayer test 2 and ET used to be my favorite online games so the fact that you seem to be taking this so serious is _very_ exciting. Have you guys set up a website or a forum yet?

reply to this message

#59: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 23:12

Well, without the legal OK of SD & iD, the stock maps will remain where they are.

We can't even use the models or textures from ET, so it's ALL going to be new content. We will be slowly building up a base set of assets as time goes by.

As for custom maps... I suppose each individual artist will have to determine if they want to port any maps to this.

We would like to (this summer, when there is something to at least play around on), hold a ET:CE map contest on Quadropolis - like they just did with Assasin.

reply to this message

#60: ..

by ezombie on 01/24/2008 23:28

There is a temporary forum here:

http://www.usef-et.org/forum/viewforum.php?forum_id=11

A website will be coming sooner or later, and the project will be hosted by SourceForge. First thing first.

reply to this message

#61: Re: ..

by yoopers on 01/24/2008 23:52, refers to #49

It's not so much that I think OpenID should be used as-is, it's more that I would love to see a delegated authentication system implemented for something like this. If I've understood correctly, there would effectively be a number of master server "federations" each sharing a common accounts database. Initially there would only be one federation, but later on if I wanted to use my account from federation A to play on a federation B server, would that be supported (ie - would B know how to trust A to authenticate me)? If so, then the substance of my suggestion would be addressed. :]

reply to this message

#62: Re: ..

by SheeEttin on 01/25/2008 00:47, refers to #59

We at Quadropolis (well, they, really, I don't think I'm qualified to count myself as part of "we", but "we" for simplicity) would be glad to hold such a competition.
The last few haven't gone too well, so there've been some thoughts going around, but nothing substantial. (Competitions are suspended indefinitely right now.)
A mapping competition for this new game should be good to get it "out there", as well as get some good content for it.

I think a little while after this is released would be a good time, enough to let people get acquainted, but still soon enough to give a good boost.

reply to this message

#63: ..

by ezombie on 01/25/2008 01:34

Why would there be more then one 'federation'? I can see the point when it comes to websites, but I'm trying to understand the benefit of that within a single multiplayer game.

The system I described is very close to the current ET:QW setup... just free and no CD keys needed.

There has to be central master servers, otherwise there would be no list of servers in the game. Why not just let them access a simple DB of player accounts?

I was proposing having mutliple master servers that are run by various organizations. They are setup to be like DNS servers, where they sync to/from the master player DB every 5 minutes or so. This way if one or more go down, everything still runs.

reply to this message

#64: Re: ..

by yoopers on 01/25/2008 03:05, refers to #63

You are, of course, correct that your system as described is exactly similar to ET:QW. I guess I just have an innate distrust of centralized authority (in and out of the computing realm ;). I don't disagree with anything you've outlined in a technical sense, and I've led us off onto a tangent to boot. <Thread On> :D

reply to this message

   Board Index