General Thread

by Aardappel on 01/05/2002 01:55, 15499 messages, last message: 12/08/2021 21:22, 8826022 views, last view: 12/09/2021 02:36

for questions, announcements etc.

   Board Index   

#28: New forum feature

by SleepwalkR on 01/16/2002 19:14

I just had some spare minutes and implemented a nifty little "reply" feature, as you probably have noticed already.

Have fun!

reply to this message

#29: Re: New forum feature

by Goetzenzar on 01/16/2002 23:46, refers to #28

oh, thx sleepwalker!
i love it :)

reply to this message

#30: Re: New forum feature

by SleepwalkR on 01/17/2002 00:34, refers to #29

Yup, it's pretty l33t, esp. since you don't have to reload the page like Qmap =). All simple javascript.

reply to this message

#31: 'test`?!"

by SleepwalkR on 01/17/2002 00:42

nevermind

reply to this message

#32: again

by SleepwalkR on 01/17/2002 00:44

again!

reply to this message

#33: last time

by SleepwalkR on 01/17/2002 00:45

I promise

reply to this message

#34: Better than mine...

by Lukeyboy on 01/18/2002 11:36

This is definatly a better engine than I've ever made... although I got quite a good one happening I'll keep all you guys posted.

reply to this message

#35: Re: Better than mine...

by SleepwalkR on 01/18/2002 13:05, refers to #34

Lukeyboy, what makes this engine so good is it's simplicity. I can't stress this enough =). So if you go about your own engine, it's a good idea to go over your feature list and choose what's important to make a game (support for entities, for example =) and what's not (sun flare effects). The more weight you lose, the better, faster and easier to develop your engine will be, and the more interesting will the games be that you can make with it. Of course, this is not a general rule, but in my own background as a level designer and programmer, I have always felt strongly about keeping things simple and minimalized, because it helps you focus on what's really important about what you are creating.

reply to this message

#36: Sweet engine

by Vorpal on 01/22/2002 01:31

So far this thing looks very promising!

reply to this message

#37: Feature Request :)

by RobC on 01/23/2002 16:36

Will cube ever do room over room or is it just fundamentally not worth toding because of the way cube renders, does z-buffering, etc? If so, it could be really cool for RAD on levels for other engines even...

reply to this message

#38: back

by Aardappel on 01/24/2002 13:09

sorry, was away for a week :)

bascule: easiest is to ask people on #cube if they want a game... there's often someone there who wants to play.

lukeboy: what is this engine then? :) and indeed, I couldn't have said it better than sleepy's reply.

robc: from a rendering perspective, its absolutely trivial to have it do ROR, but it does complicate other areas a bit (physics, occlusion, lighting, editing etc). Really it would not be that much work to add but I think it is overrated as a feature. I quite like it as is.

reply to this message

#39: Justification For Room Over Room

by RobC on 01/24/2002 17:06

Yeah, ROR is quite fine if your designing new stuff but if your trying to roughly approximate old geometry it is pretty much needed if the old geometry had ROR. Also its cool just for the geek factor.

reply to this message

#40: ROR

by Bascule on 01/24/2002 18:53

>ROR...is overrated as a feature

LOL

I initially thought the lack of it was 'disappointing', but I am coming round to Aard's way of thinking and, anyway, he's writing the engine, not me!

Aard: Yeah, I've got myself an IRC client now (Trillian) and have ventured for the very first time into IRC territory to get an online game - I was impressed (with the game, not necessarily with IRC).

RobC: Surely the point of a new engine is doing *new* things with it and pushing the limits of what you have got to play with?

reply to this message

#41: Response to Bascule's ROR Response :)

by RobC on 01/24/2002 22:11

Well you would still be doing something new... AKA take the basic layout of the old engine but add the ability to say, build houses on the fly...Shoot holes in walls with guns, etc :)

reply to this message

#42: Cube for the Mac!

by eihrul on 01/28/2002 21:17

Cube now works on any big-endian unixish platforms, which means a MacOS X port
would be feasible. If anyone would be
interested in MacOS X server/client
binaries, lemme know. :)

reply to this message

#43: woohoo

by Aardappel on 01/29/2002 00:32

and to add to the excitement, I got a little SP game going...

reply to this message

#44: Re: Cube for the Mac!

by rickclark on 01/29/2002 01:45, refers to #42

Yeah, man! I have a friend who is a Mac user who would be be very interested and so would I, since i would love to frag him in Cube.

reply to this message

#45: Re: woohoo

by rickclark on 01/29/2002 01:47, refers to #43

Too cool.

I am waiting with worm on my tongue (uh, that's baited breath)! :)

reply to this message

#46: White wash bug/big endian fixes

by eihrul on 01/29/2002 04:43

Aard, in case you read this before I get
a hold of you, those PPC fixes I sent
you have a small bug that will cause
rendering to mess up...
Just add a call to glLoadIdentity()
directly before the call to gluPerspective() and everything works
as it should. Other than that show
stopper, Cube/PPC seems flawless. :)

reply to this message

#47: Re: woohoo

by Bascule on 01/29/2002 22:03, refers to #43

Fantastic...

So when do we (the waiting public) get to taste the Cube SP experience?

/me can't wait

reply to this message

   Board Index