coop-edit and custom cfgs

by err on 11/09/2006 07:00, 21 messages, last message: 11/13/2006 01:14, 4148 views, last view: 05/04/2024 12:31

Well, someone had to ask sooner or later...

here's the problem as i see it... /sendmap and /getmap send only the ogz, not the cfg. This leads to textures appearing differently depending on what cfg you had loaded last. Bad for co-op edit... everyone sees different textures.

So, how hard would it be to either send the map.cfg along with the map.ogz?

Yes this is posted as a new thread, I want to hear peoples opinions on this and try to get it addressed (seems like it should be easy to fix).

-err

   Board Index   

#2: Re: Could be awkward

by MeatROme on 11/09/2006 17:28, refers to #1

I really love the open attitude of sauerbraten. One of the most used freedoms the engine incorporates is the editor.
This is good,
since mapping is such a fun way to enjoy a game.
But it also leads to an endless stream of first-time mappers thrilled high on adrenaline and - as rpointon noted - malicious pranksters creating crash code.

For sauerbraten you really need a "trial ground" like quadropolis; in coop-edit you can always check out geometry,
but scripting should really require a conscious effort to accept/to run.
loading a skybox requires just a filename and
/skybox filename
for users to see it,
passing a texture set (what else for MP cfg? right!) could be done via pastebin or similar service. ...

With this "trial ground" maliciousness can be moderated and the gems seperated from the educational to the contenders for "worst-sauerbraten-maps-ever" ;-)

reply to this message

#3: /sendcfg and /getcfg

by err on 11/09/2006 21:20, refers to #2

how about adding commands for /sendcfg and /getcfg?

conscious effort - check
pastebin - nope

maybe some cubescript or hard-coded regex could even check the cfg and warn if it has commands other than loading textures, models, sounds, etc.

how does that sound?

reply to this message

#4: Re: /sendcfg and /getcfg

by Drakas on 11/09/2006 23:10, refers to #3

Client still can be crashed this way.
The best way is what I have written somewhere in the forum - the (main) masterserver containing all the maps and the user can simply /dlmap <mapname> to get it from the server. Maps should be moderated by somebody though :)
That is probably the best solution - to have a separate server. On the other hand, we could get a sf.net page for hosting the maps!:)

reply to this message

#5: Re: /sendcfg and /getcfg

by err on 11/09/2006 23:49, refers to #4

ok, thats cool for finished maps... im talking more about WIP maps. If i start a new map with custom texture set and models defined in cfg, shouldn't co-op work for this map, without having to get it approved or moderated? It seems like this is what co-op edit is trying to do now, but cannot because of the inability to handle custom cfgs.

reply to this message

#6: /sendcfg and /getcfg

by Tybalt on 11/10/2006 11:22

The info needed for a coop-edit map is the list of texture and the list of mapmodels ... Why not just send that ? It can be easily check by the program ...
For futher script used by the map, use quadropolis etc...

reply to this message

#7: Re: /sendcfg and /getcfg

by Passa on 11/10/2006 11:33, refers to #6

Its a security risk.. err somewhat.

You don't want people sending cfgs that alter all your controls and do other annoying things, or even for Linuxers.. there could be a command in the cfg like screenres 1600, and if they've got a 15" LCD Sauerbraten will crash..

Well I'm just speculating this, but I'm pretty sure this is one of the reasons why you cannot send .cfgs.

Anyway, if you are making a serious map coopedit, you would meet in a private server, with people you already know thru IM or IRC, and you've all already got the cfgs needed for the maps. Public coopediting doesn't exactly produce great maps.

reply to this message

#8: Re: /sendcfg and /getcfg

by rpointon on 11/10/2006 11:42, refers to #7

Maybe if the encryption/authentication stuff for 'trusted' multiplayer is ever completed then receiving cfg files will be seen as vaguely acceptable... maybe... What are your thoughts on this eihrul?

reply to this message

#9: ..

by takua00108 on 11/10/2006 15:21

What if you could somehow /view/ the incoming file before accepting?

reply to this message

#10: well

by Aardappel_ on 11/10/2006 18:12

There are of course solutions to the security issue, but the problem is that they are not simple, and completely unnecessary for something which isn't even a problem.

If you're doing serious coopedit with someone you know, its dead easy to send the cfg manually.

If you're doing casual coopedit with friends, or even with strangers on a random server, what the hell are you doing with custom cfgs anyway? The default cfg contains all textures and mapmodels (lots of each), this should really be plenty to make a casual map.

reply to this message

#11: ..

by Drakas on 11/10/2006 18:42

What about sharind textures? ^^ some people have really nice textures ;)

reply to this message

#12: ..

by sinsky on 11/10/2006 22:38

I just realised that I've never played a serious coopedit game in my life. It's so sad..

*smirk*

reply to this message

#13: ..

by err on 11/12/2006 02:06

Thanks for everyone's input on this.

Aard, I respect your opinion and realize I'm not in much of a position to argue. Still I believe there _is_ a problem, and here's what it is - two people can appear to be editing the same map, but are really using totally different texture sets.

Correct me if i'm wrong but it seems like this can happen even without a custom cfg for the map, if the two (or more) players had loaded different custom cfgs for the previous maps they played on, and then join a server and /getmap.

Maybe a simple solution would be to have the /getmap command exec default_map_settings.cfg before it finishes. This could at least prevent players from each seeing a different texture set.

Your thoughts?

reply to this message

#14: Re: ..

by eihrul on 11/12/2006 02:22, refers to #13

This change was already made in CVS weeks ago.

reply to this message

#15: Re: ..

by err on 11/12/2006 02:43, refers to #14

eihrul, thanks for your quick response. From your tone it seems that I should have been aware of this, is compiling from CVS the recommended way to play Sauer?

reply to this message

#16: Re: ..

by eihrul on 11/12/2006 02:57, refers to #15

Not recommended, I am just remarking that we already made it so. :)

reply to this message

#17: Re: ..

by ethan592 on 11/12/2006 04:44, refers to #16

One thing that i noticed is that the stupid voice announcing quad damage and health boost persists when you create a new map

reply to this message

#18: ..

by err on 11/12/2006 05:21

Well, I just discovered that the client can be crashed by a malformed map alone. Does that make crashing associated with sending a cfg less of an issue?

reply to this message

#19: ..

by Drakas on 11/12/2006 13:46

Just having a possibility of getmap and sendmap in normal gamemodes would be really awsome :)

reply to this message

#20: Re: ..

by Vayner on 11/12/2006 17:05, refers to #19

I agree. That would rock.

reply to this message

#21: Re: ..

by Aardappel_ on 11/13/2006 01:14, refers to #13

err, as you have seen there are many factors to a decision to implement something a certain way, and in this case, the benefits of having it don't outweigh the problems.

reply to this message

   Board Index