The next update

by legodt on 05/06/2011 01:24, 333 messages, last message: 10/18/2012 04:52, 145207 views, last view: 12/09/2021 02:33

What are the sort of things that the playerbase can expect from the next Sauerbraten update? Gamemodes, user interfaces, or graphical updates?

   Board Index   

#31: ..

by eihrul on 06/03/2011 20:25

Kill cams are simply not feasible the way the engine works. No go. Sorry.

reply to this message

#32: ratios!

by Zamwa on 06/08/2011 09:05

A higher cube push surface ratio can aid in making quality maps on higher-end computers! Adding a greater physics model code allows gravity movement of cubes,water,objects as much as the programmer(headaches can turn into joy and riches #:") wants to do!
I will pay good money for at least three of those features! Destructible environments is a major plus! Hell I will buy a whole crappie cadillac that came with the feature rich game if there was no other way to buy the game!

This could be a last chance to claim a untapped market for the future of gaming! Using a strategy of "We are the first to do it" goal!
If the current number of developers don't come up with groundbreaking ideas or bring in more developers(or spawn robotic babies) to increase the pool of ideas! We could be looking at a soon to be retirement community of developers flooding in on Sauerbraten aiding every aspect of engine!

*hehe mah nuke under a castle(cpu intensive) castle turns into crater!*

reply to this message

#33: Re: ratios!

by Razgriz on 06/08/2011 09:21, refers to #32

you do realise that "upgrading" the cube push ratio could fuck up every single map if it's not double the current amount right? Everything would have to be rebuilt since the old octree would be incompatible with the new. Unless we're planning to follow the "windows compatibility" route. ^_^

Better physics (or at least full 3D model control) is something we all wanted, and still do. It's been as a request on the table for plenty of years if i'm correct.

A destructible environment is far harder than it sounds, for the lighting in sauer is not dynamic (only gun flares are for that part) and it would require "smart" texturing of the geometry that got revealed under the destructed surface.

----

As far as i know, eihrul is not looking to making money of this game, and if he does, he cannot because he is restricted by the content licenses. Plus, it's a freeware game, and joining the market would mean he would be busy finding other ways of income to keep it free and competitive. I'll quote a certain piece from the cube wiki in this case:

Of your users, a very small amount will express interest in helping. Let's say ten percent, being generous.
Of those, a smaller amount will actually TRY to help you. Again: ten percent. Extremely generous.
Of those, a much smaller amount will be capable of doing what they're trying. Ten percent.
Of those, a much smaller amount will be capable of doing what they're trying to do WELL. Ten percent.

reply to this message

#34: Re: ratios!

by Zamwa on 06/08/2011 10:18, refers to #33

On the first part your likely wrong as 1 and 2 ratio remain the same when compared to 0.5,1,1.5,2 are measured! Though nether of us could be right sense where both noobs at code! XD
I'm not going to say a anything about the other half as it does not apply to what I said!

reply to this message

#35: Re: ratios!

by Zamwa on 06/08/2011 10:25, refers to #33

Sorry if I seem defensive! I was born yesterday you know! :"]

reply to this message

#36: ..

by b3ast on 06/08/2011 13:49

Ability to bend glass, water, and lava! :D

reply to this message

#37: ..

by b3ast on 06/08/2011 13:52

Also, just a thought: Auto-Return when flag hits the bottom of a map (like reissen) so that one can not take the flag and drop it to have 10 extra seconds.

reply to this message

#38: Re: ratios!

by Razgriz on 06/08/2011 15:26, refers to #34

Born yesterday or not, you made little sense of my post and i suggest you read it again to actually understand what i meant. >_>

reply to this message

#39: Re: ..

by suicizer01 on 06/09/2011 00:12, refers to #36

YOu can bend glass by editing the geometry of a cube wich is surrounded by alpha-matrial and has the env(bump)map shader set on.
This create a very similar effect.

True, it still wouldn't be bad if water and lava also be bended...

reply to this message

#40: Re: ..

by Sub-Zero on 06/09/2011 02:14, refers to #39

yes, but is my understanding of materials go, they don\'t have the octree. and from that note, you would have to make them have an octree or something of the sort. but idk, i can\'t understand all of C++ yet.

reply to this message

#41: ..

by Razgriz on 06/09/2011 16:09

I'd like a couple of new commands for buttons, radios, checkboxes.

onhover [..]
onhoveronce [..]

Oh the features i could give life to if i had those. My current system is crude to say the least.

reply to this message

#42: ..

by b3ast on 06/10/2011 03:37

Ability to rewind demos, PLEASE!

reply to this message

#43: ..

by TheLove on 06/10/2011 17:58

+1 demo control rewind - and "go to time" please..

reply to this message

#44: ..

by Razgriz on 06/10/2011 18:07

BETTER CROSSHAIRS. seriously they are not that much of a size hog to aim for 8bit 16x16 non anti-aliased images.

reply to this message

#45: Re: ..

by Zamwa on 06/10/2011 19:27, refers to #44

-1

reply to this message

#46: Re: ..

by Razgriz on 06/10/2011 23:29, refers to #45

Hater's gonna hate. I don't like a boxy crosshair that hides completely my target behind it because of its bad quality.

reply to this message

#47: Re: ..

by suicizer01 on 06/11/2011 02:16, refers to #46

+1

reply to this message

#48: Re: ..

by Sub-Zero on 06/11/2011 16:14, refers to #47

-1 to raz and sui.

make one yourself, or re-size it so it takes up very little room, like a normal person does.

reply to this message

#49: ..

by TheLove on 06/11/2011 16:21

focus in something else. like calculating Damage on 1vs1 weapons modes .. i have seen script like this before and it was near your crosshair (leftside) and was pretty good but that guy didnt want to share it.. would be good in next version ?

reply to this message

#50: Re: ..

by Razgriz on 06/11/2011 17:05, refers to #48

I'd rather NOT have to discuss with you AGAIN our "ideal" crosshairs.

So just move along, for my request REMAINS ON THE TABLE, whether you like it or not.

reply to this message

   Board Index