Author Topic: Will it be a good Idea if the developers build in a better Physics Engine? (Read 29723 times)

Bissig · « **Reply #30 on:** June 27, 2009, 11:08:04 pm »

Quote from: MartinX3 on June 27, 2009, 10:43:35 pm

What do you mean with it is a fork?
When i translate it in german it is weird for me.

A split from a current projekt into a new one.

F.e. when someone/some group on a development team is unhappy about how the project is handled, with open source they can split off, use the codebase and move into a different direction then the original team.

Deutsch/german: Abspaltung, Ablösung (Im Sinne von Loslösung)

{7}wrath · « **Reply #31 on:** June 28, 2009, 03:42:32 am »

A fork, in this case, is a split from the old version to create a new version.

gimhael · « **Reply #32 on:** June 28, 2009, 07:22:28 am »

Fork is usually translated as "Gabel", but in this case it's "Gabelung", i.e. there was only one project in the past, but it is now moving in (at least) two different directions.

MartinX3 · « **Reply #33 on:** June 28, 2009, 03:10:57 pm »

Now I understand =D
Thank you ^^

But Tremfusion is not a different Game.
It only gives the game more visual and technical features and improvements.
When we combine TremX with Tremfusion then a new Tremulous came out. ^^

kevlarman · « **Reply #34 on:** June 28, 2009, 08:34:23 pm »

a physics engine would make it incompatible with tremulous (not to mention tons of other incompatibilities already).

MartinX3 · « **Reply #35 on:** June 28, 2009, 09:41:54 pm »

Not when the Physics Engine is included in a Tremfusion serverside .pk3 for Tremfusion servers

kevlarman · « **Reply #36 on:** June 29, 2009, 12:18:27 am »

it can't be included in a pk3. it requires client changes.

MartinX3 · « **Reply #37 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:31:05 am »

Then they could build in two gameplay path's.
One activated if we go with the tremfusion client on a non tremfusion server and the other gameplay path gets activated when we go on a tremfusion server.
Should be possible.
Or they make two cliients.
One for non tremfusion server and one for tremfusion servers.

Odin · « **Reply #38 on:** June 29, 2009, 09:03:17 am »

Quote from: MartinX3 on June 29, 2009, 08:31:05 am

Then they could build in two gameplay path's.
One activated if we go with the tremfusion client on a non tremfusion server and the other gameplay path gets activated when we go on a tremfusion server.
Should be possible.
Or they make two cliients.
One for non tremfusion server and one for tremfusion servers.

Thereby reinforcing the "fork" status.

MartinX3 · « **Reply #39 on:** June 29, 2009, 09:07:24 am »

Did you know that the mercenaries guild will add yreal to his client and tremulous 1.2 too?
odin.mercenariesguild.net[/b]/xreal/tremulous/screenshots/xreal-20090108-032250-000.jpg&imgrefurl=http://gameboom.net/node/1015&usg=__eBwxE6FV_9gGQpmyT2AhaI_WAB8=&h=1024&w=1280&sz=379&hl=de&start=10&um=1&tbnid=DkCIi9d3aNk4ZM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dxreal%26hl%3Dde%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:de:official%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1]http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://odin.mercenariesguild.net/xreal/tremulous/screenshots/xreal-20090108-032250-000.jpg&imgrefurl=http://gameboom.net/node/1015&usg=__eBwxE6FV_9gGQpmyT2AhaI_WAB8=&h=1024&w=1280&sz=379&hl=de&start=10&um=1&tbnid=DkCIi9d3aNk4ZM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dxreal%26hl%3Dde%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:de:official%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1

MartinX3 · « **Reply #40 on:** June 29, 2009, 09:08:10 am »

sorry link was broken
http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://odin.mercenariesguild.net/xreal/tremulous/screenshots/xreal-20090108-032250-000.jpg&imgrefurl=http://gameboom.net/node/1015&usg=__eBwxE6FV_9gGQpmyT2AhaI_WAB8=&h=1024&w=1280&sz=379&hl=de&start=10&um=1&tbnid=DkCIi9d3aNk4ZM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dxreal%26hl%3Dde%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:de:official%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1

Baconizer · « **Reply #41 on:** June 29, 2009, 09:35:09 am »

I'm pretty certain 1.2 will not be using Xreal.

P.S. Please try to use the MODIFY button in future as well, thanks.

Your friend.

MartinX3 · « **Reply #42 on:** June 29, 2009, 11:45:21 am »

Oh didn't know that i can edit my posts O.O
But the mecenariesguild is working on.
Aren't they?

/Edit:
Weird I posted it to Amanieu but it goes in this topic. -.-

gimhael · « **Reply #43 on:** June 29, 2009, 12:56:43 pm »

I think everything that fundamentally breaks the compatibility with the existing 1.1 clients (physics engine, Xreal renderer) should not be part of 1.2, but should be in a 2.0 release.

IMHO: finish what has to be finished to get 1.2 out before you start a project that's at least 10x the scope of the 1.1 to 1.2 development.

MartinX3 · « **Reply #44 on:** June 29, 2009, 01:26:34 pm »

But if Amanieu released a patch for the source code to put xreal and bullet in tremulous it could be included with 1.2

{7}wrath · « **Reply #45 on:** June 29, 2009, 02:08:11 pm »

As a modeler, I would be extremely happy to see Xreal in a future version of tremulous. It seems to me that Xreal can handle much larger polycounts in the models, which would be extremely useful.

Asvarox · « **Reply #46 on:** June 29, 2009, 02:09:38 pm »

Quote from: MartinX3 on June 29, 2009, 01:26:34 pm

But if Amanieu released a patch for the source code to put xreal and bullet in tremulous it could be included with 1.2

As stated few times in this thread, in could be included, but it WON'T BE INCLUDED IN 1.2.

MartinX3 · « **Reply #47 on:** June 29, 2009, 03:14:51 pm »

Quote from: Asvarox on June 29, 2009, 02:09:38 pm

Quote from: MartinX3 on June 29, 2009, 01:26:34 pm
But if Amanieu released a patch for the source code to put xreal and bullet in tremulous it could be included with 1.2
As stated few times in this thread, in could be included, but it WON'T BE INCLUDED IN 1.2.

Are you one of the developers?

N.U.K.E. · « **Reply #48 on:** June 29, 2009, 03:18:44 pm »

no, just because it would fry my suck-ass pc (atm it runs trem with 30fps at most)

And why would you even want one?

David · « **Reply #49 on:** June 29, 2009, 03:44:09 pm »

The devs have already said they won't be changing engine.

Thorn · « **Reply #50 on:** June 29, 2009, 05:34:01 pm »

Quote from: MartinX3 on June 29, 2009, 09:08:10 am

sorry link was broken
http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://odin.mercenariesguild.net/xreal/tremulous/screenshots/xreal-20090108-032250-000.jpg&imgrefurl=http://gameboom.net/node/1015&usg=__eBwxE6FV_9gGQpmyT2AhaI_WAB8=&h=1024&w=1280&sz=379&hl=de&start=10&um=1&tbnid=DkCIi9d3aNk4ZM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dxreal%26hl%3Dde%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:de:official%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1

hmm.
ugly screenshot.
http://ader008.titandsl.co.uk/thorn/xreal/trem/xreal-20090712-124707-000.png
http://ader008.titandsl.co.uk/thorn/xreal/trem/xreal-20090711-092207-000.png

ty

u can ignore the framerate counter
i gimped it in
just because now we will get the same old poor argument
buy a damn gfx card pls
and sit in the corner

everytime someone wants to make a positive contribution to tremulous, say, work for a new renderer, a physics engine, they are turned away.
then you have the nerve to complain that they are "forking" when they decide to do what the people want
welcome to opensource
now
back to your corner

MartinX3 · « **Reply #51 on:** June 29, 2009, 06:22:34 pm »

With my old Graphic Card (an ATI Sapphire Radeon X850 Pro with Pixel Shader 2.0) i could run Quake 4 on Ultra graphics, a 2.2 GHz Dual Core and with 1 GB RAM smoothly with no lags and stoppers.
And you would only need a Radeon X850 Pro to run the game rendered with Xreal smoothly.
And the next version of my old car(the ATI Radeon X1550) has Pixel Shader 3.0 and cost only 14-20 $ or €.
Don't tell me you havn't got enough money for it!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ATI-RADEON-X1550-DDR2-256-LP-VIDEO-CARD-PCIE-TESTED_W0QQitemZ280354705723QQcmdZViewItemQQptZPCC_Video_TV_Cards?hash=item414671513b&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A3|66%3A2|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A0|293%3A1|294%3A50
And for AGP you will get it for less money.

/Edit:
How did you got Tremulous with Xreal renderer?
Please tell it to me

=D

/Edit0:
Know it now. Need to run Tremulous as mod in Xreal. ^^

BTW:
A new renderer would be clientside only.
If you don't want to run tremulous on xreal cuz you are scared about using it on low graphics or you are a kind of Amish People and don't like new things like a new renderer or a new physics system then don't use Tremfusion.
But when you want to use Tremfusion then i am proud to told you that ou can actualy use a Cel Shading Renderer. Tremulous will look a little like Team Fortress with it. (It would need more brighter textures to look like a funny comic game) Later you can use it with Xreal.
And the Xreal renderer is faster than the Quake 4 renderer and looks like Quake 4.

Thorn · « **Reply #52 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:17:14 pm »

Quote from: MartinX3 on June 29, 2009, 06:22:34 pm

blah blah

And the Xreal renderer is faster than the Quake 4 renderer and looks like Quake 4.

Xreal runs smoother than Quake4 with the same features. The only thing is, xreal isn't limited to those features. Xreal is on par with Commercial engines such as UE3 on the tech side of things.
The only reason you never see proper work coming out of xreal is the lack of decent artists, and the rather cranky old toolchain (radiant etc).

danmal · « **Reply #53 on:** June 30, 2009, 02:48:43 am »

People sure seem very possesive about their code which is kinda strange considering the licence they released it under. I don't know why the Trem devs didn't just do what the UrT devs did and kept the code closed source.

jal · « **Reply #54 on:** June 30, 2009, 11:45:33 am »

Ye, sure. Move to xreal, add a physics engine, and release Trem 1.2 in 5 years from now. Thanks... but no.

SlackerLinux · « **Reply #55 on:** June 30, 2009, 12:14:27 pm »

Quote from: jal on June 30, 2009, 11:45:33 am

Ye, sure. Move to xreal, add a physics engine, and release Trem 1.2 in 5 years from now. Thanks... but no.

even without it the trem devs wont release Trem 1.2 till 5 years from now( if ever ).

at least with TF we can expect progress. i like that TF is moving to bullet and XReal should make their "fork" to be a better replacement for 1.2 which is happening.

Quote from: danmal on June 30, 2009, 02:48:43 am

People sure seem very possesive about their code which is kinda strange considering the licence they released it under. I don't know why the Trem devs didn't just do what the UrT devs did and kept the code closed source.

if they did that then all servers would be running 1.1 code trem servers would be crashed constantly. opensource is 1 very good point about tremulous.

danmal · « **Reply #56 on:** July 01, 2009, 01:28:02 am »

Don't get me wrong I like how Tremulous is opensource. It just seems strange to me that someone would discourage other people from using their code when they used a fairly liberal licence like the GPL.

your face · « **Reply #57 on:** July 01, 2009, 01:56:33 am »

Quote from: danmal on July 01, 2009, 01:28:02 am

Don't get me wrong I like how Tremulous is opensource. It just seems strange to me that someone would discourage other people from using their code when they used a fairly liberal licence like the GPL.

+1

Odin · « **Reply #58 on:** July 01, 2009, 03:14:30 am »

Quote from: danmal on July 01, 2009, 01:28:02 am

Don't get me wrong I like how Tremulous is opensource. It just seems strange to me that someone would discourage other people from using their code when they used a fairly liberal licence like the GPL.

Because when you take the code, then make it incompatible with the original product, that is a fork. Forking is something frowned upon because it splits the fanbase and potential developers in two, ending up getting nothing done for the original product, and the fork going nowhere. Why would it go nowhere? Because the fans of the original product get bored and leave, while the fork gets none of the users of the old product, thereby leaving it in a state of useless development for nobody. Forks are sometimes beneficial(take a look at XFree86/Xorg), but in this case it's of no use to anyone to take the code then break compatibility, when you could be sending patches in to the original product, furthering it to 1.2 status. I believe TremFusion will go the way of Cedega, having some nice features but eventually being phased out by the original product(Wine).

The XreaL renderer is nice but there has yet to be a discovered way to port it in its current state to ioQ3 without breaking compatibility with 1.1 servers. The XreaL renderer depends on a new BSP version, which means all maps would have to be recompiled, not to mention converted to Doom3 format first. Think this is easy? Think again. I've gone through this grueling process. It is not fun or worthwhile.

About my screenshot: It is old as hell and was taken when HDR was new, and before the new BSP format(which meant no HDR lightgrid!) resulting in what looks like shit compared to now. The current HDR is so much better than it was back then.

I agree that getting a new renderer would be a 2.0 thing, not 1.2. 1.2 is getting closer and closer every day. If we keep adding new things to bugfix, 1.2 will never get done. A new renderer is not for a mere point release.

{7}wrath · « **Reply #59 on:** July 01, 2009, 03:17:58 am »

This.

This is the most common sense I have read in this entire thread. Lets wait until both Xreal and Tremulous have developed first, shall we?

News:

Poll

What Physic Engine you would prefer?

Author Topic: Will it be a good Idea if the developers build in a better Physics Engine? (Read 29723 times)

MartinX3

MartinX3

MartinX3

MartinX3

MartinX3

MartinX3

MartinX3

MartinX3

Thorn

MartinX3

Thorn