Plans for writing a new rts engine
- PauloMorfeo
- Posts: 2004
- Joined: 15 Dec 2004, 20:53
As a note, as far as i understand, the biggest set back into Spring not fully making into Linux as the Windows version does, is no Lobby yet!? That wasn't beeing handled by the current developers, anyway (at least not the ones that are going to be developing the new engine).
The other day, Licho told me he was going to code a new lobby in C#. I told him that, for him to aim at mono so Linux people would have a lobby (it isn't harder to make it for mono or ms.NET/mono instead) and his reaction was of wilingness.
I already done my part. Now off to encourage Licho on it. Anyway, wasn't there a few Lobbies that were Linux capable that were almost complete?
That seems to be all that is needed, really (as well as a future compilation of Spring for Windows with gcc instead of msVC, so they can play together).
The other day, Licho told me he was going to code a new lobby in C#. I told him that, for him to aim at mono so Linux people would have a lobby (it isn't harder to make it for mono or ms.NET/mono instead) and his reaction was of wilingness.
I already done my part. Now off to encourage Licho on it. Anyway, wasn't there a few Lobbies that were Linux capable that were almost complete?
That seems to be all that is needed, really (as well as a future compilation of Spring for Windows with gcc instead of msVC, so they can play together).
- architeuthis
- Posts: 86
- Joined: 15 Dec 2005, 20:47
The devs are planning to release osrts under the LGPL lisence; hence i dont think it is possible to make it an commercial project, accept if the devs will ask money for an account http://forum.osrts.info/viewtopic.php?t=2Will your project be commercial?
You can make commercial GPL software, you just have to make the sourcecode available to everyone for free. Any gameplay content doesn't need to be released with the sourcecode so to play the game with its own units, maps, etc you'd still need to buy it. Id Software releases their outdated engines as GPL, you can get the engine for free and make a game using it but you can't play the original game without buying it since the engine comes with none of the content.
I support this endeavour, Spring is a big mess since it was way too TA-focussed and has tons of hardcoded TA-like behaviour that takes forever to get out of it again, never mind that TA itself is pretty messy since it was designed for software rendering.
This clean start should allow working with knowledge of all the things modders want or need and design the engine with experience from Spring regarding what went right or wrong.
I hope this new engine will use more flexible scripting right from the start. Sure, that'll be a lot more complicated to mod then but I don't think that's bad, once people learn to use the options they have they'll be able to make many more things than previously possible.
Only downside I see is the time it'll take to be a competitive engine. Spring has been in development for quite some time (I remember seeing the first screenshots when I was still playing OTA) and even with the additional experience and cleaner code it'll still take years to reach a state where the new engine could seriously compete with the old one. Granted, the additional flexibility would also mean less work for the devs hardcoding things and pushing that work onto the modders but still.
I support this endeavour, Spring is a big mess since it was way too TA-focussed and has tons of hardcoded TA-like behaviour that takes forever to get out of it again, never mind that TA itself is pretty messy since it was designed for software rendering.
This clean start should allow working with knowledge of all the things modders want or need and design the engine with experience from Spring regarding what went right or wrong.
I hope this new engine will use more flexible scripting right from the start. Sure, that'll be a lot more complicated to mod then but I don't think that's bad, once people learn to use the options they have they'll be able to make many more things than previously possible.
Only downside I see is the time it'll take to be a competitive engine. Spring has been in development for quite some time (I remember seeing the first screenshots when I was still playing OTA) and even with the additional experience and cleaner code it'll still take years to reach a state where the new engine could seriously compete with the old one. Granted, the additional flexibility would also mean less work for the devs hardcoding things and pushing that work onto the modders but still.
- architeuthis
- Posts: 86
- Joined: 15 Dec 2005, 20:47
Oh, yes now i understand, thx for the good explanation.You can make commercial GPL software, you just have to make the sourcecode available to everyone for free. Any gameplay content doesn't need to be released with the sourcecode so to play the game with its own units, maps, etc you'd still need to buy it. Id Software releases their outdated engines as GPL, you can get the engine for free and make a game using it but you can't play the original game without buying it since the engine comes with none of the content.
- PauloMorfeo
- Posts: 2004
- Joined: 15 Dec 2004, 20:53
So .. i was wrong? It is still farther away than just having the version compiled with same compiler and having a Linux lobby?Tobi wrote:Just FYI, I'll probably still fix linux<->windows compat if possible using the strategy I've used until now. ...
Don't think it's that harsh. You only need to provide the source code to whoever you sell your program to.KDR_11k wrote:You can make commercial GPL software, you just have to make the sourcecode available to everyone for free. ...
- SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
It really isn't though, spring is fundamentally flawed so much that it would really be difficult to turn it into anything complete. One bandaid solution over another has been applied and it's coming to the point where you really can't dig it much deeper without changing the way the core of the engine works, which would require a total rewrite by the time it's finished anyways. The tag system can't continue to be maintained for ever by a closed contribution development team. We need a system where modders can interface with the guts of the engine and add their own tags if they want do without potentially breaking the rest of the engine, and that just will never be feasable with the current spring engine. This engine assumes to much, and that is why a new engine is on the drawing board.mongus wrote: Altough ive read a bit on it, and how its gona be "better", its very concerning, as this engine is nearly mature, yet has so many bugs in it that got broken in the way or from new works made to the game, and needs to be fixed/finished.
And this goal looks quite close.
They learned stuff in their time developing it. Now it's at the point where remaining on the project is a waste of their time, because at a base level it's fundamentally flawed to the point where it will never go anywhere.You know im just player, so cant understand rigth why you decide to move.
But, it seems to me that, leaving this project as IS (which im not sure will happen), is a big waste of time for the people involved in developping it.
One of the things I'm being taught over and over again in university is that you don't waste time on an outdated system when it's less money and effort to build a new system. The new engine will be nix compatible because it will be built that way from the start, and as tobi has already stated he plans on continuing the nix compatibility work for the current engine until someone else decides to take it over.What about the hole work on the linux version?
And the last 5 or 6 months of work the current Lead dev and the other programmers have put into it?
I know its been slow on releases, but many things in the last 2 releases seem worth it, not to mention the work prior to that.
our open sourced devs aren't going to go anywhere, a new engine doesn't do much for them, they want to play with the guts, not the modding tools. Spring really can't compete with sup comm anyways, it's not even in the same league... however, the new engine very well could compete with sup com, especially if it's released LGPL which would mean alot of developers would like to look at using it for private projects since there would be no licensing fee, compared to sup comm which would either claim ownership of any mod made, or require a pricey license. Feature an graphics wize the new engine should compete with sup comm, the largest problems being to do with optimization.Seen spring as a supcom competitor, this is like a crittical hit, and its has the potential of killing the project as supcom makes it out the next months, people will derail from a partially finished rts to embrace a fully developped, and commmercially availabe/supported rts.
(wich is not right, but its the only engine standing in TA legacy, as supcom will be, and the only OS Rts i know has made this great)
Thanks, I think...Ive read that the current code is a mess, and its not worth cleaning, or keep working with it.
And that your new project will be built ontop of ogre, and that is supposed to have only advantages. d3d, gui stuff, squeletal animation support, linux compatiblity etc...
There are 2 things that are crucial for your project, and will affect the hole spring comunity aswell.
The time in which you will get your new engine near current spring functionality. ( i think you will reuse some code )
The success/gained code cleanness/support/features? in that new engine, comparing it with spring, and with supcom.
With this in mind, I wish you (and we) the best luck in the turn you have taken for this game.
Unless someone steps up wanting that position most likely it will stay in the hands of jelmer. Development on old spring won't die, it will just remain mostly bug fixing and patch applying oriented.And, as you will be working in the other engine, who will take charge of Spring lead and dev?.
The current plan is to develop under LGPL, meaning, no the project will not be commercial, but it will allow people to release commercial products using the engine without paying us anything more then credit for the engine.oh, finally...
Will your project be commercial?
What about making sure people can't copy, attach to an e-mail or burn to CD and boom, someone else has it?The current plan is to develop under LGPL, meaning, no the project will not be commercial, but it will allow people to release commercial products using the engine without paying us anything more then credit for the engine.
By the by, I am presuming if someone sold it, they could use PayPal?
- Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
It will probably be similar to the TA -> Spring conversion.Candleman wrote:This may have been answered, but I can't find a concrete 'yes' or 'no'...
Will modders be able to easily port their existing content into the new engine?
Prevent people from copying?Snipawolf wrote:...
What about making sure people can't copy, attach to an e-mail or burn to CD and boom, someone else has it?
...
- PauloMorfeo
- Posts: 2004
- Joined: 15 Dec 2004, 20:53
-
- Posts: 665
- Joined: 06 Jun 2006, 19:49
Is LGPL v2. Guessing same scenario as GPL as regarding signed keys.Yeah, is there any way to keep people from spreading my game if I were to sell it?
Add a patch to code for it requiring a signed mod. Keep the private key & sell the game.
Will need to distribute the engine code & patch (be easier to include on a cd)
And a signed & encrypted mod. But thats about it.
-
- MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
- Posts: 1948
- Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25