Theoretical Multiplayer Setup

[EaglePryde]

[:D] I also doubt he would do it. In any case. What he is doing allready deserves high praise. Like i said in another post, DW has something very special and somehow captures the mysterious big essence like Master of Orion did making the game really immersive and fun to play.

Last time i was doing some heavy coding i was dreaming about -> a* ..you get my "point(er)"? [:D]

[Data]

LOL....but you got out, "escaped" from it [:)]

[EaglePryde]

haha [:D] yes..luckily i managed this without crashing [:)]

[Bingeling]

What, you were dreaming about the A* algorithm?

A good search algorithm that, possibly useful for the AI. Not that path finding is such a matter in a space game, but one could imagine the path as different AI states...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A*_search_algorithm

[EaglePryde]

You got me on this one.very sharp. It's also because *a looks similar to a* but is very much different but yes.that was it and i like that kind of stuff

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: EaglePryde

for the slow readers once more. From a technical standpoint it's easy and very common. Doing so on the other side consumes much time. Is there anything unclear in my words for you because you don't seem to understand it. And that's what i stated from the beginning. AND if you haven't read it in my first post i also included it to be a basic working setup. I never spoke of getting it done tomorrow..haven't i?

So basically you're pulling the ideas out of your rectum, and they have no relation to the state of DW? If your post is nothing more than your mental diarrhea leaking out through your keyboard, then why stop with multiplayer? Why not ask for CodeForce to to incorporate fuzzy logic into the AI?

If it's fantasizing and wishful thinking - then you should indicate it is so, or people will quite fairly assume that you're talking about the game we have before us.

You also seem to compare a common person to one who actually IS working in the industry and is making this game and the knowledge and skill to pull such a game through is nothing you learn in 5 minutes. Even the most skilled programmers who can make any kind of application lack the fundamental knowledge of game design and creation.

No, I raised one issue as an example, and you clamped onto it to the exclusion of all else. You seem to think that game balance in a multiplayer game is a trivial task - so perhaps you can go give Dave Sirlin a few lessons - he did a bloody hour-long talk on it and barely scratched the surface. Coding it is a simple enough task - making it efficient code, and a balanced game is quite another. Something anyone who has coded more than "hello world" would know - which you clearly don't.

what's wrong with direct IP connection? I don't seem to get your point here. With some "special" cases you can play very well cross continent but this is hardly used. Most players stay rather close to their country regarding direct IP sessions.

What BS is this? You said in your previous post:
This is a direct connection/Lan setup where pings are very low unless you'd sit behind a crappy router or something from A-B is going wrong but that's hardly somewhere inside the code.

First it's any direct connection - then it's ONLY on a LAN, and now you're waffling back to the bloke across the street. Your statements wobble back and forth with the wind. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

I really don't get your point in any bit of your post. Are you talking about it not being possible although indie programmers are doing such and game companies are doing such and not only for FPS but also for 4X games of any kind? Companies like maybe consisting of 2 people/coders and not more. Suppose you don't know how it works and you sure don't work in this part of the industry.

Once again, you're misquoting and misinterpreting. Do you speak ENGLISH? I said it was a drastic redesign and a non-trivial task to work multiplayer into DW. That doesn't make it impossible. That doesn't make it beyond Elliot's abilities. It DOES however make it a disproportionate task given the relative rewards for the work of kludgeing it into DW.

Learn to read, boy.

Hmm..if i have done any coding..well..i work with C#/.NET and the XNA Framework although i could offer you C++ and directx too. XML is nothing i need to mention and my skills at setting up linux based servers...blah blah blah...i hate this "you don't no anything" stuff where you always have to prove some guy who really doesn't know much, how well your background may be. I have even tried to pull of a game like this myself but it never got finished because doing it as a hobby with people from different countries won't work well. But that's something different.

That's interesting. In your previous paragraph, you said that I clearly don't "work in this part of the industry" - implying that you're working in computer game development. And now you're stating that you "tried to pull off a game" like DW, but did so as a hobby.

So what's "this industry"? You've already contradicted yourself - perhaps you'd like another chance at lying?

As for C#, I've never been too interested in it. All the limitations of Java, without the portability. A feeble attempt to pull programmers away from Java, without giving them a real language. No thanks, if I'm going to code for a M$ environment, I'll stick with C++ - far more control. And I have low level control, which C# does NOT have. XML is just a management jizz-word, when it does nothing that I can't do more reliably and simply in an ini file. In short, your spouting of acronyms doesn't impress me, but rather hilights your ignorance.

Maybe you even want to know what a GDD is or even Tortoise SVN and how to set it up...what do you want to know?

Dunno, don't care. I use SourceSafe or ClearCase. I'd rather spend my time coding, than messing around with some poncy 2-bit SCM system. I'm a code monkey - I'm far less concerned with the bells and whistles than with the actual process of software development.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: EaglePryde

You got me on this one.very sharp. It's also because *a looks similar to a* but is very much different but yes.that was it and i like that kind of stuff

You were dreaming about an ancient path-finding algorithm? While developing a 4X space game???? Is there possibly a more USELESS algorithm in a game "like DW" (as you claimed)? Bingeling caught you out, and you're trying to lie your way out of being caught with yet another lie?

So now you're back to claiming you're working in game development... but it was a hobby you tried back a long time ago and now you're doing... what? Does the phrase "Would you like fries with your Coke?" pass your lips on a regular basis?

[crazyguy]

Hmm Kayoz I would be much interested in your work experience as you think you are like god here and know much more about anything than all others... Sorry but thats how you sound to me.

I am much more with EaglePryde than with you on this thread. Maybe thats because I am a Software Developer with the proper education and the proper work experience. Btw I worked with Java, C++ and C#/.net and from my perspective: I would shoot me in my leg rather than working with C++ or Java again. I worked the last 3 years with .net and it is so much more relaxed to work with it.

Btw I am NOT a native english speaker...

[EaglePryde]

1.) Ancient stuff is bad? Then let's look at COBOL for a moment. If you learned it back than you'd know much more about the tiny pieces of programming that are automated in the present. Why should i ignore the past or whipe it out of my memory. You speak of low level control..couldn't laugh more. And guess what..there are big companies still using COBOL.

2.) When did i say that i worked in the industry? Having a project or doing "indie" work isn't the high ranking industry or maybe it is..depends on how you see it. But then again your very much blind. When did i say that i used A* in a game or intended in doing so?...i dreamed about it..so what?

3.) Are we a bit premature? Seems very much like it. But hey. Bark as loud as you want.

4.) Then stick to C++. Your very much the ignorant here. A good comparison between C++ and C# is. "If you want to go to from greece to paris you could take the train, car, ship..whatever suits you...that's C++" and i'll take the plane because it's a direct route and fast...that's C#. And if you claim to know every bit and piece about .NET to be able to justify C++ being better than your very much lying. Do you know how huge .NET is ...boy? You could very well make anything in C#/.NET and you still can decide if you'd go managed or unmanaged

5.) So you use SourceSafe or ClearCase poor boy but ignore the fact that a GDD=Game Design Document is a basic standard in game development.

6.) I wish someone would lock you away because you seem to be one of those persons who a.) can't read and b.) don't think much.

7.) code monkey...hmm..i don't know about the code but the monkey fits you perfectly.

8.) I too am no native english speaker but i seem to read it better than you.

9.) Any additional word in your direction is very much a waste. Next time try to be a bit smarter or try to grow up. I hate this kiddy talk of yours but maybe this phrase fits to you "The pot calling the kettle black"

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: EaglePryde

1.) Ancient stuff is bad? Then let's look at COBOL for a moment. If you learned it back than you'd know much more about the tiny pieces of programming that are automated in the present. Why should i ignore the past or whipe it out of my memory. You speak of low level control..couldn't laugh more. And guess what..there are big companies still using COBOL.

Thee's a huge difference between maintaining a legacy financial system and developing a NEW game. If you're developing a NEW game, there's no logical reason to use an ancient tool. Given your stance, you'd use COBOL to rewrite DW. Sorry kid, but C++ is FAST and flexible. You need to optimize a section of code, you can tweak it to your heart's content - or if you're really daring, drop into inline asm if you think you know better than the compiler. Once again, you CANNOT do that with COBOL.

Now, is speed necessary? Working in the financial industry, it most certainly is. Why do you think the larger trading houses have their servers in the SAME BUILDING as the stock exchance servers? It's because their software is designed to take advantage of small variations in prices, and 1/10 of a second can mean the difference between a profit and a loss in some cases - and if you're doing millions of trades an hour, that adds up. Now let's bring this back to gaming - is speed important? Would you try to write the Crysis 2 engine in COBOL? Given what you've said, I rather suspect you would...

As to low level control, I'm at a loss to understand your humour. You laugh at low level control? You think writing device drivers is a giggle? It certainly would be in COBOL or C# - the giggling of a madman, that is.

2.) When did i say that i worked in the industry? Having a project or doing "indie" work isn't the high ranking industry or maybe it is..depends on how you see it. But then again your very much blind. When did i say that i used A* in a game or intended in doing so?...i dreamed about it..so what?

You brought the dream up. If it wasn't relevant, then it had no place. I dream of bending Michelle Rodriguez over a table and shagging her roughly from behind - that doesn't make it relevant to DW. Now that you've been caught out with your lies, you're trying to wriggle about by stating that your contradictory statements had no bearing on the discussion. That's a rather wretched attempt at an excuse.

But back to your lie, you claimed to "work in this industry" - implying that you're currently working in a professional capacity as a programmer. Perhaps you think that dabbling with some open-source project qualifies you to identify yourself as an "industry member" - I posit that given your membership criteria, the janitor at the local solicitor's office can claim to be working in the legal industry. Your presentation of your industry affiliation is misleading and so vague as to be meaningless.

4.) Then stick to C++. Your very much the ignorant here. A good comparison between C++ and C# is. "If you want to go to from greece to paris you could take the train, car, ship..whatever suits you...that's C++" and i'll take the plane because it's a direct route and fast...that's C#. And if you claim to know every bit and piece about .NET to be able to justify C++ being better than your very much lying. Do you know how huge .NET is ...boy? You could very well make anything in C#/.NET and you still can decide if you'd go managed or unmanaged

Programming languages are TOOLS to develop software. They are means to an end, not ends in themselves. If you're writing a little calendar reminder app for your desktop, then by all means use Visual Basic, as it's probably a lot quicker to develop. But if that calendar is the production control of an automated production line that requires millisecond response times - then VB is probably a BAD choice. I have in the past, and currently work in an industry where speed is paramount - the issue that is paramount in the majority of game development. Look at Elite II - with its scale and physics - all bundled up on a single floppy disk and running on a C-64. Try to recreate THAT using C# or COBOL.

You're far too enamoured with the acronyms and new toys, and have lost sight of the real purpose of coding. The purpose of coding is to economically develop software suitable to the given task. The task defines what tool is most appropriate. Your position is that "new technology is better" - whereas I propose that the technology is nothing more than a tool, and you choose the most appropriate for the task.

5.) So you use SourceSafe or ClearCase poor boy but ignore the fact that a GDD=Game Design Document is a basic standard in game development.

"poor boy"? I'm admittedly not independently wealthy, but have you seen how much ClearCase costs?!?! Poor companies don't use Rational products. Their products come with a hefty price tag - ostensibly with the productivity returns to justify their prices. "poor" isn't a term I identify well with Rational.

I've worked in 3 languages on 4 continents (I mean "worked", as in a professional capacity as a software developer, and "on 4 continents" as physically living and working in countries on those continents - not as you would propose "some open source project hosted by someone in outer Mongolia" - which you'd claim to have worked in Mongolia). So, GDD has a variety of meanings depending on what language you're speaking and what industry you're talking about. How am I supposed to divine the meaning from 3 letters?

Somehow, you think you're quite clever by using an acronym. So does that mean I can hold up my head for my brilliance in the majority of people here not being able to identify "PDV" as ponto de venda (point of sale) in Portuguese? Hell, GDD can mean a number of things in English alone. It also means Gaseous Detection Device. It means Group Delay Dispersion. You think you're clever by dropping in an acronym with no explanation or context? Pathetically childish. But you should take what pleasure you can in your small "victory" - it's quite clearly a rare event in your life.

Spouting acronyms doesn't impress anyone other than the unwashed masses who know nothing of what they mean.

6.) I wish someone would lock you away because you seem to be one of those persons who a.) can't read and b.) don't think much.

For a programmer, your typing is atrocious. Rather revealing how often you misspell words and bollocks up your capitalization - something that most programmers do NOT do.

8.) I too am no native english speaker but i seem to read it better than you.

I never stated my native tongue, did I? But to clarify, my native language is bollocks.

9.) Any additional word in your direction is very much a waste. Next time try to be a bit smarter or try to grow up. I hate this kiddy talk of yours but maybe this phrase fits to you "The pot calling the kettle black"

An interesting choice of idiom. By your own admission then, my accusations and observations are entirely correct. Thank you for admitting that. You've put to rest any questions anyone might have about your qualifications.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: crazy_guy

Hmm Kayo4z I would be much interested in your work experience as you think you are like god here and know much more about anything than all others... Sorry but thats how you sound to me.

I don't generally discuss my professional background on public forums. It's too easy to make false claims and sound authoritative by referring periodically to Wikipedia.

I don't claim to be the great expert. I am simply pointing out the contradictions, errors and untruths in EaglePryde's statements. You want an expert, go to gamedev.net - there's plenty about there. Me? I'm just calling "bullsh*t".

[Erik Rutins]

Guys, let's keep it friendly please.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Guys, let's keep it friendly please.

Sorry. Understood.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: EaglePryde

9.) ..."The pot calling the kettle black"

To clarify my observation of your statement, please see the Wiki explanation of it. Note, that it is an admission of guilt - that my statements on EaglePryde are correct, but that he claims I am guilty of the same behaviour/characteristics.

He's quite clearly stated that he's in agreement with my statements. How very helpful. Thank-you, EaglePryde, for dispelling any confusion anyone may have had on the issue(s).

[Data]

Kayoz, you just claimed you understood and now you're back at it? Stop trying to pick a fight with everyone, don't you have enough to deal with in real life? Relax.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Data

Kayoz, you just claimed you understood and now you're back at it? Stop trying to pick a fight with everyone, don't you have enough to deal with in real life? Relax.

I'm being friendly!

[Data]

Try harder, it's not enough....a provocation is still a provocation, even if strong words are not used.

[Kayoz]

ORIGINAL: Data

Try harder, it's not enough....a provocation is still a provocation, even if strong words are not used.

You're correct. It was beneath me. Just too much of a temptation to resist when he makes such a clear admission of guilt. I'll stop now.

[EaglePryde]

That's true and i true have to say i have been carried away.

For those who are into true programming and know what i'm talking about regarding COBOL it should prove interessting to know that
many companies still run old machines. That's why Linux programming is such a loved thing because doing something for a machine that has a couple of "kb" memory wouldn't go well any other way.

Many think that modern computers are the only devices that run programms or that older machines have no validity but that's very much wrong.
Next time someone goes into a supermarket they might even ask themselfs if the terminals that are used for processing the stuff you buy, have been programmed using something higher than the least demanding and most flexible programms like linux or COBOL. And why exchange over a thousand such machines against more modern one's when you wouldn't get any benefit.

Although C++ and similar are compared with "low level" programming, there is an even lower level. Modern languages have tons of librarys you basicly use while in the beginning you'd have to even programm a simple "space" yourself. Such techniques are still used for the reason above. Most "kids" who are fresh out of school don't have those deep insights anymore and are regarded less programmes and more a person who is given puzzle pieces to put together in the eyes of older guys like me. Sure they make brilliant stuff but their attitude is very much..oh well.

That's why i value the "old" things. Nothing wrong about it. Programming is not about "what is the best language or the most powerfull" but the one who suits your needs the most.

It's like comparing DW with Sins or even Crysis 2. Sure DW is less demanding and doesn't use state if the art visuals...and why should it. It doesn't need something "better".

In the end. What's more powerfull..the very first programming language or the last. The later are just an extension over the old, like adding books to a library. Nothing changes because the very core is always the same. A "space" youd have to programm in the old days is done for you by a button press that has the same routine behind it as is was in the old days.

----------
Although it would be far easier for me to talk and write in my native language it surprises me that a difference in speech is sometimes missused to tailor answers to someone owns benefit without being correct nor honoring standard board rules. This is where i sure won't make the same mistake again. I'd rather look like a lier than going below the bottom line in answering to such replies and that's why i'll quit giving any answers to such false statements as the last.
----------

[Kayoz]

You've already posted your admission to your lack of knowledge in this area. Why are you persisting?

ORIGINAL: EaglePryde

That's true and i true have to say i have been carried away.

For those who are into true programming and know what i'm talking about regarding COBOL it should prove interessting to know that
many companies still run old machines. That's why Linux programming is such a loved thing because doing something for a machine that has a couple of "kb" memory wouldn't go well any other way.

Linux is an OS, not a language. You're confusing the two. Linux programming? You might as well say Amstrad or Babbage engine programming.

Many think that modern computers are the only devices that run programms or that older machines have no validity but that's very much wrong.

Who said this? You're pulling up a completely random statement which has no bearing on the discussion. You might as well say something about the Babbage engine for all the relevance it would have to this thread of discussion.

Next time someone goes into a supermarket they might even ask themselfs if the terminals that are used for processing the stuff you buy, have been programmed using something higher than the least demanding and most flexible programms like linux or COBOL. And why exchange over a thousand such machines against more modern one's when you wouldn't get any benefit.

Linux is an OS - it is not a program as you have incorrectly identified it as. It's no more "a program" than DOS. Neither is COBOL a program - it's a programming language. As for them being "least demanding and flexible" - I fail to see how a COBOL coded program is more efficient than an equally competently well written C program. And flexible - let's see you make direct hardware calls in COBOL.

Although C++ and similar are compared with "low level" programming, there is an even lower level.

If you want really low level, go asm or do it binary in machine code. That's about as low level as you can go. C is readable assembly, and C++ is C with some syntactic sugaring and VTables - push comes to shove, C++ is just tarted up C.

COBOL on the other hand is quite high level in comparison to C, C++ and asm. You give up control for being able to do in one line in COBOL what you might take 20 or more in C - but at the cost that you can't optimize what's being done as well as in C, and it's a nightmare to do anything that's outside COBOL's design. Good luck writing an anti-virus scanner in COBOL. Equally, generating a stock report based on the last week's transactions can be a nightmare in C. Different languages, different purposes for which they were designed. I've already pointed that out. Is there a reason you're covering the exact same ground I did? How is your statement supposed to progress the discussion?

Modern languages have tons of librarys you basicly use while in the beginning you'd have to even programm a simple "space" yourself.

Program a "space"? What the heck are you on about now?

Yes, most languages can call on external libraries, allowing them to use 3rd party generated functionality. What's new about this? Anyone who's written "hello world" will know this. These libraries come at a cost, however - financial cost and technical limitations in that if the library is buggy or incapable of doing what you want it to do, you'll have to go back to coding it yourself. 3rd party libraries are not a panacea for all a programmer's ills.

Such techniques are still used for the reason above. Most "kids" who are fresh out of school don't have those deep insights anymore and are regarded less programmes and more a person who is given puzzle pieces to put together in the eyes of older guys like me. Sure they make brilliant stuff but their attitude is very much..oh well.

What techniques? You identifed "programming a space" as a "programming technique". What "technique" is this?

You're making less sense with each sentence.

That's why i value the "old" things. Nothing wrong about it. Programming is not about "what is the best language or the most powerfull" but the one who suits your needs the most.

I said that. You're repeating what I said for.... what reason?

It's like comparing DW with Sins or even Crysis 2. Sure DW is less demanding and doesn't use state if the art visuals...and why should it. It doesn't need something "better".

Now what are you on about? DW and Crysis are two completely different games. Different genre, different focus, different audience. Of course they're different. You might as well be saying "a tomato and an onion are different".

In the end. What's more powerfull..the very first programming language or the last. The later are just an extension over the old, like adding books to a library. Nothing changes because the very core is always the same. A "space" youd have to programm in the old days is done for you by a button press that has the same routine behind it as is was in the old days.

What???? Languages are tools to accomplish a task (programming), not books in a library. They aren't references, they aren't repositories of information. I have no idea where you got that analogy.

As for button pressing, that's a matter of the compiler, not necessarily the language. Keep the language the same, but change the compiler and you can get very different operations happening. A keyboard interrupt on a 8086 machine running DOS will be VERY different from one on an Amiga, a mobile phone or a NLM.

You're mixing up languages with compilers with hardware platforms.