Atlas

Wurm 2016

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, sunsvortex said:

Java skills =  Java Script Skills

 

Would you stop saying this please? They are really nothing alike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Java is to Javascript pretty much like what table is to tablespoon. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zerocool said:

 

Would you stop saying this please? They are really nothing alike.

Ok Java Skills Translate to Javascript skills very easily - better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sunsvortex said:

Ok Java Skills Translate to Javascript skills very easily - better?

The fact you say this does show that code isnt your thing. Which is perfectly okay, it's not really my thing either, I just know enough to smile and nod. But just because they both have java in the name doesnt mean they translate.

 

I also think you're missing one key point, unity does not mean pretty, java does not mean bad, you are pulling from assumptions and misinformation, Wurm would look exactly the same as it currently does in Unity, and performance would be pretty much the same as well. For such an extensively long project it is simply not something that is worth looking at.

 

I get you want Wurm to look awesome, but you really are making it clear that you do not know what you are talking about, your desire to help is cool, but misguided.

 

Edit: Hit enter too soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sunsvortex said:

Ok Java Skills Translate to Javascript skills very easily - better?

 

Absolutely not.

 

Java and JS have somy C-derived syntax in common, otherwise they are nothing alike. Java is class based, JS is prototype based FFS. It's like comparing Python to LUA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of languages used today have common ancestor in form of C language, so syntax might look similar at the first glance for non-programmers... But differences between some of these C-derived languages are massive, Java and Javascript are ironically one of best examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Warlander said:

Most of languages used today have common ancestor in form of C language, so syntax might look similar at the first glance for non-programmers... But differences between some of these C-derived languages are massive, Java and Javascript are ironically one of best examples.

 

Not to start a holy war (of either kind), but this discussion reminded me of this: :D

 

CX-o7UnWEAAEWOq.png

 

Now where do we place Scala on that chart? :P

Edited by bdew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Retrograde said:

The fact you say this does show that code isnt your thing. just because they both have java in the name doesnt mean they translate.

 

I think you're missing one key point, unity does not mean pretty, java does not mean bad, you are pulling from assumptions and misinformation.

 

I get you want Wurm to look awesome, but you really are making it clear that you do not know what you are talking about.

 

Your desire to help is cool, but misguided

Well in a sense you are right - I just started doing Java due to WU - I use Java Script fairly often on some specific parts to manipulate web browsers and for me and the people I know, it translates pretty easily. Ok, for you maybe not  - fine - who cares, It has no bearing on solving the issue, just yet another excuse to pile on top of the endless ones of why NOT to do it. I couch it under complacency and cynicism. It seems like your trying to turn this into some sort of "the developers dont have the skills to do what needs to be done." Nope - Im not biting. I could go there, but it does no good and moves the conversation away from the point -  fixing the NOT ENOUGH TIME problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had me take 2 classes in java and later 2 classes in javascript at my local college for my degree I'm on. Java was all web applets and end user applications while javascript was all manipulating the DOM.

 

Javascript didn't have any user defined classes unless I wanted to grab a big library and relearn the whole language with the frame of that library in mind, but it did let me pretty much use variables however I wanted without any declaration which was kinda nice. Made me lazy though.

 

Java on the other hand was a rerun of every other OOP language I have taken, but with Java syntax. The books we used were even written by the same author who had just tweaked a generic book or something to fit and replaced the code examples.

 

If you write something in javascript and show it to me, I can tear it apart since the code is in the browser. Even if you obfuscate, its your patience against mine. Java, no idea. Wouldn't even try. Project scope would be way bigger too.

 

I'm kinda doubting your credibility sun friend.

Edited by Zerocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Practicing my analogies ....The argument seems to be "take this engine, lights, radio, ... from this Harley (yes i consider Wurm Harley in this example), and put it all on this luxury boxcar....they both have wheels, should be easy"  and "if you know glass, then you know Plexiglass, they both have glass in name"
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, sunsvortex said:

See here we go, drowning in minutia.......

The problem here is that minutia is necessary on this kind of scale.  You literally can't just clap your hands and say, "fixed the problem."  It doesn't work like that.  You keep saying that not enough time is the hallmark excuse for the issue at hand, but it's a relevant excuse given the minutia that holds up the project in the first place.  I speak for myself when I say I've read most of your posts very patiently throughout this thread, but when you start condemning people as "making excuses" when they call you out (respectfully) on your experience, then you've only done yourself, and your debate, a disservice.

 

In any case, this kind of comparison of such a large scale project requires the little details to be hashed out.  You can say all day long that you want to avoid the minutia, but in the end it just ends up looking like you're avoiding the actual details and skills involved behind the scene because it requires too much research or effort.  Solutions take more than just an idea.  If you have to delve into the minutia to form a good footing, then by all means start there and come from the ground up with a good, solid explanation--at least on something so important as this.  You'll get there mate.  Don't sweat it.

Edited by Slickshot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to derail but it is funny that people say javascript blah blah java, when Netscape changed the name of livescript to javascript solely for marketing reasons.

 

while both use the standard c syntax, they are completely unrelated to each other. Javascript just being an evolution of self / scheme languages.

 

/Lecture over :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you actually out to do sun? Manage development time? Nobody ever wants another manager. It has to be something less than that, actually, since you have ignored every suggestion at ponying up your own time. You claim to have all this experience that should make a volunteer project really accessible to you, but you refuse to address it. WU source is there, go build a proof of concept client that at least handshakes with a WU server correctly in Unity.

 

There is absolutely no reason for the people actually doing the work to let you dictate how time is spent.

Edited by Zerocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading through this thread for awhile now. It's made me think more and more about root cause. 

 

I don't think a new engine is the key thing to focus on at this time.

 

I keep recalling reading the original vision premise of Wurm. I no longer have a link to it and from memory it went something like this:

 

You arrive in the game. You learn to survive with basic skills. With time you gain better skills and do crafting etc. As more time passes you become engaged in PVP activities.

 

I think we need more of that kind of thinking, storyline progression with many more possible paths.

 

So instead of that linear path described above there are paths for traders, crafters, explorers, fighters. Nothing hard-coded so that people are stuck on a path however more a case of making sure the supporting pieces are in place for anyone who heads in that direction.

 

For example:

 

Start game -> basic survival -> exploring -> shipping business

Start game -> basic survival -> hunting -> fighting

Start game -> villager -> farming -> cook

 

Right now there is skill grinding and PVP.

 

To retain people you need them to have things to do that keep the game fun for them. That's what this is all about.

Edited by Nappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nappy said:

I have been reading through this thread for awhile now. It's made me think more and more about root cause. 

 

I don't think a new engine is the key thing to focus on at this time.

 

I keep recalling reading the original vision premise of Wurm. I no longer have a link to it and from memory it went something like this:

 

You arrive in the game. You learn to survive with basic skills. With time you gain better skills and do crafting etc. As more time passes you become engaged in PVP activities.

 

I think we need more of that kind of thinking, storyline progression with many more possible paths.

 

So instead of that linear path described above there are paths for traders, crafters, explorers, fighters. Nothing hard-coded so that people are stuck on a path however more a case of making sure the supporting pieces are in place for anyone who heads in that direction.

 

For example:

 

Start game -> basic survival -> exploring -> shipping business

Start game -> basic survival -> hunting -> fighting

Start game -> villager -> farming -> cook

 

Right now there is skill grinding, people big things and PVP.

 

To retain people you need them to have things to do that keep the game fun for them. That's what this is all about.

Let me ask you this then -when is the right time? In all honesty, there will never be a right time.

The problem is, anything big enough to move the needle in a positive direction will be deemed  -too big /not enough dev time/= not enough time. So it all goes right back to the same thing. Sure you can put some smaller content in and give short term distraction, but its the same thing over and over again...its still the treadmill. If there were in my mind any other way to go to do it I would be pushing it instead of this. I knew this would be an uphill battle because it steps all over the established paradigms. It steps all over everything...but it needs to be done. If we dont move away from it and to a real engine, ....I just dont understand what everyone thinks will happen. Do all these people think were just going to magically get new subs one day? One day for no reason were going to check the graphs and they will be climbing steadily? It takes effort to get those things to move in the direction needed. If the projects that have the best hope of getting us going in that direction are always deemed to take too much time, then its a forever treadmill. I want off of it and the only way off it is to push hard.

 

  Sooner or later you have to start addressing fundamental problems on a fundamental level. Its tough...on everyone....but that does not take away from the need to do it. Just because its hard to do, doesnt mean it shouldnt be done, just because its going to put people in some uncomfortable positions, doesnt mean it should not be done. Nothing worthwhile was ever easy. If it was we would already be there.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sunsvortex said:

...

 

Sooner or later you have to start addressing fundamental problems on a fundamental level. Its tough...on everyone....but that does not take away from the need to do it. Just because its hard to do, doesnt mean it shouldnt be done, just because its going to put people in some uncomfortable positions, doesnt mean it should not be done. Nothing worthwhile was ever easy. If it was we would already be there.

 

 

 

I just have one question. Is what Sun is suggesting worth doing if the time/money was available?

 

I think people have been trying to say that it wouldn't help anything.  I don't know enough to have a clue if this is correct or not.

 

I'm not asking anyone to plan the project, just if it is a project worth thinking about?  In other words, if we could all wake up tomorrow and it was done, would we be in a better place than we are today?  Based on the discussion in this thread I'm expecting the answer to be a strong "No, it would be no help at all" from the development people who are experienced in this sort of thing.  Please confirm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If by "what Sun is suggesting" you mean porting Wurm to an engine, it has merits and drawbacks. It helps with lighting, it helps with graphics library handling, it helps with memory optimization and the asset pipeline, it hurts with the learning curve, it hurts with the time and money lost converting, it hurts because it could put some volunteers out of their depth. 

 

Any business with the level of decision making power sun thinks he exercises would hire a separate team to port the game and go from there. You may be familiar with any number of Minecraft ports that have come about, as an example.

 

If sun actually suggested anything else, it got lost in all of the nothing he says in between it. He really just wants to argue or manage.

Edited by Zerocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2016 at 2:04 AM, Eltaran said:
34 minutes ago, Zerocool said:

If by "what Sun is suggesting" you mean porting Wurm to an engine, it has merits and drawbacks. It helps with lighting, it helps with graphics library handling, it helps with memory optimization and the asset pipeline, it hurts with the learning curve, it hurts with the time and money lost converting, it hurts because it could put some volunteers out of their depth. 

 

Any business with the level of decision making power sun thinks he exercises would hire a separate team to port the game and go from there. You may be familiar with any number of Minecraft ports that have come about, as an example.

 

If sun actually suggested anything else, it got lost in all of the nothing he says in between it. He really just wants to argue or manage.

 

 

Good reply.  I see 4 technical points it would help with and 3 real life reasons not to do it.

 

Anything else?  All we have on the table here so far is positives to port from a purely technical point of view it seems to me.  Not what I expected to be honest.  What is porting going to hurt?  What isn't going to change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider that you are only taking into account my perspective on the pros and cons. I am not without bias.

 

Money is always an issue. Time spent is money which is what sun doesn't wanna hear (too bad). You move a team to a new engine, they need to learn that engine or be taught by a transition team like the one you could hire to do the port. If you can't offset those costs, it isn't worth doing. Doesn't matter how much good it does for the game.

 

The community has had a history of railing the game for slow development time, which is fair in my opinion. You should want your customers somewhat hungry for content, but the time taken for new content to be enjoyed isn't great. Whether hiring a team or using the existing one, porting is a show stopper for some period of time and there is a PR concern.

 

Familiarity with the code base is likely also shuffled. Less seniority, more hands on time. This isn't an interpersonal problem, just one of efficiency. It solves itself if you can afford it.

 

Porting drops players. Newer engine, newer requisites to run. Comes with the engine. I have personally had trouble getting Unity's new text rendering to work on an old Inspiron 1545 with an intel express chipset from 2009. Some people are also not going to like the new appearance. They may leave.

 

Porting also changes the tone of customer service. If a new engine is coming eventually, some problems DO get swept under the rug because they may be handled by the new engine.

 

New bugs. New, strange crap that has never happened before because it was impossible suddenly isn't. Complete wildcards.

 

I tried to talk about this before, but porting creates issues of unlike kinds. Unity uses something called prefabs for multiple instances of a thing or things. It instantiates (creates) and I think destroys by addressing instances of a prefab. Imagine you have 3 forges next to each other. They all have their own ql, one is rare, one is rotated differently, they all have properties. A prefab has a generic set of these properties that can be edited after creating an instance of the prefab. This is important because it allows distinct versions of an item sharing as much data (like your big textures) as possible. No idea what wurm's version of this is. For another example, Unity cuts all sprites and/or textures to one sheet. There are lots of highly technical reasons for this but it is fair to say it is just more efficient. Last I checked, wurm has an archive full of the textures and models and they are all distinct files on the user end. WOM may have changed this, haven't looked.

 

The business could sink. The client could have worse performance or too much of the playerbase can't keep up with the needed hardware, or it gets some bad press from the overhaul, or the growing pains cause someone to snap and quit, or any number of imaginables and unimaginables.

 

As for what isn't going to change, server side functionality shouldn't change. Really shouldn't even be on the table. Makes the scope too big. That means you should still be playing the same game, your experience with it will be what has changed. UI design, possibly sound cues (dunno if these are triggered server side but I doubt it), lighting, performance, etc.

 

...This post is too long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Zerocool said:

...This post is too long.

 

Hmmm, would it be fair to sum up your points by saying the legacy coding issues would be so large and massive that it is next to impossible in the real world that it could be done in a reasonable amount of time, cost and acceptable impact to customers?  Am I reading you right?

 

If so, not really what I was asking.  Question was to assume it was done and discuss the relative merits of the two approaches from that point forward.  Would future development be easier with an engine or not really any different?  If it is different, would it really be all that more effective or just a little bit?  So far you have stated "it...helps the asset pipeline". How much? 1/2 the future work to produce something new?  10%?  99%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GoldFever said:

 

Hmmm, would it be fair to sum up your points by saying the legacy coding issues would be so large and massive that it is next to impossible in the real world that it could be done in a reasonable amount of time, cost and acceptable impact to customers?  Am I reading you right?

 

If so, not really what I was asking.  Question was to assume it was done and discuss the relative merits of the two approaches from that point forward.  Would future development be easier with an engine or not really any different?  If it is different, would it really be all that more effective or just a little bit?  So far you have stated "it...helps the asset pipeline". How much? 1/2 the future work to produce something new?  10%?  99%?

So if I understand you correctly you're asking if a new engine would be beneficial regardless of how the transition itself could be very costly to the overall success and future of the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GoldFever said:

 

Hmmm, would it be fair to sum up your points by saying the legacy coding issues would be so large and massive that it is next to impossible in the real world that it could be done in a reasonable amount of time, cost and acceptable impact to customers?  Am I reading you right?

 

If so, not really what I was asking.  Question was to assume it was done and discuss the relative merits of the two approaches from that point forward.  Would future development be easier with an engine or not really any different?  If it is different, would it really be all that more effective or just a little bit?  So far you have stated "it...helps the asset pipeline". How much? 1/2 the future work to produce something new?  10%?  99%?

 

Simply put, In the grand scheme of things, Yes. A new client would be entirely beneficial for all corners of the board. Developers, Casual players, new comers, Modders, You name it. all would reap benefits from a new client.

 

The benefits being just to name a few:

-Less FPS issues with lets say lighting, shadows, travelling

-Less memory leaks from the simplist of things such as zooming your map in and out repeatedly, Or travelling down a hill and back up again.

-60FPS and 4k Resolution could be a possibility.

-The client wouldn't crash and burn when beyond 40 players in local. 

-Modding. Currently adding lets say a new model is like trying to figure out how to put a lego set together with half the instructions. You get half of it right then the other half is broken. With a new engine, introducing new content thats been asked for years could boom exponentially. One of the reasons you haven't seen many WU mods that do anything of the sort is simply because modding is so painful to do its not worth doing right now. If i could introduce new weapons or bridges easier, i would of had my static drawbridge and no dachi already ingame, but i dont, and i wont anytime soon with this train wreck of a client. 

-Oh and also, We more then likely wouldn't have to receive 1GB files EVERY DANG UPDATE. That probably hurts CC's hosting bills too i bet, Since theres 3400+ people downloading this file every update. 

Edited by akaedis
missed a word :#

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GoldFever said:

 

Hmmm, would it be fair to sum up your points by saying the legacy coding issues would be so large and massive that it is next to impossible in the real world that it could be done in a reasonable amount of time, cost and acceptable impact to customers?  Am I reading you right?

 

Yeah, so that bit at the end didn't mean skim the fuckin post.

 

You want to talk about ease, go to a hardware store. If a programming problem has crossed your field of view, it means someone smarter than you couldn't make it trivial in 5 minutes or you need a very specific solution and surprise! Game dev is hard in both respects. Different problems doesn't mean easier and I don't think I even brought up legacy.

 

So no, it isn't fair to sum up my points in any capacity. I gave you a very diverse answer to a very broad question.

 

1 hour ago, GoldFever said:

What is porting going to hurt?  What isn't going to change?

This. This is what I answered. The action of processing the change. This?

 

13 minutes ago, GoldFever said:

Question was to assume it was done and discuss the relative merits of the two approaches from that point forward.  Would future development be easier with an engine or not really any different?  If it is different, would it really be all that more effective or just a little bit?

Not what you asked. Different ballpark. AND EVEN THEN! I still answered a big chunk of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now