Titan Network
Community => City of Heroes => Topic started by: Leandro on January 03, 2013, 03:37:38 PM
-
-
Even tho I had a basic understanding of the differences, this made it crystal clear to me. Thank you !
(Now may I have my invite to a compatible server, pretty please with a break-free on top?)
;)
-
As a non-native speaker, I feel like I am walking on a thin ice here, but I always understood the word emulation not as a process of making a perfect copy or a mirror image, but as an act of imitating something in a manner that is in effect indistinguishable from the original. Sure, some emulators are very precise and thorough, especially those that are trying to mimic hardware, but only because - as you pointed it out yourself - even a little quirk could matter. If only they could get away with being less precise, they probably would.
So, the word emulation fits here perfectly. And, frankly, compatible server sounds weird. ;)
-
Thank you for the clarification Leandro, many people here are obviously quite technical but others - myself included - are not. Making the situation clearer for us can only help us to support various schemes in the long run.
-
Wow, that was educational. I did not know the difference (nor did I even know one existed). I just know when I play a game on the internet, I expect it to work. So, if there is a compatibility server ever created, I sure would like to know about it. That is my formal request. Thank you.
-
-
This is true in many areas of IT, non technical people use a term for something which is not the technically correct one, but is understood by similar people. I don't think anybody expected what Leandro called an emulator, much more what he called a compatible server, but to most of us, that is what we understand as an emulator (and indeed it's called an emulator in the non gaming area of IT I used to work in, I made a couple).
-
I always understood the word emulation not as a process of making a perfect copy or a mirror image, but as an act of imitating something in a manner that is in effect indistinguishable from the original.
And that's not what we want. By that definition, we'd be stuck with Issue 24 beta, never advancing the game or adding things to it. No finished Kallisti Wharf, no new powersets, no new costume pieces, no contacts with new story arcs, no Moonbase. Is that what you want? As soon as we start adding things, then you can no longer say it's indistinguishable from the original.
And, frankly, compatible server sounds weird. ;)
What about "community server"? That's my preferred term, actually. It has a nice ring to it.
-
I guess the important question is: Is a "community server" legally distinguishable from an emulator, thus making it "safe" to run one?
It's a rhetorical question. I'm assuming the "emulators" that NCSoft has gone after in the past were something more akin to "community servers," anyway. However, it would be interesting to see if there is any legal precedent for the case on technical grounds.
-
And that's not what we want. By that definition, we'd be stuck with Issue 24 beta, never advancing the game or adding things to it. No finished Kallisti Wharf, no new powersets, no new costume pieces, no contacts with new story arcs, no Moonbase.
Ah, I see where the misconception comes from now. You are mixing business logic with content, while they should be perceived as separate entities. An emulator keeps being an emulator regardless of whether it handles content for Issue 24, Issue 4, or Fan Issue 13 as long as the client connecting to it thinks it is connected to a server. But it's not the original server, hence we call it an emulator. I believe that is the correct and more importantly the intended use of the term emulation in computing.
Is that what you want?
This is beside the point, but since you asked, then yes, of course it is. Or at least I would like to have a choice to run in "classic mode", please. For sentimental reasons. And because fan made issues would be, well, fan made issues. Once upon a time a well crafted fan made content for a game happens, but I see that as a very rare event. No disrespect for you guys. I simply have no idea what are you capable of in terms of writing, map design and so forth.
What about "community server"? That's my preferred term, actually. It has a nice ring to it.
Sounds much better. But it wasn't my intention to meddle with the naming. Whatever choice will be good. I simply wanted to point out that people using the word emulator are actually correct and there is no need to invent anything more technically accurate.
edit: wording
-
-
I thought that the efforts here (not the SaveCoH stuff but the technical efforts that started Titan in the first place) had done a lot of that kind of tracking and monitoring. I could be misremembering that, but I thought that Tony or Code had said that shortly after Black Friday.
-
I thought that the efforts here (not the SaveCoH stuff but the technical efforts that started Titan in the first place) had done a lot of that kind of tracking and monitoring. I could be misremembering that, but I thought that Tony or Code had said that shortly after Black Friday.
I'm pretty sure the people involved have more than enough data.
I recall someone saying here they were monitoring the last three months of the game.
@OP: Well said, Leandro.
8)
-
<all what Leandro said>
Yeah, that's what I was talking about. But people call the computer box a 'modem'(!) or 'hard drive' or many other things than a computer all the time where I work.
I... don't know why.
But yes, what you said, Leandro, definitely, that's what I want. A local one. Because, well.. I want it. :)
Good on ya! :thumbs up:
-
In fact, the late CoH servers were images that were running on virtual machines in a cloud of servers. So there is nothing to emulate, or if there is, it will boil down to recoding it.
Based on reference.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/emulation), to emulate is to equal or excel others. CoH is protected by copyright. But is Usain Bolt protected by copyright ? Would he be, would besting him in sprint be copying him ? No, because everybody knows what running is. We all can make a robotic duck that quacks like a duck, and flies like a duck. Will it be a duck and then, infringe on Nature's copyright ? Nope ! It's an emulator of a duck !
So what Titan Network is actually plotting is not to do a community server. Neither an emulator. It'll be...
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.gifbin.com%2Fbin%2F1232550297_Dramatic+chipmunk.gif) (http://www.gifbin.com/981986)
Emulating an Emulator !
-
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=images2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20080110190923%2Fspacequest%2Fimages%2F4%2F41%2FSimSim.png)
-
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=images2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20080110190923%2Fspacequest%2Fimages%2F4%2F41%2FSimSim.png)
The third recursive loop seems to have crashed... it only has a blue screen!!!
-
Yeah, that's what I was talking about. But people call the computer box a 'modem'(!) or 'hard drive' or many other things than a computer all the time where I work.
The place I used to work handled computer support for several offices in the metro area. One of our longest-served customers had a problem that sounded like a hard drive issue, which he knew from experience would be better handled at our office, and, since we had recently switched him to a new Dell, the repair was likely to be covered by the warranty, so he said he would just drop the computer off on his way home. (Our office was actually on his way.) What I had forgotten was that his prior computer was an iMac. Guess what he brought in. :)
-
And that's not what we want. By that definition, we'd be stuck with Issue 24 beta, never advancing the game or adding things to it. No finished Kallisti Wharf, no new powersets, no new costume pieces, no contacts with new story arcs, no Moonbase. Is that what you want? As soon as we start adding things, then you can no longer say it's indistinguishable from the original.
What about "community server"? That's my preferred term, actually. It has a nice ring to it.
The above is a (not so) veiled hint Leandro just tossed out.
Just sayin. :D
-
The above is a (not so) veiled hint Leandro just tossed out.
It's no longer a hint if you point it out like that, but people on the Multimedia forum know very well that I intend for us to be able to make our own maps (http://www.cohtitan.com/forum/index.php/topic,7551.0.html), and finish the incomplete bits that the devs left in the i24 Beta client. Their creations deserve to see the light of day as they intended.
-
Boo.
1. Query the database for characters that match the desired account name,
sorted by last logon date (descending), limit 1. Cause finding needles in
haystacks is what SQL servers have been doing for ages and they're really
good at it.
2. Profit!
Boo.
1. Since this is a VERY commonly used functionality, create a column per account for last logged in character.
2. Access that column when the person logs in, and update it whenever they choose a character. You don't need a separate query to find this information.
3. Dance like it's Christmas and you were drawn by Charles Shultz. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBPcoI4OE9Y)
-
1. Query the database for characters that match the desired account name,
sorted by last logon date (descending), limit 1. Cause finding needles in
haystacks is what SQL servers have been doing for ages and they're really
good at it.
2. Profit!
If only the database query was THAT simple... :)
-
It's no longer a hint if you point it out like that, but people on the Multimedia forum know very well that I intend for us to be able to make our own maps (http://www.cohtitan.com/forum/index.php/topic,7551.0.html), and finish the incomplete bits that the devs left in the i24 Beta client. Their creations deserve to see the light of day as they intended.
See, now you're talking reverse engineering the client as well as the server. The pair are designed so that the server contains as little data as possible, and sends as little traffic as possible to the client, and the client uses its massive archive of objects and data to build a world in real time. Without the client side stuff, the "map" on the server is just garbage data.
-
Boo.
1. Since this is a VERY commonly used functionality, create a column per account for last logged in character.
2. Access that column when the person logs in, and update it whenever they choose a character. You don't need a separate query to find this information.
3. Dance like it's Christmas and you were drawn by Charles Shultz. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBPcoI4OE9Y)
Now sort the character list by last played. :)
-
This is probably important information from a technical viewpoint, but from the POV of a layperson it seems that hairs are being split.
-
This is probably important information from a technical viewpoint, but from the POV of a layperson it seems that hairs are being split.
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=farm4.static.flickr.com%2F3240%2F2772221688_2866dc49bf.jpg)
-
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=farm4.static.flickr.com%2F3240%2F2772221688_2866dc49bf.jpg)
That is an interesting sculpture. And I find it a particularly funny response because I nearly went with "hares" myself. :)
-
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=farm4.static.flickr.com%2F3240%2F2772221688_2866dc49bf.jpg)
I find this disturbing on many levels... ???
-
It's literally called "Split Hare," it is in the Yorkshire Sculpture Park in the UK, and it is by an artist named Sophie Ryder. She does a lot of monumental Sculptures featuring Lady Hares. http://www.sophieryder.net/ (http://www.sophieryder.net/)
-
You know, I don't care what it is called or how it works. If something lets me play again , I want it.
I would even be happy if the game was somehow made single-player.
-
1. Since this is a VERY commonly used functionality, create a column per account for last logged in character.
I had to read this three times before it stopped sounding like some kind of programmer punishment. Right up there with, "Copy this seven pages of code from this old copy of COMPUTE! Gazette."
Also,
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=farm4.static.flickr.com%2F3240%2F2772221688_2866dc49bf.jpg)
Can anyone spare some Brain Bleach?
-
It's literally called "Split Hare," it is in the Yorkshire Sculpture Park in the UK, and it is by an artist named Sophie Ryder. She does a lot of monumental Sculptures featuring Lady Hares. http://www.sophieryder.net/ (http://www.sophieryder.net/)
A furry that is actually respected as an artist by society?! :o
-
A furry that is actually respected as an artist by society?! :o
Such art is historically highly sought after. In ancient Egypt, for instance.
-
A furry that is actually respected as an artist by society?! :o
Here's the lady herself.
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=gerryco23.files.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F06%2Fsophie-ryder.jpg%3Fw%3D640%26amp%3Bh%3D508)
I think she's more about mythic images. I could go on at some length about the hare in celtic, greek, and other myth, but I don't want to bore you.
-
I've heard a fair bit about it. =>.>=
-
You know, I don't care what it is called or how it works. If something lets me play again , I want it.
I would even be happy if the game was somehow made single-player.
This is me, right here.
For anyone working on it, you have my thanks.
-
Now sort the character list by last played. :)
0. Since you already have a field storing last activity date for each character, you can add an index on it to speed up the query.
1. SELECT * FROM characters WHERE account=<account ID> ORDER BY last_active DESC
If only the database query was THAT simple... :)
Yes, it is. If you're selecting by account name and not ID, it will need an extra JOIN and that's that.
1. SELECT <fields> FROM characters JOIN accounts ON characters.account=accounts.id WHERE accounts.name=<account name> ORDER BY last_active DESC LIMIT 1
-
0. Since you already have a field storing last activity date for each character, you can add an index on it to speed up the query.
And since the character table will be the most used table in the database, then indexes on it will very likely be in the memory cache at any time other than right after server startup. So index queries against it are very, very cheap.
1. SELECT * FROM characters WHERE account=<account ID> ORDER BY last_active DESC
Yes, it is. If you're selecting by account name and not ID, it will need an extra JOIN and that's that.
1. SELECT <fields> FROM characters JOIN accounts ON characters.account=accounts.id WHERE accounts.name=<account name> ORDER BY last_active DESC LIMIT 1
That's assuming the accounts are in the same database, which they wouldn't be -- there's no reason for every shard to have the master account list in its own database, and it would be a security risk for it to have direct access to that table anyway. Presumably the dbserver would already have the account ID on hand, probably passed in a token from the authentication server.
-
See, now you're talking reverse engineering the client as well as the server.
Actually, the client has a built-in map editor mode, so there was no reverse engineering involved. The map format is human readable (as you can see in the linked thread), and the client reads maps from .txt files from the "data" overrides folder. We don't need to disassemble the client or touch one byte on it in order to create and include new maps; the COH client is very, very, very mod-friendly.
It's true that Codewalker posted a binary patch so people could load maps right now, but that was just a case of "gimme NAO!" and not a necessity. With the server in place, the client doesn't need to be touched in order to create new maps; it's one of the things it can naturally do.
-
It's true that Codewalker posted a binary patch so people could load maps right now, but that was just a case of "gimme NAO!" and not a necessity. With the server in place, the client doesn't need to be touched in order to create new maps; it's one of the things it can naturally do.
Maps load just fine without that patch. The only thing the patch is needed for is if you want to create new scenes (skyfiles), or add new meshes (which we don't yet have a tool for doing).
-
0. Since you already have a field storing last activity date for each character, you can add an index on it to speed up the query.
1. SELECT * FROM characters WHERE account=<account ID> ORDER BY last_active DESC
I was making a bit of a joke about storing the last active date in the account table. I am sure there are uses to do that, but it wont save you off querying for those dates in the character table anyways.
BTW separate nitpick: TOP and LIMIT operations in SQL servers tend to be a bit "slow", not slow as in dragging but do them in high enough numbers and you will nottice it. Sometimes it may be way faster to just send the entire set of data (like a list of all characters) to the client and let the client sort and "page" through the array.
-
Yes, it is. If you're selecting by account name and not ID, it will need an extra JOIN and that's that.
Not saying your wrong, just that there may be more fields and tables involved, likely that evolved over time into a monster sized query.
-
I love how you're all discussing the best way to implement a function that I pulled out of my ass and wrote two bad ways to implement it as an example. Not sarcasm.
-
I love how you're all discussing the best way to implement a function that I pulled out of my ass and wrote two bad ways to implement it as an example. Not sarcasm.
Human nature?
They're all trying to one-up each other...? ;)
-
Oh, it's much worse than that. You have a group of people who are good at problem solving who no longer have their favorite place to spend time.
-
I just want the CoH version of Project99 for Everquest classic/Kunark/Velious, Feenix's Emerald Dreams for WoW vanilla, or Utgarde for DAoC.
You can call it whatever you like, just make my client talk to something that lets me superjump through all the familar places, chat with friends in-game per usual, group for missions and TFs, and beat the whatever-serves-for-snot out of Rikti in the RWZ.
If the exact physics or other calc done server-side aren't exactly the numbers that would have been sent back from a real PS server, that is expected and can improve over time. I think everyone realizes that you have to invent your own equivalent to what they had in terms of data persistant storage and in-memory schema, calc logic and scene update messaging. Oh, and whatever behavioral script system you are using server-side (LUA-based would be my guess).
-
Yeah, I just want the game back. Call it an emulator, call it a simulator, call it an exfoliator, I don't really care. Just wanna play. I have so many character ideas still fermenting in my head.
-
I second the nomination for the name CoX Exfoliator!
-
No please click - Hero Exfloliator to enter the game and to be sent a catalog from Avon.
-
Don't exfoliate too often, you'll go blind.
-
I second the nomination for the name CoX Exfoliator!
I third it!
Also, I formerly request that someday a new issue to be created, called "City of Pie"
-
(https://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/KansasCrawford/Funny%20Pics/DalekExfoliate.jpg)
-
(https://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/KansasCrawford/Funny%20Pics/DalekExfoliate.jpg)
I would answer this with a facepalm picture, but I couldn't find one adequate to the task...
-
I would answer this with a facepalm picture, but I couldn't find one adequate to the task...
*rummages around for a while*
I think this one fits :D
(https://i813.photobucket.com/albums/zz55/KansasCrawford/Funny%20Pics/FacepalmTennant.png)
Edit: Wait, did I just facepalm myself? ???
-
I'm like the lamest chessmaster in the cosmos. 8)
-
Oh, it's much worse than that. You have a group of people who are good at problem solving who no longer have their favorite place to spend time.
THIS.
This is so true. I can't really get into the programming thing myself. Don't have the specific skills/knowledge, but I LOVED building our SG base. (Well - loved when it worked RIGHT - the rest of the time I was cursing and kicking the editor... >.>)
So yeah - naturally you're going to get people who want to tinker who CAN'T now and... well - this is the only outlet they HAVE anymore.
-
Edit: Wait, did I just facepalm myself? ???
Physician heal thyself
Hmm...
Class Clown Pants thyself?
:D
-
He wouldn't worry about wearing pants if his characters were on Triumph....
*going on a Hami raid*
(https://i.imgur.com/281mW.gif)
-
I'm like the lamest chessmaster in the cosmos. 8)
You are sooo lucky I'm gullible. >:(
...... Aww dangit, he did it again!!! :gonk:
-
Yeah, I just want the game back. Call it an emulator, call it a simulator, call it an exfoliator, I don't really care. Just wanna play. I have so many character ideas still fermenting in my head.
Same here mate. I'd prefer to play online with other people, but I'd settle for single player version with dev power, for nostalgia and giggles.
-
He wouldn't worry about wearing pants if his characters were on Triumph....
*going on a Hami raid*
Hamikinis for everyone!
-
I love how you're all discussing the best way to implement a function that I pulled out of my ass and wrote two bad ways to implement it as an example. Not sarcasm.
I love how I'm *not* the nerd in this social environment.
I'm still a social pariah, of course, but one out of two ain't half bad... ;)
-
Don't exfoliate too often, you'll go blind.
I'll stop when I get specs then
-
You know, I don't care what it is called or how it works. If something lets me play again , I want it.
I would even be happy if the game was somehow made single-player.
I am the same.
-
An emulator would try to copy this behavior exactly, because accuracy is the goal.
Oooh, that's not right.
An emulator attempts to emulate the same behavior as the original code, which generally means it takes the same inputs and generates the same outputs. It does not need to attempt to do so with precisely the same algorithms. What you're talking about is more of a server simulator, something that would, for reasons unknown, want to recreate the computational behavior of a server instance.
The real reason why a server emulator is unlikely is much simpler. An emulator would attempt to reproduce the behavior of a server instance given its original inputs. The inputs from the clients we have, because we have the clients. But the *other* inputs to the server instances are the game data, which includes data not in the game clients. We don't have that data, so we don't have the correct inputs. Without them, making a server emulator that can read them is an impossible, and also worthless, goal.
-
Yeah, I just want the game back. Call it an emulator, call it a simulator, call it an exfoliator, I don't really care. Just wanna play. I have so many character ideas still fermenting in my head.
Hero Exfoliator needs to be a billboard in the game.
Michelle
aka
Samuraiko/Dark_Respite
-
Hero Exfoliator needs to be a billboard in the game.
Michelle
aka
Samuraiko/Dark_Respite
Wow! I'm actually surprised that it wasn't, especially since the issue of exfoliating (or, at least, depillating) was directly addressed in the John Byrne Superman miniseries.
-
Oooh, that's not right.
[...]
The real reason why a server emulator is unlikely is much simpler. [...] Without them, making a server emulator that can read them is an impossible, and also worthless, goal.
Yay! Arcanaville only slightly corrected me and still agrees with the gist of the post! That's as good as being told I'm right by everybody else in the planet!
-
Yay! Arcanaville only slightly corrected me and still agrees with the gist of the post! That's as good as being told I'm right by everybody else in the planet!
*sage nod* It is, innit?
-
(https://i.imgur.com/WW6sYl.jpg)
-
If such a server were to exist, "Hero Exfoliator" sounds like a perfect code name for it, so that the people who know, know what to look for without it being too obvious.
Make it so.
-
Why am I imagining a Paragon city billboard with a photogenic hero showing off a palm sander (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Skil-735-0118V-Octo-Multi-Finishing-Sander/15173790) but in a more decorative bathroom color?
-
Why am I imagining a Paragon city billboard with a photogenic hero showing off a palm sander (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Skil-735-0118V-Octo-Multi-Finishing-Sander/15173790) but in a more decorative bathroom color?
It fills a hole left behind when Joanne Liebeler stopped appearing on Hometime?
-
Why am I imagining a Paragon city billboard with a photogenic hero showing off a palm sander (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Skil-735-0118V-Octo-Multi-Finishing-Sander/15173790) but in a more decorative bathroom color?
Just the thing for dealing with a nasty outbreak of palmar trichosis... 8)
-
Likely some heroes would have to use one. Considering I myself have to use a friggin' rock on most of my body to get the dead skin off.
-
As a non-native speaker, I feel like I am walking on a thin ice here, but I always understood the word emulation not as a process of making a perfect copy or a mirror image, but as an act of imitating something in a manner that is in effect indistinguishable from the original. Sure, some emulators are very precise and thorough, especially those that are trying to mimic hardware, but only because - as you pointed it out yourself - even a little quirk could matter. If only they could get away with being less precise, they probably would.
So, the word emulation fits here perfectly. And, frankly, compatible server sounds weird. ;)
I'm in the same boat, myself. I've always understood "emulation" to mean the creation of an environment within which something can operate that's incompatible with the environments it naturally has access to. Whether you emulate that environment with exacting accuracy - which I would actually term a "simulation" or loosely, what matters about an emulator is that it make the software run as it was intended.
I guess the difference in terms here comes from whether you're trying to emulate City of Heroes or THE SERVER which runs City of Heroes. In this regard, I appreciate Leandro's point: The game runs fine on modern machines and we don't care about the architecture which intercepts the various server calls. We want to emulate City of Heroes itself, which means creating an environment suitable for its needs, and that doesn't have to be a copy of the original server architecture.
-
Probably "simulator" would be a better term. We are looking to simulate the data that came from the official servers so the client would believe it's attached to the original servers.
-
What's up with this quest for an alternative to the perfect word for the job?
According to Oxford Dictionary (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/emulate?q=emulate), to emulate means "[to] match or surpass (a person or achievement), typically by imitation". There is also a case for usage of emulate in computing: "reproduce the function or action of (a different computer, software system, etc.)".
Other dictionaries have similar definitions. I particularly like the one from dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/emulate?s=t), which says that in computing to emulate stands for "to imitate (a particular computer system) by using a software system, often including a microprogram or another computer that enables it to do the same work, run the same programs, etc., as the first". The emphasis is mine.
Emulation does not equal to making an exact copy. What you guys are striving to make would be an actual emulator. But quite frankly, the whole argument is silly. You can call it a hero exfoliator or George if you'd like. Nobody will mind as long as we get to play the game.
-
It's just because when you say emulator people think of MAME or the virtual consoles running old games on modern consoles. Or even DOSBox for old PC games that manipulated PC hardware directly to get the most performance out of the system (ah the good old days of ignoring DOS and the BIOS and writing down at the metal :'()
-
Mame ? The one with Lucy ? <runs - hides>.
-
It's just because when you say emulator people think of MAME or the virtual consoles running old games on modern consoles. Or even DOSBox for old PC games that manipulated PC hardware directly to get the most performance out of the system (ah the good old days of ignoring DOS and the BIOS and writing down at the metal :'()
Um... I am confused about where the issue is.
-
Um... I am confused about where the issue is.
He was giving his opinion...?
It's semantics, dude.
You say TOEMATE-O, I say TUHMAWTOE.
:D
-
He was giving his opinion...?
It's semantics, dude.
You say TOEMATE-O, I say TUHMAWTOE.
:D
I am confused about where the issue is with people associating emulators with DOSBox and MAME. Me quoting relevant post could have been a clue. :P
-
I'm in the same boat, myself. I've always understood "emulation" to mean the creation of an environment within which something can operate that's incompatible with the environments it naturally has access to. Whether you emulate that environment with exacting accuracy - which I would actually term a "simulation" or loosely, what matters about an emulator is that it make the software run as it was intended.
I guess the difference in terms here comes from whether you're trying to emulate City of Heroes or THE SERVER which runs City of Heroes. In this regard, I appreciate Leandro's point: The game runs fine on modern machines and we don't care about the architecture which intercepts the various server calls. We want to emulate City of Heroes itself, which means creating an environment suitable for its needs, and that doesn't have to be a copy of the original server architecture.
In this regard, Leandro's terminology is much more accurate. If you are attempting to create a server that the client recognizes and that behaves in a manner similar to the way the original CoH servers did with regard to broad gameplay, you are attemping to create a compatible server.
Colloquially, these terms do not have consistent definition: they are used by people in whatever way they want. But in software development specifically, and in communities that focus on these areas, the terms have very specific usages that are generally followed consistently in the vast majority of cases.
Emulation refers to the behavior of a system treated as a black box. System A emulates System B if System A behaves like System B given the same inputs.
Simulation refers to the behavior of the components of a system. System A simulates System B at some level if, for a particular breakdown of System B into components, the equivalent components of A behave in the same or similar way. In a sense, Emulation refers to the behavior of the system from the outside, simulation refers to the behavior of the system inside.
System A is Compatible with System B if System A can replace System B in a way that allows other systems that normally interact with System B to continue to function correctly, if not necessarily identically.
A colloquial argument about the meaning of those terms goes nowhere, because the dictionary definition is vague and the technical definitions are only important to people involved usually. But if I were hiring a programmer to create a system, I would expect them to understand the difference between those three terms.
As to MAME, MAME is an interesting example. MAME emulates game consoles - it reproduces their behavior. It contains processor emulators that emulate the behavior of CPUs and sound chips etc. But in a sense, it also simulates game consoles, by reproducing the behavior of those components as they interact with each other. The stated purpose of MAME is to reproduce not just the behavior of the games, but also in a way that preserves their original design. Although they do not put it this way, I would say MAME intends to simulate game consoles with a library of component emulators to reproduce the behavior of the original game. So you could argue MAME drivers are emulators at one level, and simulators at another level. Albeit, they are extremely loose simulators at best, its not a trivial point since arguments over this precise detail have occurred within the MAME development community periodically over the years.
Where MAME crosses the line from emulator to simulator is in the area of unintended behavior. In the MAME community, the majority opinion has tended to be if the original game had an behavior the designer did not intend, a MAME driver that did not reproduce that behavior implicitly (as opposed to in an ad hoc manner) would fail to properly recreate the game to MAME standards. If the base MAME code and the MAME driver did their jobs correctly, such behaviors should automatically emerge from the system. This notion that a MAME driver with the appropriate roms should *automatically* reproduce all quirks of the original game without those behaviors being explicitly programmed into the code is a hallmark of a simulator more than an emulator.
-
Except if we were to follow such strict rules about what counts as an emulator and what does not, an argument could be made that in computing emulators do not exist (or are extremely rare), as most emulators are not exact functional copies of the systems they try to be compatible with. All emulators listed in this thread, as far as I can tell, take liberties with the precision of that compatibility.
Take DOSBox. Is it an emulator? It sells itself as such, but what does it emulate? Not an earlier PC architecture, because it exceeds that functionality. It would also fail your definition of an emulator, as there are still certain code paths that do not produce the exact same result as a pre-Pentium era PC computer with MS-DOS on board would (http://www.dosbox.com/status.php?show_status=1). So is it a MS-DOS emulator? Well, no to that as well, as it takes many liberties in how it works for the sake of convenience and its intended purpose. Should we call it a system compatible with MS-DOS running on a PC-like architecture? If we wanted to be strict, then the answer to that question would be yes. However, we do have this nifty convenience word that has been serving as an umbrella term for this kind of stuff and it's an emulator, strictness be damned.
-
I'm getting a headache... :-\
-
I'm getting a headache... :-\
We must all come to an agreement.
For what Leandro is talking about, we should call it a community server. Or maybe we could call it the reverse-engineering project.
For things similar to (outside of this community/City of Heroes) but not exactly what Leandro is talking about, we'll call those emulators.
Done deal?
:D
-
Except if we were to follow such strict rules about what counts as an emulator and what does not, an argument could be made that in computing emulators do not exist (or are extremely rare), as most emulators are not exact functional copies of the systems they try to be compatible with. All emulators listed in this thread, as far as I can tell, take liberties with the precision of that compatibility.
That's an argument you'd lose, because no definition of emulation requires perfection.
Take DOSBox. Is it an emulator? It sells itself as such, but what does it emulate?
It emulates a hypothetical x86 *hardware* system with *software*.
Not an earlier PC architecture, because it exceeds that functionality. It would also fail your definition of an emulator, as there are still certain code paths that do not produce the exact same result as a pre-Pentium era PC computer with MS-DOS on board would (http://www.dosbox.com/status.php?show_status=1). So is it a MS-DOS emulator? Well, no to that as well, as it takes many liberties in how it works for the sake of convenience and its intended purpose. Should we call it a system compatible with MS-DOS running on a PC-like architecture? If we wanted to be strict, then the answer to that question would be yes. However, we do have this nifty convenience word that has been serving as an umbrella term for this kind of stuff and it's an emulator, strictness be damned.
Also, you're confusing the virtual hardware component of the project which is the x86 system emulator with their version of DOS, which is their implementation of a DOS-like OS that runs on their virtual x86 hardware.
No one that I'm aware of with any knowledge of software systems would be remotely confused as to what DOSBox is. Its a project that delivers an x86 PC emulator in software, and a DOS-like OS that runs in it.
-
That's an argument you'd lose, because no definition of emulation requires perfection.
Precisely. Yet most emulators I dealt with would count as simulators if definitions from your earlier post were to be followed.
It emulates a hypothetical x86 *hardware* system with *software*.
I am intrigued. How do you emulate something hypothetical if you apply your definition of an emulator?
Also, you're confusing the virtual hardware component of the project which is the x86 system emulator with their version of DOS, which is their implementation of a DOS-like OS that runs on their virtual x86 hardware.
I am not confusing anything. I can tell them apart, although in case of DOSBox the differentiation is purely artificial. Instead I am pointing at how inadequate it is to shoehorn DOSBox into the emulators category. Yet, that is how it is usually called. It's convenient to call it that.
No one that I'm aware of with any knowledge of software systems would be remotely confused as to what DOSBox is. Its a project that delivers an x86 PC emulator in software, and a DOS-like OS that runs in it.
Actually, I am not discussing confusion, but the intended and practical usage of certain words.
-
Precisely. Yet most emulators I dealt with would count as simulators if definitions from your earlier post were to be followed.
Name one. DosBox is an emulator. It emulates in software a system spec of their own design. Specifically:
DOSBox emulates an Intel x86 PC, complete with sound, graphics, mouse, joystick, modem, etc., necessary for running many old MS-DOS games that simply cannot be run on modern PCs and operating systems, such as Microsoft Windows XP, Windows Vista, Linux and FreeBSD. However, it is not restricted to running only games. In theory, any MS-DOS or PC-DOS (referred to commonly as "DOS") application should run in DOSBox, but the emphasis has been on getting DOS games to run smoothly, which means that communication, networking and printer support are still in early development.
I am intrigued. How do you emulate something hypothetical if you apply your definition of an emulator?
Emulation refers to the behavior of a system treated as a black box. System A emulates System B if System A behaves like System B given the same inputs.
The DOSBox project developers do not explicitly have to target the emulation of an actual PC somewhere, because the components they are emulating in the aggregate have well-known functionality, including the base CPU, the system interfaces, and the sound and graphics components. Its also well-known that there's really no such thing as an "x86 PC" in the specific: that's a general term to refer to a class of systems, and the unstated target of any "x86 PC" emulator is a base subset of functionality within that class. In fact, there's no such thing as an "x86" in the specific either: that is also a reference to a class of processors and not a specific one, but everyone understands what an "x86 emulator" refers to. It also doesn't violate my definition of emulation, since an x86 emulator would specifically attempt to target the well-known subset of functionality common to processors of that class, and nowhere do I state that subset must exist in a product you can purchase at Best Buy.
-
Bah. Let's stop arguing about semantics and call it something tasteless.
Say "Server-like Substitute Product". :p
-
Bah. Let's stop arguing about semantics and call it something tasteless.
Mapserver spackle?
-
Name one. DosBox is an emulator. It emulates in software a system spec of their own design. Specifically:
So DOSBox is an emulator even though it emulates certain idealized approximation of a system. The so called community server is not an emulator, despite being required to follow certain protocol to the letter in order for the client to be able to use it in a meaningful way. Help me understand how is that possible and why such semantic acrobatics are required.
The DOSBox project developers do not explicitly have to target the emulation of an actual PC somewhere, because the components they are emulating in the aggregate have well-known functionality, including the base CPU, the system interfaces, and the sound and graphics components. Its also well-known that there's really no such thing as an "x86 PC" in the specific: that's a general term to refer to a class of systems, and the unstated target of any "x86 PC" emulator is a base subset of functionality within that class. In fact, there's no such thing as an "x86" in the specific either: that is also a reference to a class of processors and not a specific one, but everyone understands what an "x86 emulator" refers to. It also doesn't violate my definition of emulation, since an x86 emulator would specifically attempt to target the well-known subset of functionality common to processors of that class, and nowhere do I state that subset must exist in a product you can purchase at Best Buy.
The DOSBox project comprises multiple emulators bundled into one convenient package. In fact it is more of a specialized virtual machine, being both a comprehensive hardware emulator supporting many components and having a built-in software platform. Yet it fits the definition of an emulator in your eyes. Why does the community server need to be called something else even though its implementation has to follow more rigid set of rules? What cognitive problem does it solve?
Bah. Let's stop arguing about semantics and call it something tasteless.
B-but... I am trying to pad my post count here!
-
So DOSBox is an emulator even though it emulates certain idealized approximation of a system. The so called community server is not an emulator, despite being required to follow certain protocol to the letter in order for the client to be able to use it in a meaningful way. Help me understand how is that possible and why such semantic acrobatics are required.
Actually, it doesn't have to follow the protocol to the letter. Certain things, like slash commands that get passed through directly to the server, could be altered and the client would still function.
-
Actually, it doesn't have to follow the protocol to the letter. Certain things, like slash commands that get passed through directly to the server, could be altered and the client would still function.
I meant protocol as a set of behaviors that need to be present in order for the client to be able present the game world to the player, not the communication protocol the client and server use to communicate with each other. Sorry, should have explained it better.
-
You like potato and I like potahto,
You like tomato and I like tomahto,
Potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto!
Let's call the whole thing off!
:D
-
So DOSBox is an emulator even though it emulates certain idealized approximation of a system. The so called community server is not an emulator, despite being required to follow certain protocol to the letter in order for the client to be able to use it in a meaningful way. Help me understand how is that possible and why such semantic acrobatics are required.
1. DOSBox does not "emulate certain idealized approximations of a system." It attempts to emulate a specific thing: its just that the target isn't hardware that I can point to. That's irrelevant.
2. The community server can be said to emulate a game server relative to the game client, but its not a server emulator. That's two different things. Emulating a protocol is not the same thing as emulating a server.
Why does the community server need to be called something else even though its implementation has to follow more rigid set of rules? What cognitive problem does it solve?
As mentioned previously, including by me, a hypothetical community server, if it existed, could call itself anything it wants. However, there's a significant fundamental difference between attempting to recreate the servers as they previously existed, and attempting to create servers that happen to work correctly with the client. As Leandro himself pointed out and I concurred, the target isn't really emulation or simulation, but compatibility.
However, the "cognitive problem" the term encapsulates the description of is the fundamental decision anyone attempting to recreate CoH servers must first resolve. Is the intent to attempt to recreate the behavior of the servers to the best extent possible, or is the intent to create game servers that the game clients interoperate with to the best extent possible. Those are not identical goals.
-
*slaps Atlantea with a herring and runs away cackling*
-
You like potatoe and I like potahto,
You like tomato and I like tomahto,
Potatoe, potahto, tomato, tomahto!
Let's call the whole thing off!
:D
Fixed for Dan Quayle.
-
And that's not what we want. By that definition, we'd be stuck with Issue 24 beta, never advancing the game or adding things to it. No finished Kallisti Wharf, no new powersets, no new costume pieces, no contacts with new story arcs, no Moonbase. Is that what you want? As soon as we start adding things, then you can no longer say it's indistinguishable from the original.
What about "community server"? That's my preferred term, actually. It has a nice ring to it.
Frankly, yes. I did like the i23 version of the game, and so, if I were 'stuck' with that, I'd be ecstatic..I will happily admit, I do want to see i24, too... But I dont think an i23 version would be 'settling'.. And I totally disagree with.. "And that's not what we want". I want CoH back, period... I will take that. If it is ever offered...
But, I have to commend ya on all the technical details
Cheers
-
2. Profit!
Yes?
-
Frankly, yes. I did like the i23 version of the game, and so, if I were 'stuck' with that, I'd be ecstatic..I will happily admit, I do want to see i24, too... But I dont think an i23 version would be 'settling'.. And I totally disagree with.. "And that's not what we want". I want CoH back, period... I will take that. If it is ever offered...
But, I have to commend ya on all the technical details
Cheers
I think his intention in that post wasn't so much saying "we don't want a frozen at i23 or i24 COH" but rather I think he was saying "Why settle for i23/i24 that never advances when we can have endless expansion possibilities on top of i24"
-
-
It's also partly a connotation issue. As someone who has played some other MMOs and seen the various developments going on, there are two things that are typically called "emulators" by the communities of those games:
- A private server that is either based directly on leaked code (Aion), or written to interface with leaked server data files (WoW), both of which are extremely dubious and much more likely to be subject to serious legal action than a clean implementation.
- A half done hack job running on a crappy MySQL database that barely works, crashes all the time, and is so buggy as to not really be playable. Often missing pretty much all content other than whatever monsters the server admins feel like spawning for giggles, which probably don't even have working AI.
There are a few notable exceptions (SWGEmu comes to mind), but they're rare.
We don't want either of those. :)
-
Correct me if I'm wrong here: does this mean that
1) from the point of view of a player that never touches or administers either server (original official one or the compatibility one) there is no distinction, he just see what he can honestly call "emulation"
2) From the point of view of an admin, or developer that works on or administers the server, there will be a very obvious difference and (should he know the definition of emulation as you stated before) he will never dare call it emulation (or accept anyone else calling it so.)
Sounds about correct.
-
There are a few notable exceptions (SWGEmu comes to mind), but they're rare.
SWGEmu is already functional?
-
SWGEmu is already functional?
Looking back over their news archive they have had players on the test server from at least 2010. I don't recall when they launched their proper live servers or know how many features are still to be fully developed however.
-
-
It's also partly a connotation issue. As someone who has played some other MMOs and seen the various developments going on, there are two things that are typically called "emulators" by the communities of those games:
- A private server that is either based directly on leaked code (Aion), or written to interface with leaked server data files (WoW), both of which are extremely dubious and much more likely to be subject to serious legal action than a clean implementation.
- A half done hack job running on a crappy MySQL database that barely works, crashes all the time, and is so buggy as to not really be playable. Often missing pretty much all content other than whatever monsters the server admins feel like spawning for giggles, which probably don't even have working AI.
There are a few notable exceptions (SWGEmu comes to mind), but they're rare.
We don't want either of those. :)
Which is why I really consider all community server projects I'm aware of reimplementations.
-
-
-
In a casual conversation about server replacements for CoH, I wouldn't nit-pick the use of the term "server emulator." But this was a discussion about the specifics, and that casual immunity no longer applies here.
You are by definition emulating the communications protocol between client and server no matter what use of the client you are making.
What you may or may not be additionally emulating are the game content and systems, such as what maps and mobs it uses, and all the behavior and calculation results that sum up to act and look like "The Game" we played before.
1. If experiencing Atlas Park or any familiar map play as close to Nov 30, 2012 as possible, then you are attempting to emulate City of Heroes content-wise as well.
2. If not, and you just want to use the client but show a different landscape or one that behaves differently in small or large ways, then you are only emulating some of the gameplay component systems enough to do that job.
Clearly (1) requires much more detailed replacement gameplay systems server-side to try to respond to the client in as much the same way the real Servers would have that is possible. Everything from combat mechanics and calcs to scripted events have a big burden on them to result in the same communications stream as the real Servers would have produced, regardless of what spinning gerbils in your black box are used to accomplish that.
All (2) requires is that the messages to the client make sense. Without the goal of emulating the content and gameplay systems we knew, this could result in an infinite variety of games that have anywhere from some passing resemblance to CoH, to looking more like WoW or Everquest ifyou so chose.
So its all in the level of emulation desired by you.
---------------
tl;dr
Communications protocol emulation is required no matter what.
Content and gameplay systems behavior emulation is only needed to the extent you are trying to copy the old City of Heroes content and behavior we knew. Without this goal, you could drive the client as a game that looks and acts nothing (or partially) like what we knew.
So it is an emulator by definition. The extent of emulation is the only question.
-
You are by definition emulating the communications protocol between client and server no matter what use of the client you are making.
To be precise, you can emulate a system that uses a protocol, but not literally emulate a protocol (which I imprecisely stated colloquially earlier). Something that "emulates" a protocol and something that implements a protocol are indistinguishable from each other. Emulation by definition reproduces behavior, not structure, in operational definitions involving software.
No definition of emulation I consider reasonably valid for software systems would imply that implementing a communications protocol was a form of emulation. In a professional context, I would consider someone trying to convince me its possible to functionally emulate HTTP without implementing HTTP to be high.
-
To be precise, you can emulate a system that uses a protocol, but not literally emulate a protocol (which I imprecisely stated colloquially earlier). Something that "emulates" a protocol and something that implements a protocol are indistinguishable from each other.
I think I can think of some protocols out there that "emulate" another protocol. At least new versions of old protocols are this when they want to be retrocompatible. Like the ISO model can easily emulate the TCP/IP model (okay that's not a protocol but you get the point). And isn't USB2 this to USB1.1 ? (there is no need for two hardwares to make devices compatible to the two protocols)
-
I remember reading similar post as OP in some WOW forums, saying why wow players would never see an emulator.
6 months later I was able to play on a private server.
So anything is possible.
But ofc a LEGAL private server will never be.
-
lol, is this whole thread about whether or not it's okay to call a generic company's tissue a kleenex instead of a tissue? Personally I just want to blow my nose, man.
-
I think I can think of some protocols out there that "emulate" another protocol. At least new versions of old protocols are this when they want to be retrocompatible. Like the ISO model can easily emulate the TCP/IP model (okay that's not a protocol but you get the point). And isn't USB2 this to USB1.1 ? (there is no need for two hardwares to make devices compatible to the two protocols)
USB2 is backward-compatible with USB1.1. USB2 specifies that all USB2 devices must support the requirements of USB1 and negotiate them appropriately. To put it another way, USB2 is a superset of USB1; it includes as a requirement the exact communications protocol of USB1. It does not emulate USB1. A USB2 device could perhaps be described as being able to emulate the behavior of a USB1 device, but USB2 does not emulate USB1. It implements USB1 directly as a requirement of the specification.
The closest thing I can think of to "protocol emulation" are network testing systems. There are systems that pretend to execute a network protocol to test that all the transmission equipment handle that transmission correctly. I use VOIP testers, for example, that generate something that appears to be SIP call traffic from one end of a network to another. These are often colloquially called "protocol emulators" in that they appear to implement SIP or H.323 but don't really: the two end points are talking gibberish and not really even listening to what each other is saying except for the minimum necessary to keep things like session state and round-trip lag elements of the protocol valid.
In a sense its a form of "protocol emulation" in that its reproducing the behavior of a system relative to some standard (that standard being what intermediate network gear sees) but its not really emulating the protocol itself; its emulating the network characteristics of the protocol for test purposes.
-
I remember reading similar post as OP in some WOW forums, saying why wow players would never see an emulator.
6 months later I was able to play on a private server.
So anything is possible.
I suspect that one day someone will publicly announce a City of Heroes server emulator. Its just unlikely it will actually emulate the original CoH servers except superficially. Not because its impossible, but rather because its technically suboptimal to even try compared to all other reimplementation alternatives.
-
I suspect that one day someone will publicly announce a City of Heroes server emulator. Its just unlikely it will actually emulate the original CoH servers except superficially. Not because its impossible, but rather because its technically suboptimal to even try compared to all other reimplementation alternatives.
You know, by no definition emulators are required to precisely replicate inner workings of a system they imitate.
-
USB2 is backward-compatible with USB1.1. USB2 specifies that all USB2 devices must support the requirements of USB1 and negotiate them appropriately. To put it another way, USB2 is a superset of USB1; it includes as a requirement the exact communications protocol of USB1. It does not emulate USB1. A USB2 device could perhaps be described as being able to emulate the behavior of a USB1 device, but USB2 does not emulate USB1. It implements USB1 directly as a requirement of the specification.
The closest thing I can think of to "protocol emulation" are network testing systems. There are systems that pretend to execute a network protocol to test that all the transmission equipment handle that transmission correctly. I use VOIP testers, for example, that generate something that appears to be SIP call traffic from one end of a network to another. These are often colloquially called "protocol emulators" in that they appear to implement SIP or H.323 but don't really: the two end points are talking gibberish and not really even listening to what each other is saying except for the minimum necessary to keep things like session state and round-trip lag elements of the protocol valid.
In a sense its a form of "protocol emulation" in that its reproducing the behavior of a system relative to some standard (that standard being what intermediate network gear sees) but its not really emulating the protocol itself; its emulating the network characteristics of the protocol for test purposes.
If what's bold, that is what you say, is not saying "USB2 protocol requires all devices to comply with protocol USB1", and so, "USB2 protocol incorporates protocol USB1 and more" that is, "USB2 imitates USB1 and exceed it", then I'll be damned.
I'm going to propose the definition in Wikipedia's article on Emulators (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator), which stipulates that "In computing, an emulator is hardware or software or both that duplicates (or emulates) the functions of a first computer system (the guest) in a different second computer system (the host), so that the emulated behavior closely resembles the behavior of the real system. This focus on exact reproduction of behavior is in contrast to some other forms of computer simulation, in which an abstract model of a system is being simulated. For example, a computer simulation of a hurricane or a chemical reaction is not emulation." So, as long as the intent is to provide an exact reproduction of behaviour, of which we have had countless examples an we even know the majority of the rules, then yes, we can have an emulator of City of Heroes, as long as the people who have the best knowledge of it are behind it, and as long as it was a human-created system, it can be recreated to fool every other human as being the real thing.
And I think we've just got the kind of person quoted in this post, the rest of this kind must already be on Titan board, and the kind that can't help us because of NDA shouldn't count.
If the problem is the server's input file being an unknown, that's partially correct. Those are not unknown, they are variables. Emulation doesn't care to emulate every data it's going to have presented, it copies the mechanism. Saying a "community server" can't be an emulator because we will never have the server data files is like saying you can't have homebrew on the PSP because we couldn't read what was on the discs. We all know the data that was in the server files, the only problem being we don't know their format is moot. When you plug an MP3 player on a pair of speakers, they don't care if the format was in fact Ogg. The output is the same. That's the same with CoH client and a community server, wether it's an emulator or a reimplementation is the same - the game is supposed to function the same.
Maybe the cruelest fact would be that the server files are forever gone. So no developer will never have to ever bother with making what would truly be considered an "emulator" because there is nothing to emulate except the whole server and its data altogether. Then isn't that an emulator ? It also transforms raw power into client-compatible data ! We reimplemented all the mechanisms necessary to produce the same output, and it will have the same input: the client commands and raw power.
-
Head explodes
-
Head explodes
*begins to pick up the pieces*
-
I am worried that Hail Mary TF may be severely impaired by VV's lack of proper head. We'd better bootstrap some sort of an emulator right quick.
-
I think hatracking an emulator is a bit more urgent now.
-
I think his intention in that post wasn't so much saying "we don't want a frozen at i23 or i24 COH" but rather I think he was saying "Why settle for i23/i24 that never advances when we can have endless expansion possibilities on top of i24"
Ah, I think you might be right. In that case, not sure which way I'd lean on that idea.
-
Why can't a group of Devs do what the folks at SWGEMU.com have done with Star Wars Galaxies? I would kill for a Pre-Enhancement Diversification City of Heroes Emulator.
-
Why can't a group of Devs do what the folks at SWGEMU.com have done with Star Wars Galaxies? I would kill for a Pre-Enhancement Diversification City of Heroes Emulator.
If a team can pull off an I24 emu, I think it'll be able to add a "No DE" flag somewhere, at least in certain zones (via Ouroboros ?)
-
If a team can pull off an I24 emu, I think it'll be able to add a "No DE" flag somewhere, at least in certain zones (via Ouroboros ?)
Why would they want to? DE was necessary to the health of the game, and inventions completely make up for it.
-
Why would they want to? DE was necessary to the health of the game, and inventions completely make up for it.
Well the original developpers did want to give us a totally overpowered mission as the first mission of the Mender Ramiel, because it was fun. So why not some ouroboros arcs where the rules are totally off just to have fun ?
-
Well the original developpers did want to give us a totally overpowered mission as the first mission of the Mender Ramiel, because it was fun. So why not some ouroboros arcs where the rules are totally off just to have fun ?
You know....that is the one place where ending an arc with "and it was all a dream" would be perfectly legitimate.
-
I somehow think it wasn't a -DE in the Mender arc. It was more a hugely overpowered set of three special temporary powers. If Brawling Humiliator can go in with just brawl and take them out easily... BRAWL, people... 4 hits maybe on the toughest one... It's not -DE, it's a gigantic Luck, Rage and such, added into the three temp powers. You had something like a +50000% temp power forcefield surrouding you and affecting all you did, so you were effectively untouchable and overpowering.
But that's a guess, to be honest. I'd really like to know for sure, myself.
/BRAWL. Soloed that in no time. That's ridiculous. :p
-
Ok, Soooooo If I understand everything I just spent all this time reading, And I understand it correctly.... There WILL be Bacon correct??
Hello??
-
I somehow think it wasn't a -DE in the Mender arc. It was more a hugely overpowered set of three special temporary powers. If Brawling Humiliator can go in with just brawl and take them out easily... BRAWL, people... 4 hits maybe on the toughest one... It's not -DE, it's a gigantic Luck, Rage and such, added into the three temp powers. You had something like a +50000% temp power forcefield surrouding you and affecting all you did, so you were effectively untouchable and overpowering.
But that's a guess, to be honest. I'd really like to know for sure, myself.
Yep, the source of the insane 'Roid Rage boost in Ramiel's arc (http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Mender_Ramiel#Part_One:_What_Could_Be) was three mission-exclusive temp powers:
[Divine Core Oscillation] (http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/powers/power.php?id=Temporary_Powers.SilentPowers.Divine_Core_Oscillation) : Gigantic piles of unresistable damage added as a proc to every hit.
[Limitless Radial Freeeem! (http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/powers/power.php?id=Temporary_Powers.SilentPowers.Limitless_Radial_Freeeem)] : Every stat you've got boosted out the wazoo.
[Paradox Core Eternity] (http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/powers/power.php?id=Temporary_Powers.SilentPowers.Paradox_Core_Eternity) : Complete invulnerability after a time travel event. Which you were just in.
In other words, you've basically had your entire body coated with an alloy of unobtainium and wonderflonium, and the lightest tap sends the target crashing through a brick wall where they burst into flame and explode in a giant fireball.
I too think that ED was necessary for the game's health, and that you could pretty much negate it's limitations by using IOs. But a couple Ouro arcs, or an "Echo" zone, where the rules get ignored... yeah, that could be pretty sweet. 8)
-
Yep, the source of the insane 'Roid Rage boost in Ramiel's arc (http://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Mender_Ramiel#Part_One:_What_Could_Be) was three mission-exclusive temp powers:
[Divine Core Oscillation] (http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/powers/power.php?id=Temporary_Powers.SilentPowers.Divine_Core_Oscillation) : Gigantic piles of unresistable damage added as a proc to every hit.
[Limitless Radial Freeeem! (http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/powers/power.php?id=Temporary_Powers.SilentPowers.Limitless_Radial_Freeeem)] : Every stat you've got boosted out the wazoo.
[Paradox Core Eternity] (http://tomax.cohtitan.com/data/powers/power.php?id=Temporary_Powers.SilentPowers.Paradox_Core_Eternity) : Complete invulnerability after a time travel event. Which you were just in.
In other words, you've basically had your entire body coated with an alloy of unobtainium and wonderflonium, and the lightest tap sends the target crashing through a brick wall where they burst into flame and explode in a giant fireball.
I'd like to play through the entire game with all three of those on at least one character.
And I'd like a limitless supply of all IOs free from every vendor for all characters.
And x10 XP. ;)
Of course, this is why I'd prefer to be able to play the game offline.
-
I'd like to play through the entire game with all three of those on at least one character.
And I'd like a limitless supply of all IOs free from every vendor for all characters.
And x10 XP. ;)
Of course, this is why I'd prefer to be able to play the game offline.
I suspect the game would bore you to tears quickly.
-
I suspect the game would bore you to tears quickly.
You'd suspect wrong. Probably because you base your suspicions on your own temperament, or possibly because you missed the part where I didn't want the uber-buffs on every character. Basically the same statement has been fed to me regarding more games than I can count, and it was wrong in every instance.
-
You'd suspect wrong. Probably because you base your suspicions on your own temperament, or possibly because you missed the part where I didn't want the uber-buffs on every character. Basically the same statement has been fed to me regarding more games than I can count, and it was wrong in every instance.
Yes, I do base my suspicion on my own temperament and I can imagine such settings, paired with solo play, sapping any motivation to play the game for me. You are, however, welcome to have fun any way you like.
-
I'm give or take about "godmode" myself. When I used to play Neverwinter Nights, godmode was the only way I'd play, because I was playing that game to experience the storyline in all the player-made modules and dying kept getting in the way. However in a game like Torchlight, where story is a distant backseat to the action, godmode is the last thing I would ever do, for exactly the reason that it would get very boring very fast. In a game based around challenge, removing the challenge removes the reason to play.
I say, if you're competing against someone else, then everything should be kept entirely fair; one party should not have unearned advantages over another. But if it's just you, then play the way you like it. If you want to punch a mob in Atlas Park so hard he lands in Peregrine Island, so be it. I've played games that way and it is fun. Except, as you said Tenzhi, I'd limit it to one or two characters, just for those "pure over-the-top fun" runs :D
-
If what's bold, that is what you say, is not saying "USB2 protocol requires all devices to comply with protocol USB1", and so, "USB2 protocol incorporates protocol USB1 and more" that is, "USB2 imitates USB1 and exceed it", then I'll be damned.
USB 2.0 is not a protocol. Its a standard. The electrical transmission protocol for USB is NRZI with bit stuffing. Its a very common serial encoding protocol: anyone that does work with CSU/DSUs and other carrier gear would be familiar with it (the USB3.0 standard adds 8b/10b and LFSR data encoding for superspeed mode). The USB control protocol is identical between USB 1.1 and USB 2.0 except for a couple of USB2.0-specific commands. There is no USB2.0 protocol as such. That's normally how protocols evolve: a new one isn't created which emulates the older one, the original one is extended to add capabilities that older systems can safely ignore.
-
The USB control protocol is identical between USB 1.1 and USB 2.0 except for a couple of USB2.0-specific commands. There is no USB2.0 protocol as such. That's normally how protocols evolve: a new one isn't created which emulates the older one, the original one is extended to add capabilities that older systems can safely ignore.
Okay then, I meant the USB control protocol, not the USB protocol, duh.
Thanks for providing such technical info once again.
-
I just want to be able to play with my bird-things again... Give me that, and I won't care what it's called. ;D
-
I don't care if its a toaster that lets me play CoH again, call it whatever you want, just get it working.
If it would make it easier or faster, I'd be cool with a single player version to start with, that would be fantastic.
-
I don't care if its a toaster that lets me play CoH again
I want this.
-
I don't care if its a toaster that lets me play CoH again...
Indeed, I would like a toaster that does that too.
/Or a brooch.
//Or a pterodactyl.
///Meh, looks like I picked the wrong week to stop drinking.
-
Indeed, I would like a toaster that does that too.
/Or a brooch.
PAAARAGOOOON CIIITYYYYY...PRISM... POWER!
...yeah I couldn't help it.
-
I don't care if its a toaster that lets me play CoH again, call it whatever you want, just get it working.
I'm pretty sure the mapservers would run on 486/66s.
-
I'm surprised that none of the employees snuck a copy of the server code out and put it up on a torrent site.
-
I'm surprised that none of the employees snuck a copy of the server code out and put it up on a torrent site.
Because the Paragon Studios people are good-hearted, have integrity, and wouldn't just do that.
-
I'm surprised that none of the employees snuck a copy of the server code out and put it up on a torrent site.
That would be stupid and impractical.
-
That would be stupid and impractical.
Especially since many version control systems use tags heavily and have a way of sneaking personally identifiable information about who checked out the copy in all sorts of places.
-
That would be stupid and impractical.
I'm surprised you just haven't written the server code from memory/made it up based on prior knowledge during your last lunch break Arcana. If anyone is capable of doing this I'd have to say it was you... ok maybe it might take a little longer than an hour lunch... >_> ya think maybe you could turn your uber brain powers towards such a worthwhile and lofty goal? pretty please?
-
-
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1.minus.com%2FikbugFkY0G28M.jpg)
Or maybe I am seeing sarcasm where there is none. Still, I think I need to bookmark this image just for your posts. It's the second time already. :P
-
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1.minus.com%2FikbugFkY0G28M.jpg)
Or maybe I am seeing sarcasm where there is none. Still, I think I need to bookmark this image just for your posts. It's the second time already. :P
Interesting thing is I cant see the image. Most image hosting services are blocked at work, and I check these forums mostly while at work.
Also, was not being sarcastic. Recreating the whole server engine from scratch would be an insane level of work. Way too many hours. Whoever engages into it really is forefeting a lot of money by not doing profitable work instead, reason I state they would have to be very selfless (if that's the right antonym for "selfish")
-
Interesting thing is I cant see the image. Most image hosting services are blocked at work, and I check these forums mostly while at work.
It's a macro showing Fry from Futurama squinting his eyes while the text reads "not sure if missing the sarcasm or being sarcastic...".
Also, was not being sarcastic. Recreating the whole server engine from scratch would be an insane level of work. Way too many hours. Whoever engages into it really is forefeting a lot of money by not doing profitable work instead, reason I state they would have to be very selfless (if that's the right antonym for "selfish")
Kiriani's post strikes me as being quite sarcastic and that is why I posted the macro above. Either I am reading too much into Kiriani's post or you have missed the not so serious tone of their message. :)
-
-
-
Sooo, would that be an emulator then? a simulator? a community recreator? jello?
Delicious bread pudding for the toaster, methinks.
-
Ah, since I saw no quote and you were right after me thought you meant me (and since I cant see the images not sure if you used it before for me :P)
Yep, I did! Unfortunately I can't remember in what thread. :)
Sooo, would that be an emulator then? a simulator? a community recreator? jello?
I thought we have settled on hero exfoliator?
-
Sooo, would that be an emulator then? a simulator? a community recreator? jello?
Reimplementation (I think.)
-
Delicious bread pudding for the toaster, methinks.
I thought we have settled on hero exfoliator?
Reimplementation (I think.)
Hmm, all seem valid, now I just need to figure out which ones can be used as colloquial and which ones as technical...
-
Bah. Really, a whole thread over what amounts to semantics?
I don't care if it's an emulator, compatible server software, wholesale reengineering, reimplementation, or whatever. I don't care if it's being run on a home desktop, a server farm, the original CoH servers, a toaster, or a bronze cauldron of bubbling purple goop heated by the magics of a hundred leprechauns engaging in interpretive dance.
I WANT MY PANCAKING GAME BACK!
-
Bah. Really, a whole thread over what amounts to semantics?
It's this new thing. We call it "The Internets." :D
-
It's this new thing. We call it "The Internets." :D
(https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i50.tinypic.com%2Fb6c75v.jpg)
-
Bah. Really, a whole thread over what amounts to semantics?
I don't care if it's an emulator, compatible server software, wholesale reengineering, reimplementation, or whatever. I don't care if it's being run on a home desktop, a server farm, the original CoH servers, a toaster, or a bronze cauldron of bubbling purple goop heated by the magics of a hundred leprechauns engaging in interpretive dance.
I WANT MY PANCAKING GAME BACK!
Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, anyone attempting to recreate the game will have to care. It would not be a semantical difference to them as to whether they attempt to emulate the server behavior of the original City of Heroes servers, create from-scratch servers that are compatible with the current City of Heroes game client, or ditch both and attempt to reproduce the City of Heroes look and feel in a completely new game.
The easiest of those tasks is, perhaps ironically, to start completely from scratch. But it would probably end up being less a reproduction of City of Heroes, and more like playing City of Heroes' kissing cousin.
-
Bah. Really, a whole thread over what amounts to semantics?
We've probably had longer threads over less important topics.
Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, anyone attempting to recreate the game will have to care. It would not be a semantical difference to them as to whether they attempt to emulate the server behavior of the original City of Heroes servers, create from-scratch servers that are compatible with the current City of Heroes game client, or ditch both and attempt to reproduce the City of Heroes look and feel in a completely new game.
Not to bring semantics into a semantical argument, but while the differences in meaning might be important to the practical application they would still be inherently semantical. The issue there is the tendency to dismiss semantics as unimportant rather than the fact that they are semantics in the first place.
-
Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, anyone attempting to recreate the game will have to care. It would not be a semantical difference to them as to whether they attempt to emulate the server behavior of the original City of Heroes servers, create from-scratch servers that are compatible with the current City of Heroes game client, or ditch both and attempt to reproduce the City of Heroes look and feel in a completely new game.
The easiest of those tasks is, perhaps ironically, to start completely from scratch. But it would probably end up being less a reproduction of City of Heroes, and more like playing City of Heroes' kissing cousin.
There is a fourth option.
Indeed it seems the easiest because it requires the least work. But to emulate the server behaviour is to emulate both its internal and external behaviours, the second of which is the "CoH client-compliance" you're talking about in the from-scratch.
But what are you going to replace the "internal behaviour" of the server with ? You'll have to design a new one. Design "from scratch", an that is going to bring it's whole new sets of problems. Whereas the current game's behaviour is well-defined, maybe somewhat improveable. Still, it's going to be a ifficult task to re-implement with all its quirks.
The really easiest solution ? Make a game-compliant server, and begin with part of the previous behaviour, most of it (combat and leveling without IOs or above). Most of our fellows will scream of joy by then already. Then integrating IOs, incarnates and so on will be clearer at this point.
-
There is a fourth option.
Indeed it seems the easiest because it requires the least work. But to emulate the server behaviour is to emulate both its internal and external behaviours, the second of which is the "CoH client-compliance" you're talking about in the from-scratch.
But what are you going to replace the "internal behaviour" of the server with ? You'll have to design a new one. Design "from scratch", an that is going to bring it's whole new sets of problems. Whereas the current game's behaviour is well-defined, maybe somewhat improveable. Still, it's going to be a ifficult task to re-implement with all its quirks.
The really easiest solution ? Make a game-compliant server, and begin with part of the previous behaviour, most of it (combat and leveling without IOs or above). Most of our fellows will scream of joy by then already. Then integrating IOs, incarnates and so on will be clearer at this point.
To be frank, you're conflating the software of the game with the data of the game.
-
To be frank, you're conflating the software of the game with the data of the game.
Oh, so when you want an antivirus software, you don't want the virus definitions (that are data) to go along with it ?
What is a shell script ? Software or data ? Both, data for the script interpreter, software for the writer. Even the interpreter's binary is actually data for the CPU. Even things such as fonts are not really only data anymore these days. My understanding is that software is the kind of data that can be executed by another software or hardware and works on other data, creating another kind of data (plus waste heat, if you want to be thorough).
Do you have a copy of the server "data" ? That's an honest question, because if you have, that could explain you not conflating those when everyone here should want a server+data bundle, nobody here wants the software alone, and will ever speak of "software" alone. Concerning the server data, I assumed long ago that it was going to be lost forever, as it is now. The whole Titan crew did, too, else why ask for all the backup effort in the last months of the game ?
I know you must know these things so let's compare: actually, the client we want a compatible server for, just manages simple things: PC and NPC movement (it does have collision maps since it can do movement prediction and disallows us falling through the floor while jumping, slightly penetrating walls due to delay, etc), PC and NPC stats (HPs, endurance, infamy...), chat (including emotes), dialogues (with NPCs, the market...), PC powers (NPC powers are listed but it doesn't actually need to manage those) and server events (a whole crapton of them: combat log (you rolled...) and effects (stat updates, status update (death)...), animation (and ragdoll), and so on).
So what you need to make the client at least work is a server to (a) receive power, movement, dialogues and chat requests, (b) make the combat and movements tick, and (c) issue the proper event notifications to the client. That is a compliant server, that is a server simulator. Other than that, the logic (or data) is not even relevant ! But that's not what we want in our community server, do we ? What good would be a CoH community server if it never took you to Atlas Park ? This would be an engineering success, but no player would play that (for long). So data is part of the server, at least what it's expected to be and what everybody should try to do.
I don't think we'll be able to recreate everything down to the millimeter-precise spawn points or patrol routes, so in this regard, we won't be able to have CoH back at all. But does it matter really ? So let's put this aside, yes ? At least let's assume we have something equivalent.
Now the real question is: If we had the same dialogues, the same gameplay, the same maps and ennemies, but only mostly the same story arcs (differing only by incomplete dialogues, incorrect maps and ennemies, of which I estimate we have 75% thanks to the ParagonWiki, and 20% more in the people's minds), would it still be City of Heroes (or an emulation thereof) ? If your answer is "yes", then we can do a proper server emulator (if we had the real server files and didn't use them, it wouldn't be a proper emulator anymore), because for the user, the server is a software/hardware part that is needed to play the game he sees as City of Heroes. To help you answer the question, when the devs did rehaul the Hollows, Faultline, the tutorials or the starting zones, or even just the Romulus cinematic, were you still playing something that at least emulated City of Heroes for you ?
tl;dr: no, I don't want just a "community server" just for semantics' sake. I don't want a "server software emulator" either, because that's both impossible and useless. I want a "server emulator", something that replaces the previous City of Heroes server for my client, and with which I can use my client to create an Ice/Kin corruptor, hang out on the chat, and go Blizzard the scream out of some Cimerorians on the Towers.
-
It's a macro showing Fry from Futurama squinting his eyes while the text reads "not sure if missing the sarcasm or being sarcastic...".
Kiriani's post strikes me as being quite sarcastic and that is why I posted the macro above. Either I am reading too much into Kiriani's post or you have missed the not so serious tone of their message. :)
I wasn't so much being sarcastic as lightheartedly (and perhaps on the verge of hysterics) begging Arcanaville to use her super brain powers to give us back COH... >_> I mean she's like a genius (at least compared to me!) and she's the first person that comes to mind when I think of who could bring back COH.
-
I wasn't so much being sarcastic as lightheartedly (and perhaps on the verge of hysterics) begging Arcanaville to use her super brain powers to give us back COH... >_> I mean she's like a genius (at least compared to me!) and she's the first person that comes to mind when I think of who could bring back COH.
Reimplementing City of Heroes would require not so much an incredibly smart person so much as someone with an incredible amount of time to commit to the project. If the actual Paragon programmers ignored the legal issues and attempted to simply rewrite City of Heroes, having already seen it and done it once before (at least parts of it), my guess is that it would still take a couple months. And that's already knowing what the code will eventually look like (although I suspect there's lots of things they'd want to change in a clean reimplement).
The Project Z people seem to have at least a reasonable plan forward and some good ideas on how to generate a successor game that would at least play reasonably close to CoH. And if they do their job correctly and the software itself is released to the community, other players could reskin its data - i.e. if either Project Z generates a playable game at all and they've correctly separated engine and data, even if the game they make isn't close enough to City of Heroes for you, someone else could come along and in effect reimplement a close copy of City of Heroes within the Project Z framework.
All the powers, all the gear, all the archetypes in City of Heroes were just data files fed to the game engine. If Project Z (either of them) has different archetypes, that wouldn't prevent someone else from making a version of the data that has CoH archetypes. If their version of stealth works differently than CoH that wouldn't prevent someone from implementing something similar in Project Z. And of course mission content is only what someone writes for it.
There are a lot of challenges facing both Project Z teams, challenges that its not guaranteed they can overcome. But if they succeed, they will not only have succeeded in making whatever game they choose to implement, they will open the door to lots of other people to make different games with the same tools. It just has to be *close enough* to make that relatively easy.
Unfortunately, this all takes time. But although I'm not privvy to either team's internal design discussions, I suspect that while it could take years to "finish" either project, it also took years for City of Heroes to get from alpha to beta to launch to the game were were playing at the end. If they are smart, they will create suitable landmarks in the project to get, say, a working costume editor followed by a working map server followed by a working sandbox we can fly around followed by simplified combat and missions and so on, so it won't be five years of nothing followed by the release of a completed game, but rather a multiyear playable beta test we can see and use. To get to that point could take less than a year.
I honestly don't think there's much I could personally do to radically accelerate that schedule.
-
I wasn't so much being sarcastic as lightheartedly (and perhaps on the verge of hysterics) begging Arcanaville to use her super brain powers to give us back COH... >_> I mean she's like a genius (at least compared to me!) and she's the first person that comes to mind when I think of who could bring back COH.
No super brain powers are required. Only hard work and determination.
-
I honestly don't think there's much I could personally do to radically accelerate that schedule.
There is. You could provide definite insight and specifications of how the game worked. Most of it must actually be sitting somewhere on (one of ?) your computer, perhaps waiting for minute amount of rewriting. For total CoH neophytes, it would prove insufficient to recode the game in any framework, but for programmers who also knew the game, I think it would be specifics enough to reduce the reimplementation to a difficulty equivalent of performing a lullaby is to a symphony. Even pseudo scripts would suffice, if they correctly represent the inner behaviour of the server. Most of us can have a good idea of how it worked, but I think nobody as yet, even maybe amongst the developers themselves, do have such a complete and refined idea of how it worked. And we still can have the innocuous hints from the devs themselves, because they read us.
I think I'm ready for "Arcana's Guide to aggro, notification and stealth" for starters. Either that or "Combat loop, enhancements and buffs" ;-)
-
If a hypothetical compatible server needed a hypothetical tester for that boring, repetitive, kinda brainless stuff that no one else wanted to do, please consider me a hypothetical applicant. I'm currently working only part-time hours, with a good chunk of free time while my hypothetical kids are in their hypothetical school. :P
-
I noticed something reading about some popular private servers from WoW and other games, I kept seeing "leaked code" mentioned as to how those projects came to work.
My question, has a complete re-engineering effort like we're (supposedly) attempting ever worked?
On another note, if someone has a contact at NCsoft looking to make some money...hey, we all had at least one villain alt, don't judge.
-
I noticed something reading about some popular private servers from WoW and other games, I kept seeing "leaked code" mentioned as to how those projects came to work.
My question, has a complete re-engineering effort like we're (supposedly) attempting ever worked?
Star Wars Galaxies.
http://www.swgemu.com/
-
I noticed something reading about some popular private servers from WoW and other games, I kept seeing "leaked code" mentioned as to how those projects came to work.
My question, has a complete re-engineering effort like we're (supposedly) attempting ever worked?
Net-7 for Earth and Beyond.
www.net-7.org (http://www.net-7.org/)
-
Why can't a group of Devs do what the folks at SWGEMU.com have done with Star Wars Galaxies? I would kill for a Pre-Enhancement Diversification City of Heroes Emulator.
So no one has really answered my question still. This title is a bit misleading and a turn off. I've followed the SWGEmu project throughout its 9 years, I was around age 14 when they started it. An emulator is a huge undertaking, I've seen hundreds of Devs come and go, thieves stealing project money, and coding organization mistakes that sets the project back years from completion.
It's super worth it though. Seeing a project and people grow, and making new great friends, and with a community like CoH's the most important step is already complete.
So, if anyone were to assemble a Dev team to revive CoH, I would definitely get some advice from SWGEmu.com
-
SEGS is aiming at Issue #3, IIRC
-
So no one has really answered my question still. This title is a bit misleading and a turn off. I've followed the SWGEmu project throughout its 9 years, I was around age 14 when they started it. An emulator is a huge undertaking, I've seen hundreds of Devs come and go, thieves stealing project money, and coding organization mistakes that sets the project back years from completion.
It's super worth it though. Seeing a project and people grow, and making new great friends, and with a community like CoH's the most important step is already complete.
So, if anyone were to assemble a Dev team to revive CoH, I would definitely get some advice from SWGEmu.com
The answer to your question is that there are two separate development teams attempting, to varying degrees, to do what the SWGemu team did, although both teams probably hope to avoid replicating at least five years of drama in the process.
-
SEGS is aiming at Issue #3, IIRC
This is awesome, especially if people from CoHTitan are involved. I found the SEGS thread on here, but that's about it, sounds like they arenlt really promoting much info yet. Is there any other information out there?
-
This is awesome, especially if people from CoHTitan are involved. I found the SEGS thread on here, but that's about it, sounds like they arenlt really promoting much info yet. Is there any other information out there?
Titan has nothing to do with SEGS. SEGS is one dude AFAIK.
-
A CoH private server has been my soap box since the announcement of the closure. To Codewalker, Leandro and anyone else working on the continuation of CoH, thank you in the most sincere way.
This is our best hope at getting CoH or anything like it back, I'm no coder but when the time comes ill be glad to help however I can.
-
I was just wondering how a "theoretical" compatible server for CoH might hypothetically coming along. I might certainly be interested in it....hypothetically speaking. ;)
-
Check the SEGS thread on the Save Paragon boards. I believe nemerle has gotten it as far as being able to create a character and load into Outbreak, though not to move or anything like that.
-
The Project Z people seem to have at least a reasonable plan forward and some good ideas on how to generate a successor game that would at least play reasonably close to CoH. And if they do their job correctly and the software itself is released to the community, other players could reskin its data - i.e. if either Project Z generates a playable game at all and they've correctly separated engine and data, even if the game they make isn't close enough to City of Heroes for you, someone else could come along and in effect reimplement a close copy of City of Heroes within the Project Z framework.
Oh boy,
We just finished a long discussion on this very thing in a thread in the Plan Z threads. To condense it all down (as I perceived it), neither TPP nor HaV are interested in making a clone or even a near COH clone. They are interesting in creating what might amount to a COH2, leaving the original COH behind. (mainly, I believe, for legal reasons). The Plan Z Devs are convinced that created a "clone" of COH would take just as long as making a new game from scratch. Devs from both TPP and HaV have convinced me that, while they are not recreating COH, they hope to create games that will have the "feel" of COH but will, in no way, BE COH. I am waiting anxiously for what they can produce, but I would not be expecting to get the original COH or even a close facsimile from them.
-
Oh boy,
We just finished a long discussion on this very thing in a thread in the Plan Z threads. To condense it all down (as I perceived it), neither TPP nor HaV are interested in making a clone or even a near COH clone. They are interesting in creating what might amount to a COH2, leaving the original COH behind. (mainly, I believe, for legal reasons). The Plan Z Devs are convinced that created a "clone" of COH would take just as long as making a new game from scratch. Devs from both TPP and HaV have convinced me that, while they are not recreating COH, they hope to create games that will have the "feel" of COH but will, in no way, BE COH. I am waiting anxiously for what they can produce, but I would not be expecting to get the original COH or even a close facsimile from them.
That's unfortunate. Those discussions summarized the "Fight for CoH back" nicely though. All those players who want the original CoH back, who were scattered between all the different options, will gather to the only option left - SEGS private server.
Plan Z = 'Similar feeling' game
SEGS = Original version of the game
I invite people to download the client and try it out. After seeing/hearing the title screen, creating a character and loading into outbreak, I'm sure a lot of people will be certain whether they want to play a similar game, or the actual game.
-
That's unfortunate. Those discussions summarized the "Fight for CoH back" nicely though. All those players who want the original CoH back, who were scattered between all the different options, will gather to the only option left - SEGS private server.
Plan Z = 'Similar feeling' game
SEGS = Original version of the game
I invite people to download the client and try it out. After seeing/hearing the title screen, creating a character and loading into outbreak, I'm sure a lot of people will be certain whether they want to play a similar game, or the actual game.
Still haven't figured out how to get that going.....think I am missing something in the instructions LOL
-
That's unfortunate. Those discussions summarized the "Fight for CoH back" nicely though. All those players who want the original CoH back, who were scattered between all the different options, will gather to the only option left - SEGS private server.
Plan Z = 'Similar feeling' game
SEGS = Original version of the game
I invite people to download the client and try it out. After seeing/hearing the title screen, creating a character and loading into outbreak, I'm sure a lot of people will be certain whether they want to play a similar game, or the actual game.
Why is it one or the other? Are you not capable of playing two games?
-
I can't multitask very well, so no, Aggelakis.
Also, I find that the idea of two or more CoH like games I'd have to split my precious time with does NOT engender the good feels... I like the original. Can't have it. If three successors come out...
Well, as the words of the Highlander state, There Can Be Only One. It'd be better to have a free trial so I can figure out which one I like though...
I'm also not downloading the 'semi-client' that is currently SEGS, as I just... well, it'd just hurt a lil' too much.
Maybe later. Maybe if they/he has more to do with it...
-
Not sure how close they could come to the original. Sure, power pools could be very similar, but named to avoid infringement. As long as the "play style" is like it was for almost 8 years of my life, I'm a happy camper. I don't want to watch all my powers cooling down. I want the easy communication. I want super powers, whatever they may be. I want a good looking environment (no cartoony CO). Otherwise, I would consider BOTH plan Z offerings monthly. Just a wait and see what comes out of the different ovens.
-
Okay, this is a bit...unusual ;D In the other thread, I was the one asking question after question and generally bugging the Plan Z people...now I find my self arguing THEIR case....go figure.
From what I gathered (and this was part was from GG), there was never any intention to clone COH for legal reasons. Both Plan Z projects (TPP and HaV) have listened to what the DEVs of COH said over the years and are attempting to avoid some of the problems. I do believe both are looking at the COH interface as a guideline for that portion. AT's will have different names, and different power sets, but that is to be expected. One thing that got my attention was Downix's explanation of the differences in the COH powersets and the TPP proposed powersets. Not from the users end, but from the other end. It seems that AT's were not part of the original COH but were grafted on later (only you old timers would know that for sure, by the time I came along (about 2 1/2 years before the END) AT's were obviously already established).
This caused some bandwidth problems because of how the powersets had to be handled. Both teams are, I believe, trying to avoid this.
In any case, neither will be the COH we knew and loved...but they will be games created by people that knew and loved COH just as much...
If SEGS does their thing (hoping they do...I wanna fly around Steel Canyon again LOL) or TF Hail Mary some how pulls a rabbit out of the hat and finds us a way to get COH back (fingers are still crossed - making it a bit difficult to type..but I manage somehow), we will be able to play the original....But when TPP and/or HaV get something out, we will have something to broaden our experiences without having to resort to CO (ugh) or DCUO (only slightly better than ugh).. and STILL have the original to play as well.
-
Why is it one or the other? Are you not capable of playing two games?
I would definitely try both out to see which I prefer, but I don't have enough time or money to focus seriously on more than one MMORPG. That goes double for a lot of others.
-
I am waiting anxiously for what they can produce, but I would not be expecting to get the original COH or even a close facsimile from them.
Consider how much City of Heroes has changed from launch to the end of 2012. Had City of Heroes itself continued along until 2014 or 2015, say, plus or minus when I would expect to see playable code from either project, City of Heroes itself would not have been a close facsimile of City of Heroes. So I think asking either project to recreate CoH exactly as it was on October 31st 2012 is asking way too much. We didn't even hold the devs themselves to that standard.
Consider how different City of Heroes was at shutdown from when I first started playing it shortly after launch.
- Crafting (inventions)
- Auction Houses
- Villain content
- Side switching
- Bases
- Icon
- Respecification (planned, but did not exist at launch)
- Flashback
- Quick content (newspaper missions)
- Turnstile content (incarnate trials, special event trials, other trials)
- Zone events
- PvP
- post level-cap progression (Incarnate progression)
- Player generated content (Architect)
- microtransaction based content
And we know that additional major changes were coming to the game post I23. LUA scripting of missions and events was being introduced which was going to create enormous opportunities to make more complex and interesting content. LUA scripting had the potential to be a larger game-changer than inventions, auction houses, flashback, and incarnate content combined.
Some people really want to know if they will be able to play their Fire Blaster exactly as it was when the game shutdown in either Plan Z offering. Probably not. But that Fire Blaster also didn't play the same way as it did in I10, say, before the D2.0 changes. It didn't play the same prior to I5 and the D1.0 changes. It would not have played the same in Issue 24 due to the I24 blaster changes. Most of us who played City of Heroes have gotten used to the fact that the technical elements change, but - for most of us if not all of us - the core feel of the game remained the same, and that's why we continued to play it. I think its only fair to the Plan Z developers to reserve judgment on their efforts until we can actually play them. Very few of us are really capable of accurately judging a game from a written description of it.
Plus, I think its interesting that some players are reluctant to play a "spiritual successor" that isn't identical to City of Heroes, but more willing to play a clone that replicates Issue 3 (SEGS). Nothing against SEGS, but Issue 3 is probably more different from the game we were playing at shutdown than either Plan Z offering is likely to be.
-
Have to agree here. Was my line in this very thread I think.
But...
And we know that additional major changes were coming to the game post I23. LUA scripting of missions and events was being introduced which was going to create enormous opportunities to make more complex and interesting content. LUA scripting had the potential to be a larger game-changer than inventions, auction houses, flashback, and incarnate content combined.
I just had an Architegasm. What would have it been if we had that scripting power for MA arcs.
Must. Happen.
-
Nothing against SEGS, but Issue 3 is probably more different from the game we were playing at shutdown than either Plan Z offering is likely to be.
While that could be true, Issue 3 has already proved it's popularity, as it held every 6+ year vet from CoH (A lot of them).
The CoH population was settling to a point where it was mostly made up of veteran players and people who had played the game that existed in the first couple years after launch. It's hard to argue that Issue 3 was that much different from Issue +2/-2; it will undoubtedly be closer than either Plan Z.
To anyone who only joined in the past couple of years (2009-2010) and stayed with the game because of what the game had become, they may enjoy the other options more. To those who chose CoH over other MMOs even in one of it's original states (2004-2007), I think SEGS will be the preference.
And to anyone who loved City of Heroes, it's nice to not only 'read' about it's history, but actually relive it (The real phantom armies. Couldn't attack with Elude? OP Instant healing). That's something no other game can give people. As I said earlier, the choice really is between a similar game and the original version.
-
While that could be true, Issue 3 has already proved it's popularity, as it held every 6+ year vet from CoH (A lot of them).
And Arcana makes a good point. I finally got the SEGS thing working...and was really disappointed. Why? Well, I didn't realize the changes. I could barely recognize it as something I played. (recall, I came into COH about 2 1/2 years before the shut down. That was....what? I19 or so? The character creator changed after I started...but obviously it had already changed before...because if that was the creator from I3, it looked nothing like the Creator we had before the last version (unless my memory is faulty...which, at my advanced age, is not that far fetched LOL)
if SEGS decides to advance it up to closer to what it was at closing time, I might give it another shot...otherwise, it doesn't do a thing for me.
And so....with SEGS out of the picture...I guess my only hope lies squarely on TF Hail Mary......
-
While i played CoH from Issue 0 to shutdown i have no desire to go back and play Issue 3 again, even if it meant i could have 4-5 Fluffies running around again. The only "emulator" i would have any significant interest in would be one circa the live or beta servers at shutdown. (Preferably the beta servers; there was so much in there, including LUA and forcemove, that i wanted to see go live.)
i've been following TPP, and so far i have the impression that by the time the game goes live (fingers crossed) it will be analogous to what CoH probably would have been if it had continued. This is a good thing in my opinion. While i enjoyed playing CoH through every iteration there really aren't any versions i'd want to go back to instead of moving forward.
-
Everybody remembers having fifteen imps and twelve phantom army running around, and few people remember that they couldn't enter or leave missions or even pass through elevators. There's a reason controller superteams only ran outdoor maps back in the day: pets couldn't zone. They also didn't snap to you, which made pets plus teleport sometimes an interesting affair, particularly if you had those indestructible pets like the PA or nearly so like Singularities.
For that matter I'm pretty sure Dark Armor players do not want to go back to the days when their armors didn't stack, and defense sets don't want to go back to the days when bosses had 75% base tohit (and AVs had 90% and inventions didn't exist). And I think a lot of players would miss body sliders in Icon, and power customization. Difficulty sliders. Paper and scanner missions.
Some of those things you could add in theory to an I3 backend, but some of those things you really can't add because the I3 client wouldn't support them (like all the advances to the costume editor which require client support for all of them).
-
At this stage, it feels to me, that I3 would be a lot closer to the game I love than any of the spiritual successors.
I also thought a major reason SEGS was at i3? (actually I thought it was i7) had a lot to do with getting tired of making changes for every issue's updates. Which is no longer a problem :/
-
I find it quite silly that if you can get the game back at around circa i4 - that some folks don't want to play it.
Just like with everything else it could be slowly worked up to what we knew in the end at i23 Beta. Many people were doing data capture at that time. So people are saying - I don't want a short trip back in time to try and save the world?
Man, I guess we better not fire up the flux capacitor in the DeLorean.
-
I find it quite silly that if you can get the game back at around circa i4 - that some folks don't want to play it.
Just like with everything else it could be slowly worked up to what we knew in the end at i23 Beta. Many people were doing data capture at that time. So people are saying - I don't want a short trip back in time to try and save the world?
Man, I guess we better not fire up the flux capacitor in the DeLorean.
Well, It might be good for some of you old timers. That is understandable.
But I would venture to guess that not everyone in the community that want COH back started playing at Day One. In fact, I would venture to guess that, while there may be a lot of you, there's probably just as many that started playing at different times through the history of COH (though I admit that I am beginning to feel like the Newbie here since I started only a couple of years before the shut down)
For those that joined later, those early Issues do not depict the game that we came to know and love (and got addicted to...still trying to figure out how that happened after only a single trial period...kids...let this be a lesson...Yes..you can get addicted from trying it just once!)
I truly admire what SEGS has done. And I am sure that there will be many who want COH back...in whatever form. I'm just not one of them. I'll give SEGS kudos for getting SOMETHING up.....but I'll pass.
-
I find it quite silly that if you can get the game back at around circa i4 - that some folks don't want to play it.
Just like with everything else it could be slowly worked up to what we knew in the end at i23 Beta. Many people were doing data capture at that time. So people are saying - I don't want a short trip back in time to try and save the world?
Man, I guess we better not fire up the flux capacitor in the DeLorean.
1. That short trip back in time would take an eight and a half year old game back to when it was eight months old.
2. The problem is the game client. Ironically SEGS is starting from zero when it comes to the server code. The entire server can be created from scratch in pieces over time. And you don't actually have to get the servers to work exactly as they did before, you just have to get them to work at all. But as hard as it is to write game servers from scratch, a much more difficult problem would be patching the I3 game client to add functionality. We don't have the game client source code. We don't have an obvious way to expand its capabilities significantly. If you target your servers at the I3 client, moving forward from that point would be incredibly difficult for any feature that required client support.
The problem is not that you couldn't move forward. The problem is that SEGS or any project like it starts with the presumption of using a specific client version specifically *because* its extremely difficult to reproduce the game client. And its those limitations that are very difficult to change. SEGS would realistically be unable to add any archetype, powerset, or costume that didn't exist in I3 (not without essentially figuring out a way to rewrite the client - the client was not extensible in that fashion). How many characters become impossible to recreate in I3? How many others become impossible to even get close? For many players, the inability to recreate their characters in at least some fashion would be a show-stopper.
If SEGS manages to make something playable, I'll download it and try it out. I'm an eight+ year veteran: my mains were all created in Issue zero, so the limitations of an Issue 3 client won't be fatal. But I suspect most of the players that joined in the last seven years would have at least moderate difficulty with those limitations.
-
I been playing for a while since i5 and even then I'm not sure if I would be too keen on thinking about playing if the game went back to it's i5 version.
Alot of features that people talk about as being the thing that make COX great and bummed because other games dont have it, did not exist during that time. People sometimes forget that the i23 game was way different than the i5 and pre. that and even different than even i14.
Like the sidekick system and people say it's easy. Yeah the current version but many forget the version before that where it was very clunky, and walk, what was it, more than 200 yards was it, and you might go from being surrounded by whites to purples and dead within 1 second.
Or exemp/mal. factor. I seen someone say that CO the teaming thing is a pain i nthe butt because of the setup. Well, originally COX was not far from that setup. If you exemp. no xp. And on team needed a sidekick for every lowbie. Meaning if you doing level 50 mish, and have 5 lowbies, and three 50s, a couple of them will be SOL. Especially if the team had to enter a high level hazard zone beyond the lowbie level.
-
I find it quite silly that if you can get the game back at around circa i4 - that some folks don't want to play it.
Just like with everything else it could be slowly worked up to what we knew in the end at i23 Beta. Many people were doing data capture at that time. So people are saying - I don't want a short trip back in time to try and save the world?
Man, I guess we better not fire up the flux capacitor in the DeLorean.
Well, let's see, state of the game at Issue 3... Kheldians came out in Issue 3, but didn't have a number of very significant issues fixed until Issue 4. Also the majority of my space pirate PB's outfit didn't exist then. That's... less than ideal. Beyond Dark Armor's absurd endurance costs the constant dental drill noise induced headaches when i tried playing it and i actually shelved my Issue 1 Claws/Dark for years because of that. Basically a lot of powersets, game mechanics, and ATs still had significant issues at that time. Setting aside all the costume pieces, powersets and other content that also didn't exist yet.
Still, around Issue 3 i was mostly playing my DM/Regen (thoroughly, awesomely broken), FF/Rad (boring but very effective on teams, excruciatingly slow solo), D3 (decent, but still relatively weak at that point), and an Electric/Electric. i can think of several other combos that were good back then and i would enjoy playing, and the graphics would be a nice bit of nostalgia.
As Arcana pointed out though, the only reason to create an Issue 3 specific server is because you don't have the means to do so with any later versions, so it's Issue 3 forever. Which would be depressing. i certainly wouldn't pay money to play a static game stuck at a point in time with a host of bugged mechanics and balance issues. Not saying you shouldn't but i don't see the appeal. As much as i liked playing CoH i would find perpetual Issue 3 more annoying than fun. If i was going to fire up the flux capacitor it would be to head to the future, not spend my time crouched over the guttering ember of a fixed point in the past.
-
I4 didn't have villains.
I... what is it... 18? Introduced Praetoria and the Vigs and Rogues.
Yeah, not a fan of I anything that's not 21 or so, myself, if I could have a choice.
-
I am and would continue to enjoy a time capsule of Issue 3 as a huge nostalgia trip (started between 1 and 2, myself), but as a functioning game going forward? No, not really. It's a toy, like if we were able to rig up the Pocket D (with Chalet) as a sort of 3D chatroom for our characters to hang out in and talk.
-
It's a toy, like if we were able to rig up the Pocket D (with Chalet) as a sort of 3D chatroom for our characters to hang out in and talk.
A sizable portion of Virtue would be happy with just that. :p
But yeah, I4 is good but I24 would be infinitely better. I'll take what I can get, but I'll miss all the powersets, costumes, zones and features that came after. Bases and mission architect especially, but I can see those two being probably the hardest parts to get working for a reverse engineering project.
-
A sizable portion of Virtue would be happy with just that. :p
Oh, I'm well aware, and I'd be one of them. :)
That's about the limits of what I let myself really hope for. Anything over and above that will thus be a pleasant surprise.
-
Honestly, the main thrust I would have is to use the work involved in getting an older private server going and the demand the server is getting to help sell it to Google.
If we can turn and say look - a private server is getting 1000 hits a day.................
-
I could probably play an i3 version of the game, but I'm not at all sure I would want to. Two of my three favorites (And I'm going to be honest here... those three are the ones I REALLY want back-) simply couldn't be rebuilt in a version of the game from that time period.
Their powersets (Not to mention Kestrel's Stalker AT-) just didn't exist. They also couldn't have their wings, much less most of the other costume pieces I used on them... Which would also be an issue for the last of the trio. IIRC, I could build a Dark defender in i3 but he would be a very different character from the Nemissary I had to give up when the game shut down, both in terms of playability and appearance.
-
My main was a dual pistols (even though I started at the launch) and I know that power set would not be available in I3 or I4 so there is no remaking her. But I did like my Claws/SR scrapper so I could remake her. I still have her original costume on her. Anyway, playing the game again would be great, while we wait for something else to come along.
-
Anyway, playing the game again would be great, while we wait for something else to come along.
This. The game would eventually get old with the lack of updates, although there was a lot of content, even back then.
I suppose playing an older version of the game is more of a specialized preference than I originally thought. I still play the games from my childhood on a regular basis (NES, N64, Gameboy etc.), so it seems much more appealing to me. I like to revisit a game years later, because becoming older usually changes how I play and view it. I love classic games, and have no problem dealing with frustrations (No saves, limited lives) that older games have in order to re-experience them.
I don't think I'm necessarily so uptight now that I couldn't deal with the downsides of the game I once loved. It is the CoH I played obsessively back then. I would definitely prefer i24, so that I could finish that Perma-Elude DM/SR I was working on, but I realize that the old game had some amazing tricks as well (Burn/Ice Patch) that I wouldn't mind playing with for a couple years or so.
-
I ran a Tank, and have always ran Tanks. I loved Issues 3 & 4 for me they were CoH's heyday, after that the nerf fest began and my characters got weaker and weaker. even toward the end they were no where near what they were in I4.
-
I definitely agree with what most people on this page have said. Having CoH back to life, even if it was in a diminished form, is a win in my books. Yeah, I probably wouldn't play a fully working SEGS as much as I would play a I24-enabled version, but it would certainly be an amazing nostalia trip, and it would certainly entertain me a lot more than any of the current mmo "offerings" that are out right now while I wait for said I24 version to be made.
-
I don't want the newer code working on a private server. I don't want competition for anyone who might buy the game.
I could happily play Issue 3-4 until the game up and running again.
Let me tell you about 6 slotted damage in a blaster.....
Let me tell you about only Bosses and Lts having mez.........
My Fire/Fire blaster used to get instant invites when I logged in :)
-
I'd be happy for the opportunity to play CoX again, even if it meant going 'back to the box'. After all, it was the original game that hooked me. Everything else was just gravy.
-
"Any chance to go aboard 'Enterprise'... oh wait, wrong genre.. ;D
Yep, any chance to play CoX again would be welcome in my book.
-
I don't want the newer code working on a private server. I don't want competition for anyone who might buy the game.
I could happily play Issue 3-4 until the game up and running again.
Let me tell you about 6 slotted damage in a blaster.....
Let me tell you about only Bosses and Lts having mez.........
My Fire/Fire blaster used to get instant invites when I logged in :)
But we can't stop work on the private server(s) because of a possible buyer. NCsoft has reiterated that it is not interested in selling CoH. I wish TF Hail Mary the best, its worth a shot, but they're basically trying to sell something they don't own and the owner doesn't want to sell.
So, while yes, an active and populated private server would dilute the IP to a potential buyer, but we would actually have our game back. In light of NCsoft's attitude toward selling and the past precedent they've set by not selling ANY of their IPs, the private server is by far our best bet at getting CoH back.
God speed coders, we're counting on you.
-
But we can't stop work on the private server(s) because of a possible buyer. NCsoft has reiterated that it is not interested in selling CoH. I wish TF Hail Mary the best, its worth a shot, but they're basically trying to sell something they don't own and the owner doesn't want to sell.
NCsoft would be foolish to state anything other than they are not interested in selling. In this situation any business that has a viable product would take this position and wait for the list of possible buyers to surface in order to target a more accurate price point. If they were to advertise their willingness to sell the potential price point for negotiations and leverage would be decreased. IMO they will sell if the money is right no matter what they state or have stated. TF Hail Mary is the prod to help these potential buyers surface and our voice that says we are here and ready to support this game if you can obtain it from NCsoft. Like you said, "its worth a shot".
-
NCsoft would be foolish to state anything other than they are not interested in selling.
Fair point, but NCSoft hasn't exactly always been a paragon of smart business decisions. :p
-
NCsoft would be foolish to state anything other than they are not interested in selling. In this situation any business that has a viable product would take this position and wait for the list of possible buyers to surface in order to target a more accurate price point. If they were to advertise their willingness to sell the potential price point for negotiations and leverage would be decreased. IMO they will sell if the money is right no matter what they state or have stated. TF Hail Mary is the prod to help these potential buyers surface and our voice that says we are here and ready to support this game if you can obtain it from NCsoft. Like you said, "its worth a shot".
The best evidence NCsoft is not interested in selling CoH is the fact that it is currently shelved. CoH was worth much, much, MUCH more when it was an active game with a paying playerbase. Now it is basically an IP, some code & art assets, and a dead game with a scattered playerbase. Of course it could be rebuilt, but not without substantial work.
If NCsoft wanted to sell they would have put the game in maintenance mode and started taking bids while it still had players. TF Hail Mary absolutely is worth a shot, I'm not arguing against that at all. I was just rebutting the idea that we shouldn't shoot for an i23 private server because it might scare off an imaginary buyer.
-
The best evidence NCsoft is not interested in selling CoH is the fact that it is currently shelved. CoH was worth much, much, MUCH more when it was an active game with a paying playerbase. Now it is basically an IP, some code & art assets, and a dead game with a scattered playerbase. Of course it could be rebuilt, but not without substantial work.
If NCsoft wanted to sell they would have put the game in maintenance mode and started taking bids while it still had players. TF Hail Mary absolutely is worth a shot, I'm not arguing against that at all. I was just rebutting the idea that we shouldn't shoot for an i23 private server because it might scare off an imaginary buyer.
Understood; however, the IP has value to any potential buyer(s) that would like to build the title. The player base is scattered, but marketing should bring them back. Heck, if the consensus is the player base has scattered with little probability of returning then there will be no potential buyer(s). It's simple business and we move on to our other options. This avenue needs to be exhausted, but I understand what you are saying. Things that have been put on shelves can always be taken back off...needs a little dusting though.
Fair point, but NCSoft hasn't exactly always been a paragon of smart business decisions. :p
True. Let's hope the old saying "money talks" is practiced globally. There is only one way to find out....
-
I disagree - there was apparently some contracts tied to the game that left NCSoft open to a possible liability until the game was closed.
Once closed those disappeared. The game was worth more open - but also has potential liabilities worth more as well.
-
-
I hope that once they get it working with the old COH they can somehow make it work with new COH... but why they are working with an older client in the first place I don't understand.
Is the newer client really so much different from the older one that its not compatible with segs?
-
Is the newer client really so much different from the older one that its not compatible with segs?
Well, the size of old client's exe ~3.7MB, the last one was around 8MB I think, so there is a large difference between them.
Switching to a new client version would be basically discarding large amounts of binary sleuthing. Since the amount of resources that can be brought to bear on the project is still very much limited to the free time I can scrounge, it does not look logical to drop everything just to work on I24.
I hope that once they get it working with the old COH they can somehow make it work with new COH...
If, there's no other alternative server at the time, then it's likely we will start on updating the supported client towards the last client version.. but that's in far off future.
but why they are working with an older client in the first place I don't understand.
That's because segs needed a stable client code base to work from, and at the time new versions were released every 3-4 weeks.
-
I hope that once they get it working with the old COH they can somehow make it work with new COH... but why they are working with an older client in the first place I don't understand.
Is the newer client really so much different from the older one that its not compatible with segs?
I'm pretty sure each "system" the game introduced all the way could very, very much complicate coding. I can imagine adding the auction house and invention systems would be hard to work with and that's just Issue 9. Also nemerle has been working on this for years now, I think 5 years if I'm not mistaken. So Issue 3 wasn't nearly as old when he started working on this.
-
Simplicity as well.
The game in issue 3/4 was far easier to copy - Io's only, 6 slotting all powers, less costumes and other things that would make it a sensible start. By the time you are into a seperate auction house (and how to implement that on the same/seperate server) the addition of IO's, salvage, multiple currencies and 3 seperate worlds including buggy i24 code...........it is easy to understand why we need to learn to fly first.
-
I don't see a private server as a hindrance to anyone buying the game -- rather it would be actual proof that people want to continue playing the game.
Plus, a working private server provides at least a partial working code base to move forward from in case NCSoft trashed everything after the shutdown.
-
Is the newer client really so much different from the older one that its not compatible with segs?
The newer clients weren't even compatible with older versions of the actual official servers.
-
Well /sadface from me to all your replies :(
I hope one day we can have a working server with the up to date coh... but I'll be happy if the current segs progresses... its the only ray of hope I've seen to get real COH back in some way.
I wish I was a smarter techy type person who understood all this code stuff. Time I have in abundance... the skill to do whats needed for this project, not so much.
If you segs people just have leg work that needs doing that doesn't actually require someone to understand what the hell they are looking at or can give a newbie a crash course in coding I have virtually every hour of every day available and nothing particularly vital to devote that time to. If you can find a way to use my time I am happy to offer it. (I'm 37, disabled, and have at least enough computer knowledge to build my own machine from parts purchased online to give you some idea of what you'd be working with)
-
If you segs people just have leg work that needs doing that doesn't actually require someone to understand what the hell they are looking at or can give a newbie a crash course in coding I have virtually every hour of every day available and nothing particularly vital to devote that time to. If you can find a way to use my time I am happy to offer it. (I'm 37, disabled, and have at least enough computer knowledge to build my own machine from parts purchased online to give you some idea of what you'd be working with)
This. The devotion expressed in this paragraph is awesome. Great community. Great Game. Nice Kyriani!!
-
Hmmmm. Think I oughta jump in here one last time to clarify my position.
I FULLY appreciate the effort to give the community SOMETHING. The SEGS people (or person) deserve major Kudos for what has been done and what might be done in the future.
Just because I cannot get into such an early version of the game does not mean it is a waste of time...it is just a personal preference. Do I wish they had a newer version? Of course. But that does not mean that I cannot appreciate the effort that has gone into something like this...and it does not mean that I cannot be happy for those that WILL enjoy playing such an early version of the game (when it is actually "playable", that is ;D) I am happy for them..(and a bit envious LOL). I'll simply have to wait until something I CAN get into comes along....that's all there is to it.
Again...Kudos to SEGS.
-
Again folks understand the SEGS intro with Issue 3/4 is because the game was simple and very stable. Issue 2 had lag spikes that would literally rubber band you 500 yards.
Issue 3/4 allow respecs and have very simple requirements. Understand you would have dumpster diving, herding an entire map, no aggro cap, no damage cap - in other words blasters can nuke an entire herd.
This was the games peak time a step back to when the world was new and heroes strode through the land like gods.
-
Again folks understand the SEGS intro with Issue 3/4 is because the game was simple and very stable. Issue 2 had lag spikes that would literally rubber band you 500 yards.
Issue 3/4 allow respecs and have very simple requirements. Understand you would have dumpster diving, herding an entire map, no aggro cap, no damage cap - in other words blasters can nuke an entire herd.
This was the games peak time a step back to when the world was new and heroes strode through the land like gods.
As far as I know SEGS is based on Issue 3 because that's when the project started, plus or minus, and trying to support anything newer than that would have been trying to aim for a moving target for the developer(s) of SEGS, which they did not have the time or resources for. Its basically a coincidence of timing. If the project had started later, it could have easily been based on I6, or I9.
Keep in mind SEGS is a reverse-engineering project started when we were still using Brawl numbers and we barely had a good theory for accuracy. It was less a re-engineering of the servers, of which we had virtually no idea how they worked, and more a project to figure out what the client even need to run. The project didn't target I3 because of any specific love of I3 data, if for no other reason than we didn't then (and don't even now) have I3 data. SEGS was eventually going to have to make up the back end mechanics of the game because even today we do not have that data in any form except anecdotal.
However, there are certain things "baked into" Issue 3 that would be very difficult to tamper with. For example, SEGS could make Flares do I24 damage rather than I3 damage because we'd have to make that up either way. But it would be a lot harder for SEGS to make Flares activate with I24 timing than I3 timing, because the I3 client has an animation for Flares that would not be trivial to change. Well, you could change it, but to do that power-system wide for all the powers would be a lot of work. And customization would be basically impossible without essentially rewriting the client.