Thanks for that last update GG

#1 "The task list only covers the next few months"

I get the feeling from the above quote from the "status update" that Tim's trying to let us know that we'll be waiting until July or so before they knock this baby out.

That's fine with me. I'd "rather have good code tomorrow than muddled code today"(A quote from a prof. I knew).

#2 No. It's coming out ASAP. We are sending it to our associates today. Tim's list is describing the task list for the next few months after release. At our meeting yesterday, I told him his post was a little confusing.

Jeff

#3 Ahh thank God. I, too, believed we were looking at a late 3rd quarter release date from that task list. I would think it's in GG's best interest to release the product as soon as legally possible, regardless if the code even compiles. If it's shipping to associate members, then I think we can assume packaging and legal approval can't be too far behind?

#4 Well, it is getting close. But what's a good cutoff point? We'd like to release a quality product, but it would take Rick and I a long time to polish this thing off. On the other hand, we don't want to release something that is almost impossible to use (which I'm sure we'll get flamed for anyway). Of course the longer we hold on to it, the higher expectation are. Our current plan is to get it out as soon the basic functionality is usable, which shouldn't be to far away.

We'll issue another warning somewhere, probably on the purchase screen :), but I would like to re-iterate that this is basically the Tribes engine, not a engine designed for public release. Tribes 2 was in crunch mode for 8 months, and there is a fair amount of hacked up code. On the other hand, if you can get past the fluff and junk, there is some good stuff there and the engine will polish up fine with a little work. Well worth a $100.

The first release will be a little shaky, but it should be enough for people to get started. At this point, we just want to get it out there and start the community going :)

#5 Okay here's what i got out of the posts. That your most likely be releasing the engine soon but it won't have the things mentioned in the devolpment status forum correct? if so we really can't get started on it since our game relis heavily on netcode... but anyway we can at least get started with the map so that will be good.

Also a license question. I"m going away this summer and i'm the only programmer for the group. Can i temporaryly give my license to ONE of my team mates and revoke it when i come back? the problem is I'll need them to be able to patch the engine and ot work with it once it gets networking support....

#6 The first release will only have those things listed under the "first public release" in the task list.

The only thing missing from the net code is the authentication handshaking which takes place in network connections (as opposed to local connections). The game still runs client/server. It basically always runs client/server, but when you run a local game you run both the server and the client at the same time and there is a simplified connection process. Any game objects that you write will have to be "networked" from the start, as the game simulation objects always operate this way. They basically don't know the difference between single player and multi-player. You just won't be able to actually test over a network until the handshaking is sorted out, which shouldn't take long. Believe me, you'll have plenty to do in the meantime :)

Actually there is another missing piece: a master server. We have some old code lying around, but we'll have to modify the engine to use it (WON.net provided the T2 master server). Until that's done, you have to connect to a server using it's ip address.

Jeff will have to answer the licensing question...

#7 "But what's a good cutoff point?"

This was probably a retorical question but if you have a working demo (however simple) that doesn't crash (on most machines - I mean mine) then I would like to have the engine in my hands. There is a lot of stuff I can play around with while waiting for you guys to "polish" it. I'm assuming that the polishing stage will take only a few months and that updates will be available during this process.

You will be more inspired to do good work if you can see how its selling (with money coming in :) ) Like you said, you will get flamed anyway, but not from anyone with an ounce of intelligence.

#8 Well the master server thing isn't too bad because we can just have implemented in the scripts the master server ip or whatever...

But basically we can't play multiplayer until you fix the handshaking problem correct?

Also out of curiosity will it be easy to script it so that the person hosting the server, when he wants to play he runs the game and the server goes becomes part oh his client instead of having 2 separate apps going and separate when he quits or no?

This would help with system resources most likely./..

#9 Scared of hacked up code I am not. As far as I'm concerned, just rip out the Tribes II stuff and serve it up. If you want to write an example, great. If not, I still don't care. If I did not plan on doing some serious source code browsing, I would not be here. Besides, I plan on ripping it apart anyways since I have some very distinctly different ideas about what to do with the engine than what Tribes II did.

Looking forward to seeing the developer only section once the engine is released. It will be nice to get some real dialogues going about development and less "convince me to buy this engine please" and "how does V12 compare to " threads. Hopefully, the signal to noise ratio will be a bit better.

After reading over this post, I feel like I just spouted a bunch of "me this" and "me that". Sorry! Anyway, just wanted to say don't be shy with the V12. Some of us out here don't mind living on the edge:)

--Brandon

#10 Brandon,

I wish it were true, but I have a distinct feeling that at $100 the developer board will be just the same as the common GG boards. Worse, even. Now that they've paid their money, they expect some amount of service and prompt responces from the (already overworked) GG staff.

I don't see things clearing out till the end of the year, when the shiny-newness wears off and people get down to work.

--Bryan

#11 Matthew, you could always fix the handsaking stuff yourself, since you'll have the source :) Actually, I was trying to be carefull while cutting out the WON.net stuff, it may actually run as is. I just haven't tried it. It compiles though :)

You could very easily do what you suggest... host a server and allow the owner to drop in and out as a client in the same app.

#12 oh yeah forgot we'll have the source. And ever since I learned Winsock programming in order to create my new server app i would just LOVE to get into that netcode :) The only thing that i don't understand is why the won.net code would have to do with handshaking. How I understand it (and correct me if i'm wrong) all won.net does is verify your T2 account, show you a list of servers, and direct you to the server you chose. If this is true then there shouldn't be too much of a problem with getting the netcode to work as is, though i'd love to tweak around with it.

Also I think how i'll approach the server combining with the cleint and separating is have the server act as a hub for the info and it just passes it to the client, so in effect makes the client the server and cleint. This would also let me understand more on how i would be able to accomplish my theory of how to have multiple server machines with a persistant, no zone world. I'm not even talking about having one machine handle one part of the world, all machines handle all parts of the world...

#13 The WON.net code had nothing to do with the net packet code or handshaking stuff. I shouldn't have used that word, I meant authentication (which did involve some handshaking, just not in the usual low-level sense of the word). WON.net provided authentication and the master server functionality.

#14 I agree with Robert. A good "cutoff point" would be where you have a simple demo that compiles. Still, I'd rather see you error on the side of caution(quality). Either way, I'm in for $100 as soon as it's available.

#15 I think at some point it will be in GarageGames' best interest to put their support effort behind those who are most likely to create a game road versus those who are just playing around or are having delusions of grandeur.

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to have a separate space on a subscription basis. Maybe not a whole lot more than $100 but enough to separate those who are committed from those who are not.

#16 As to the cutoff point, perhaps GG should consider offering a beta pre-release for the hardcore programmers and the official release for those who are interested in scripting / game creation? The jakarta org has been quite successful with publishing nightly, milestone, and release builds.

There are at least one or two serious minded individuals who will be able to contribute to community APIs. I think *everyone* wants to get those programmers involved right away...

#17 Quick question: How can I become an associate? :-)

#18 Very good point about documentation Jason.

Brandon, I don't think an extra $100 dollars would be any more effective or necessary. Things would be a little better if you had another $100 subscription just as they will be a little better on the private forum. I think its better to keep everyone together for better or worse and let GG (and others) decide how much time to spend answering questions on the basis of merit rather than how much money was spent. You don't want to risk alienating those people who are not making a game but just want to spend their spare time working on one small part of the engine that they know well and are willing to share with others.

As Bryan said things will die down at the end of the year anyway.

#19 Well said Robert.

#20 I guess this is another vote for releasing what you have as soon as it compiles (pretty much)

The engine is a big complicated thing, and I would love to have an opportunity to start learning your code structures and whatnot. I don't care if the first version has any sort of demo at all. I probably wouldn't even use the demo for at least a few weeks, more probably a month.

I also want to take a look at what it would take to port to the mac. I have both macs and pcs, and would love to make my game cross-platform.

Maybe you could let people that completely understand what they are getting into pay sooner rather than later and geat an early code drop? Maybe allow us to get what you are sending to the associates?

Thanks,
Josh