Re: [hlcoders] NPC activities
I was planning on expanding the list to cover all activities (the rest being sorted by game then NPC), so whatever happens it needs to stay on an activity related page, Activities_list or something. No problems otherwise. Robin Walker wrote: There's lots of names for this kind of method of linking code content. Internally, we call them symbolic links. The link between the code (imagine something like NPC-PlayAnimation( activity )), and the content (standing_reload animation), is a symbol. The symbol here is ACT_RELOAD, and we call these symbols Activities. If you don't mind, I'd like to update the Activities wiki page to contain the stuff I sent in the previous email, and move the content that's currently on it into a new page that's more about how the Actbusy system uses activities. Thoughts? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Edwards Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:04 PM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] NPC activities I'm no modeller or coder, but that sounds pretty neat regardless. What's the collective term for these technologies (the material system sounds like it does the same sort of thing)? And that reminds me, I need to update the actbsuy diagram. Robin Walker wrote: Actually, these aren't activities. They're really two things: - entries in the actbusy.txt file list of actbusies (which I won't go into here). - sequence names. NPCs play animations by sequence. Activities are a way of abstracting away sequence names from animation concepts, and at the same time providing animators with the ability to add more value to the product without changing code. NPCs remap activities down to a single sequence before playing them. For example, say we have a concept of reloading. We want our NPCs to play reload animations when they reload. The wrong way to do this would be to play the reload animation by sequence name. i.e. have the code play a sequence named: standing_reload One problem with this is that each NPC will have to ensure that their reload sequence is named standing_reload, or the code won't find it. Another problem is that each NPC can only have one standing_reload sequence. Activities solve both these problems. The right way to do this is to have the code play the ACT_RELOAD activity instead, and have the modeller set the standing_reload to the ACT_RELOAD activity. This way, each NPC can name their sequence however they want, as long as they're set to ACT_RELOAD. Multiple sequences in the same model can be set to ACT_RELOAD, and the engine will randomly pick one each time it plays the activity. So your animators can produce 3 reload animations for the NPC that reloads a lot, and you won't have to change your code when he does that. Sequence names don't need to be registered like activities, so you won't find a list of them anywhere in the code. The easiest way to find out what sequences are in a model is to load the model in HLMV. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Edwards Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2005 4:24 AM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] NPC activities *VCD Tom Edwards wrote: Cancel that, they aren't there. Here's some examples of the 'hidden' activities I'm looking for: d1_t01_BreakRoom_Sit01_Idle d1_t01_BreakRoom_Sit02 d1_t01_BreakRoom_WatchBreen d1_t01_Clutch_Chainlink_Idle d1_t01_BreakRoom_WatchClock_Sit LineIdle01 sitcouchknees1 I've just looked in every VDC I can find too - they are still nowhere to be found. Tom Edwards wrote: Of course...how could I not have thought of that? Thanks. apophis wrote: I think they are in the NPC code. For example, this is in dlls/hl2_dll/npc_zombie.cpp: AI_BEGIN_CUSTOM_NPC( npc_zombie, CZombie ) ... DECLARE_ACTIVITY( ACT_ZOMBIE_TANTRUM ); DECLARE_ACTIVITY( ACT_ZOMBIE_WALLPOUND ); On 7/2/05, Tom Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since the VDC launched I've been making solid progress documenting Source's AI. My current project is the actbusy routine, and I need help. Actbusy is a way of telling NPCs to perform certain actions at specified locations. You enter the action name into a keyvalue box, but the actions aren't documented. I've found the generic ACT_BUSY activities in ai_activity.cpp but there are a lot more that I've seen in the HL2 VMFs but can't get my hands on. It looks like they may be compiled into the models. If anyone could get (or tell me how to get) a complete list of activities not listed in ai_activity.cpp or activitylist.cpp, I would be very grateful. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
*plays the violin* I think you missed the out cry by a few weeks there, people are moving on with it and trying work around the restrictions -- Draco ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
Lol it seems like they are pushing the SDK for Mods and TC's more than plugins :D Maybe that's the way to go? ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
To work around the restrictions is not the way I want to go. As you can see with cheating death, after every update CD isnt working and needs to be fixed a couple of times - this is wasteless time... I only want to know for sure, if we cant expect more than we have yet or not. Because there is a second more reliable option: make a clone of Valves commercial games under a different name and support server mods. Sure, there would be much to do, but this option is much reliable than to work around the restrictions after every update. Ronny *plays the violin* I think you missed the out cry by a few weeks there, people are moving on with it and trying work around the restrictions -- Draco ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] And have a player base of 5 people. I think you misinterpreted what he meant by cleaning the code. On 7/6/05, Ronny Schedel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To work around the restrictions is not the way I want to go. As you can see with cheating death, after every update CD isnt working and needs to be fixed a couple of times - this is wasteless time... I only want to know for sure, if we cant expect more than we have yet or not. Because there is a second more reliable option: make a clone of Valves commercial games under a different name and support server mods. Sure, there would be much to do, but this option is much reliable than to work around the restrictions after every update. Ronny *plays the violin* I think you missed the out cry by a few weeks there, people are moving on with it and trying work around the restrictions -- Draco ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
Ronny Schedel wrote: I only want to know for sure, if we cant expect more than we have yet or not. Because there is a second more reliable option: make a clone of Valves commercial games under a different name and support server mods. Sure, there would be much to do, but this option is much reliable than to work around the restrictions after every update. GO FOR IT! It'll be interesting to see what you have in about five years. ;) -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
If it would be need 5 years to implement the logic of like CS, then anyone should change his job immediatly... You dont need to invent the wheel a second time, the grafic stuff is already there and can be used, there is only the gamelogic left. To summarize it for CS:Source: 2 teams, 2 gamemods (de, cs), a buy menu and some entities. It can be done within 1 or 2 months of constantly work. Ronny GO FOR IT! It'll be interesting to see what you have in about five years. ;) -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Ooooh a challenge. I'll see you in 2 months. On 7/6/05, Ronny Schedel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it would be need 5 years to implement the logic of like CS, then anyone should change his job immediatly... You dont need to invent the wheel a second time, the grafic stuff is already there and can be used, there is only the gamelogic left. To summarize it for CS:Source: 2 teams, 2 gamemods (de, cs), a buy menu and some entities. It can be done within 1 or 2 months of constantly work. Ronny GO FOR IT! It'll be interesting to see what you have in about five years. ;) -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
RE: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
I can imagine Valve would too... in court :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Davison Sent: 06 July 2005 15:46 To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Ooooh a challenge. I'll see you in 2 months. On 7/6/05, Ronny Schedel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it would be need 5 years to implement the logic of like CS, then anyone should change his job immediatly... You dont need to invent the wheel a second time, the grafic stuff is already there and can be used, there is only the gamelogic left. To summarize it for CS:Source: 2 teams, 2 gamemods (de, cs), a buy menu and some entities. It can be done within 1 or 2 months of constantly work. Ronny GO FOR IT! It'll be interesting to see what you have in about five years. ;) -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders FusionPeople Ltd may monitor outgoing and incoming emails and other telecommunications on its email and telecommunication systems. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error you are on notice of its status. Please notify us immediately by return email if you are not the intended recipient and delete this message. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of FusionPeople Ltd. FusionPeople Ltd may monitor outgoing and incoming emails and other telecommunications on its email and telecommunication systems. === This message has been checked for all known viruses by MessageLabs, The service does not scan any password protected or encrypted attachments. FusionPeople Ltd accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
I'm not sure everyone's clear on what's being suggested here. Botman (as did I) seems to have assumed that when you said Make a clone of Valves commercial games, you meant that you or your team would reimplement the engine itself (heck, to design Source in 5 years would be a shocking accomplishment for any of us). If we assume that you mean you would reimplement just the mods themselves, that's a rather more realistic goal, but you're still playing catch up. If you aim to maintain compatibility between your mod and the original mod, you would have to release an update after each CS update, from the simple stuff (tweaking balance values) to figuring out the changes in internal structures. If you aim to merely approximate the gameplay, then you're going to have to realize that you're making a mod which is nearly identical to a publically available, very widespread mod... I hardly think the average user will see a reason to switch. Here, too, if you're going to try and match CS as closely as possible, with each CS release you'll be tweaking your own mod, so you still have to make changes far too often, which beggars the question - what's the point? In any situation, there will either be no incentive for most users to switch, or there will still be the same level or regular maintenance required. The only real hope we have is for Valve to return to their original stance of allowing easy metamoddability, as well as normal moddability. As for my own stance on the matter, I feel that by limiting the power of server plugins, Valve is denying Server Administrators the freedom that they have been long accustomed to. The idea that server plugins can detract from the overall online experience is rather absurd to me, as while it is true that the possibility of there being subtle differences from server to server might confuse a newcomer, it's also true that in limiting the power of the people to modify the game severely limits the replayability (as much as anyone may enjoy the original formula of any given mod, it eventually gets old). Through metamod and the like, HL1 mod players have often continued playing a mod long after they tired of the mod itself, instead enjoying the myriad extensions and modifications to the mod around there (this is certainly the case for me). On 7/7/05, Ronny Schedel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it would be need 5 years to implement the logic of like CS, then anyone should change his job immediatly... You dont need to invent the wheel a second time, the grafic stuff is already there and can be used, there is only the gamelogic left. To summarize it for CS:Source: 2 teams, 2 gamemods (de, cs), a buy menu and some entities. It can be done within 1 or 2 months of constantly work. Ronny GO FOR IT! It'll be interesting to see what you have in about five years. ;) -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] I think someone like Alfred should just clear valves stance on this once and for all. Nip it in the bud please Alfred. On 7/6/05, Predatory Kangaroo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure everyone's clear on what's being suggested here. Botman (as did I) seems to have assumed that when you said Make a clone of Valves commercial games, you meant that you or your team would reimplement the engine itself (heck, to design Source in 5 years would be a shocking accomplishment for any of us). If we assume that you mean you would reimplement just the mods themselves, that's a rather more realistic goal, but you're still playing catch up. If you aim to maintain compatibility between your mod and the original mod, you would have to release an update after each CS update, from the simple stuff (tweaking balance values) to figuring out the changes in internal structures. If you aim to merely approximate the gameplay, then you're going to have to realize that you're making a mod which is nearly identical to a publically available, very widespread mod... I hardly think the average user will see a reason to switch. Here, too, if you're going to try and match CS as closely as possible, with each CS release you'll be tweaking your own mod, so you still have to make changes far too often, which beggars the question - what's the point? In any situation, there will either be no incentive for most users to switch, or there will still be the same level or regular maintenance required. The only real hope we have is for Valve to return to their original stance of allowing easy metamoddability, as well as normal moddability. As for my own stance on the matter, I feel that by limiting the power of server plugins, Valve is denying Server Administrators the freedom that they have been long accustomed to. The idea that server plugins can detract from the overall online experience is rather absurd to me, as while it is true that the possibility of there being subtle differences from server to server might confuse a newcomer, it's also true that in limiting the power of the people to modify the game severely limits the replayability (as much as anyone may enjoy the original formula of any given mod, it eventually gets old). Through metamod and the like, HL1 mod players have often continued playing a mod long after they tired of the mod itself, instead enjoying the myriad extensions and modifications to the mod around there (this is certainly the case for me). On 7/7/05, Ronny Schedel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it would be need 5 years to implement the logic of like CS, then anyone should change his job immediatly... You dont need to invent the wheel a second time, the grafic stuff is already there and can be used, there is only the gamelogic left. To summarize it for CS:Source: 2 teams, 2 gamemods (de, cs), a buy menu and some entities. It can be done within 1 or 2 months of constantly work. Ronny GO FOR IT! It'll be interesting to see what you have in about five years. ;) -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
Predatory Kangaroo wrote: As for my own stance on the matter, I feel that by limiting the power of server plugins, Valve is denying Server Administrators the freedom that they have been long accustomed to. The idea that server plugins can detract from the overall online experience is rather absurd to me, as while it is true that the possibility of there being subtle differences from server to server might confuse a newcomer, it's also true that in limiting the power of the people to modify the game severely limits the replayability (as much as anyone may enjoy the original formula of any given mod, it eventually gets old). As someone who pioneered the ability to create plugins that hook into an existing mod on the Half-Life engine and as someone who works for a professional game development company, I can understand both sides of this discussion very clearly. If you look at things from Valve's point of view, you'll see that *SURPRISE* there are actually new customers buying Half-Life games that have NEVER played Counter-Strike before (I know it's shocking to everyone who has played CS for the last 5 years, but yes, there are actually people who have never played CS). As these new customers start playing the game, they randomly connect to BillyBob's uber733t hacked server and see all kinds of weird, crazy shit going on (things flying around in the game, chickens attacking and killing people, players who mysteriously get knocked around by the hand of God, and all other manner of strange stuff). To the newbie CS (or DoD) player, this is very confusing and reflects poorly on Valve (because player's assume that Valve somehow controls every single Half-Life server out in the world). From Valve's point of view, it's no different than someone creating a Columbine mod or a Porno mod. Even if Valve had nothing to do with the content on that server, that game reflects poorly on Valve because it's running on an engine created by Valve. Valve customers get the impression that Valve actually approves of such nefarious activity (even if they know nothing about it). Of course, not all server operators are going to be this extreme, but there is no simple way to allow some types of modifications and not allow others. By restricting what can and can't be done on a server, Valve helps to maintain a more uniform gaming experience for all its customers. If you like things better under the Half-Life 1 engine, you should stick with it. There are still plenty of CS players who haven't switched to CS:Source (just as there are still people playing QuakeWorld) and there probably will be for another few years. -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
Ronny Schedel wrote: If it would be need 5 years to implement the logic of like CS, then anyone should change his job immediatly... You dont need to invent the wheel a second time, the grafic stuff is already there and can be used, there is only the gamelogic left. To summarize it for CS:Source: 2 teams, 2 gamemods (de, cs), a buy menu and some entities. It can be done within 1 or 2 months of constantly work. Ronny Humm... IF you have that much time on your hands, theres something funny to code, a open source proxy for Half-Life. If this proxy its smart, may able to rewrite the protocol on the fly and able to connect HL1 or HL2 engines. Even not hl engines, like Quake2, or Quake3 engines. hl2tv looks like a proxy, so ..the protocol IS proxy friendly. Adding a proxy may able to compress the data, cypher, redirect, cache, etc. If you code a proxy, you sould write much less code than a full blow engine. A proxy its not much more than a demo file parser that forks reading from a network pipe. You can read Quakeworld proxys to get inspiration about how to write your own. Nowdays the QuakeWorld scene use proxys for the network to able unlagged 56K modems play. The proxy its located on the ISP and filter data users with 56K modems dont need ( gibs, etc.. ). Proxys also act has a waiting room and chat room. Much like on the p2p sense of Warcraft. Imho, If you are reluctant to code hl2 with the design Valve suggest, theres a brutal alternate option, not code on hl2. Theres other games, and open source communitys out there to join. No one force you to be happy here, and thats will not work. Good Luck! :D ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
RE: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
It appears as though the main complaint is that the updates are limiting mod inter-operability (meta-mod, etc...). If this is the case, there is a simple solution: Get and save a copy of the mod (CS, DOD, etc...) you want to run Run the HL Server UNSECURED Add any mod management you want NEVER UPDATE THE MOD OR SERVER!!! Don't complain when it stops working! Have fun... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey botman Broome Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 11:21 AM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement Predatory Kangaroo wrote: As for my own stance on the matter, I feel that by limiting the power of server plugins, Valve is denying Server Administrators the freedom that they have been long accustomed to. The idea that server plugins can detract from the overall online experience is rather absurd to me, as while it is true that the possibility of there being subtle differences from server to server might confuse a newcomer, it's also true that in limiting the power of the people to modify the game severely limits the replayability (as much as anyone may enjoy the original formula of any given mod, it eventually gets old). As someone who pioneered the ability to create plugins that hook into an existing mod on the Half-Life engine and as someone who works for a professional game development company, I can understand both sides of this discussion very clearly. If you look at things from Valve's point of view, you'll see that *SURPRISE* there are actually new customers buying Half-Life games that have NEVER played Counter-Strike before (I know it's shocking to everyone who has played CS for the last 5 years, but yes, there are actually people who have never played CS). As these new customers start playing the game, they randomly connect to BillyBob's uber733t hacked server and see all kinds of weird, crazy shit going on (things flying around in the game, chickens attacking and killing people, players who mysteriously get knocked around by the hand of God, and all other manner of strange stuff). To the newbie CS (or DoD) player, this is very confusing and reflects poorly on Valve (because player's assume that Valve somehow controls every single Half-Life server out in the world). From Valve's point of view, it's no different than someone creating a Columbine mod or a Porno mod. Even if Valve had nothing to do with the content on that server, that game reflects poorly on Valve because it's running on an engine created by Valve. Valve customers get the impression that Valve actually approves of such nefarious activity (even if they know nothing about it). Of course, not all server operators are going to be this extreme, but there is no simple way to allow some types of modifications and not allow others. By restricting what can and can't be done on a server, Valve helps to maintain a more uniform gaming experience for all its customers. If you like things better under the Half-Life 1 engine, you should stick with it. There are still plenty of CS players who haven't switched to CS:Source (just as there are still people playing QuakeWorld) and there probably will be for another few years. -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
Jeffrey botman Broome wrote: ... From Valve's point of view, it's no different than someone creating a Columbine mod or a Porno mod. Even if Valve had nothing to do with the content on that server, that game reflects poorly on Valve because it's running on an engine created by Valve. Valve customers get the impression that Valve actually approves of such nefarious activity (even if they know nothing about it). Whats the problem? People also paint his vehicles with gay colors (#FFC0CB). Will General Motors ban people for painting vehicles? Of course, not all server operators are going to be this extreme, but there is no simple way to allow some types of modifications and not allow others. By restricting what can and can't be done on a server, Valve helps to maintain a more uniform gaming experience for all its customers. 'uniform gaming experience' mean all cars sould be grey (#7f7f7f) because of pink ones? If you like things better under the Half-Life 1 engine, you should stick with it. There are still plenty of CS players who haven't switched to CS:Source (just as there are still people playing QuakeWorld) and there probably will be for another few years. The horde will switch (its mindless), but some people need reasons to. Imho, doing another CS its redundant to vomit. Friends dont let friends make CS clones. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Valve: need a clear statement
If you aim to maintain compatibility between your mod and the original mod, you would have to release an update after each CS update, from the simple stuff (tweaking balance values) to figuring out the changes in internal structures. Full compatibility would not be the goal of this project. Lets say you have the basic logic running (de, cs - gametypes), you dont have to update your clone after every update from Valve, because there is no change in the gameplay. Take a look on the last updates: no new gametypes (only de, cs), no new weapons - the gameplay is still the same like in the first beta release. But, you are able to support new gametypes or weapons, you dont have to... Ronny ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] BOTS HEALTH PLUGIN Can BE DONE!
It was one of the first things done when the plugin SDK came out. On 7/6/05, Belcherman[BTC] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some of you said it couldn't be done.. Well take a look at this... I was gonna code all this myself until I found out it was already done. I have modified more to make It unique on my server but here it is. http://www.zombiehorde.com/ it can be done and was done :) All via plugin. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey botman Broome Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 9:25 AM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] BOTS HEALTH PLUGIN Belcherman[BTC] wrote: It would be awesome if I could make the plugin not have bots use player slots. Any ideas on that one? See my Monster Mod for Half-Life1... http://www.planethalflife.com/botman/monster.shtml You can't easily do this kind of thing with the Half-Life2 plugin system though. -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
RE: [hlcoders] BOTS HEALTH PLUGIN Can BE DONE!
I wonder how he did it? I did look at the basic plugin files and there is a bot file and there is a reference to health in it. I assume this is were he did his magic. Anyway its already been done so it saves lotsa time. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of apophis Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:09 PM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] BOTS HEALTH PLUGIN Can BE DONE! It was one of the first things done when the plugin SDK came out. On 7/6/05, Belcherman[BTC] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some of you said it couldn't be done.. Well take a look at this... I was gonna code all this myself until I found out it was already done. I have modified more to make It unique on my server but here it is. http://www.zombiehorde.com/ it can be done and was done :) All via plugin. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey botman Broome Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 9:25 AM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] BOTS HEALTH PLUGIN Belcherman[BTC] wrote: It would be awesome if I could make the plugin not have bots use player slots. Any ideas on that one? See my Monster Mod for Half-Life1... http://www.planethalflife.com/botman/monster.shtml You can't easily do this kind of thing with the Half-Life2 plugin system though. -- Jeffrey botman Broome ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: RE: [hlcoders] Can't remove a CBeam Entity
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. -- -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
[hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers
If you have written a plugin/addon for the Source engine that implements reserved slots (i.e making some positions on your server not available to the public at large) then you MUST set the sv_visiblemaxplayers to the number of actual PUBLIC slots on the server. We have had numerous complaints from users about seeing a seemly free slot and then being kicked after connecting. - Alfred ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Has anything else changed todo with plugins? *Apparently* theres trouble with plugins. On 7/7/05, Alfred Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have written a plugin/addon for the Source engine that implements reserved slots (i.e making some positions on your server not available to the public at large) then you MUST set the sv_visiblemaxplayers to the number of actual PUBLIC slots on the server. We have had numerous complaints from users about seeing a seemly free slot and then being kicked after connecting. - Alfred ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Scrath that just some idiot. On 7/7/05, Ben Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anything else changed todo with plugins? *Apparently* theres trouble with plugins. On 7/7/05, Alfred Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have written a plugin/addon for the Source engine that implements reserved slots ( i.e making some positions on your server not available to the public at large) then you MUST set the sv_visiblemaxplayers to the number of actual PUBLIC slots on the server. We have had numerous complaints from users about seeing a seemly free slot and then being kicked after connecting. - Alfred ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
RE: [hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers
The plugin interface is the same (and testing of it passed successfully). Any plugins that rely on a particular memory layout of CBaseEntity et al in our binaries could be totally broken, you shouldn't do that. Actually, there is one change (nothing that would break a plugin). We added this function: virtual void InsertServerCommand( const char *str ) = 0; To the end of the IVEngineServer interface (at Mattie's request). - Alfred Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Davison Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:02 PM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Has anything else changed todo with plugins? *Apparently* theres trouble with plugins. On 7/7/05, Alfred Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have written a plugin/addon for the Source engine that implements reserved slots (i.e making some positions on your server not available to the public at large) then you MUST set the sv_visiblemaxplayers to the number of actual PUBLIC slots on the server. We have had numerous complaints from users about seeing a seemly free slot and then being kicked after connecting. - Alfred ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
Re: [hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers
-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Well anyway, im loving the update. Send the team my thanks ;) And when is the next SDK update :P On 7/7/05, Alfred Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The plugin interface is the same (and testing of it passed successfully). Any plugins that rely on a particular memory layout of CBaseEntity et al in our binaries could be totally broken, you shouldn't do that. Actually, there is one change (nothing that would break a plugin). We added this function: virtual void InsertServerCommand( const char *str ) = 0; To the end of the IVEngineServer interface (at Mattie's request). - Alfred Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Davison Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:02 PM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Reserved slots and sv_visiblemaxplayers -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Has anything else changed todo with plugins? *Apparently* theres trouble with plugins. On 7/7/05, Alfred Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have written a plugin/addon for the Source engine that implements reserved slots (i.e making some positions on your server not available to the public at large) then you MUST set the sv_visiblemaxplayers to the number of actual PUBLIC slots on the server. We have had numerous complaints from users about seeing a seemly free slot and then being kicked after connecting. - Alfred ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders -- - Ben Davison - http://www.shadow-phoenix.com -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
