Welcome!

Join our community of MMO enthusiasts and game developers! By registering, you'll gain access to discussions on the latest developments in MMO server files and collaborate with like-minded individuals. Join us today and unlock the potential of MMO server development!

Join Today!

In terms of development, what would people want to see?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skilled Illusionist
Joined
Nov 21, 2012
Messages
390
Reaction score
213
Err, alright.

I get this topic is repetitive, but I'm going to start getting back into C++ development for the ending of this semester in schooling, and what better way to learn than programming in; quite possibly, the most poorly designed code I've ever seen? I'm just wondering what will spark interest amongst developers. I can start a github, and people can push their own code into anything I would be working on as well.

It just kinda depends. I don't want the generic responses; ergo, "do what you'd find most enjoyable" or "give up on FlyFF programming" because that's worthless. I'm not doing this for a server, or to benefit particular benefactors in what's left of this "scene". I'm just trying to help better myself, while learning the FlyFF code. Two birds, one stone. I'm sure you understand.

Lemme know!
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Sep 8, 2011
Messages
67
Reaction score
252
A github would probably just lead to leechers; but for ideas on what to do, just look at other mmo's, test some, and things will appear.
 
Skilled Illusionist
Joined
Nov 21, 2012
Messages
390
Reaction score
213
A github would probably just lead to leechers; but for ideas on what to do, just look at other mmo's, test some, and things will appear.

Add me back on Skype, Fenris. Also, thanks for your input. I appreciate it.
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Feb 11, 2015
Messages
51
Reaction score
8
Err, alright.

I get this topic is repetitive, but I'm going to start getting back into C++ development for the ending of this semester in schooling, and what better way to learn than programming in; quite possibly, the most poorly designed code I've ever seen? I'm just wondering what will spark interest amongst developers. I can start a github, and people can push their own code into anything I would be working on as well.

It just kinda depends. I don't want the generic responses; ergo, "do what you'd find most enjoyable" or "give up on FlyFF programming" because that's worthless. I'm not doing this for a server, or to benefit particular benefactors in what's left of this "scene". I'm just trying to help better myself, while learning the FlyFF code. Two birds, one stone. I'm sure you understand.

Lemme know!

A perhaps complex but nice project would be to integrate a decent rendering engine to Flyff's client.
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
62
Reaction score
11
My biggest wish would be a source project where someone actually implements v16 features completely, then v17 and so on instead of just going for the biggest features and missing the little things here and there.

Its always funny to see how many servers say that they are full v19 but clearly never heard of the new quests or changed item drops.
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
47
Reaction score
8
If you are not interested in adding new systems for the game, than I would agree with petroli.
There are a lot of parts in the flyff engine that are really poorly made, a few examples are the outdated SFX engine, GUI, rendering engine and a lot more so improving them would be a huge task but a good learning experience I would say.
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
85
Reaction score
149
I think it could be great to recreate the client without using the Win32 API and add the support of D3D11/OpenGL 3.

KimJaejoong why did you say the SFX engine is outdated ?
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
47
Reaction score
8
The particle system is missing a lot of options that the newer particle systems have.
Like bending, rgb color changing, reading collision, irregular path and a lot more.
 
Ace of Hearts
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
739
Reaction score
104
I think it could be great to recreate the client without using the Win32 API and add the support of D3D11/OpenGL 3.

KimJaejoong why did you say the SFX engine is outdated ?

flyff does almost everything in the cpu, while most games handle their particles, sfx, and static objects through gpu instancing and atlas textures.

so with the resources to render 2~3 of something, you could render a few... hundred thousand of that thing, and it is very doable and has been done before within flyff.
 
Last edited:
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
85
Reaction score
149
Okay I see for the SFX. Since I released my SfxEditor's source code it's not really hard to add these features, I'll think about that...

Reimniess where did you see that ? When you have a compatible graphic card all the render is done on hardware (GPU).
Of source we can optimize the source code, and it's what I done in my tools, but the main algorithms are quite fine for Direct3D9.
Look in famous 3D engine source code, like Ogre and Irrlicht, and you'll see that it works the same way as Flyff, with more features of course. The 3D engine isn't as bad as you think, to prove it Flyff can run on old computers.
I think what's really missing is the support of D3D11 and modern OpenGL + remove Win32 API and use a framework like Qt to keep compatibility (and Linux/Mac support).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
424
A question about animation:
To add support of multiple animations run (example: you can attack and move in same time), it's necessary recreate some functions to it?
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
47
Reaction score
8
you will need to change the fighting style in FlyFF for that if i'm right, atleast it has barely anything to do with the animation itself but more with the source.
Aishiro yeah truth be told now that there is a map and sfx editor with source it is a lot easier to actually add new features to the game that are not supported but are possible.
Your sfx editor already actually renders sfx's better than the FlyFF source.
 
Last edited:
Ace of Hearts
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
739
Reaction score
104
Okay I see for the SFX. Since I released my SfxEditor's source code it's not really hard to add these features, I'll think about that...

Reimniess where did you see that ? When you have a compatible graphic card all the render is done on hardware (GPU).
Of source we can optimize the source code, and it's what I done in my tools, but the main algorithms are quite fine for Direct3D9.
Look in famous 3D engine source code, like Ogre and Irrlicht, and you'll see that it works the same way as Flyff, with more features of course. The 3D engine isn't as bad as you think, to prove it Flyff can run on old computers.
I think what's really missing is the support of D3D11 and modern OpenGL + remove Win32 API and use a framework like Qt to keep compatibility (and Linux/Mac support).

a famous 3d engine is not automatically a good 3d engine, in the same way you could call java famous but you could not call it efficiant.

the difference between having instancing is and not having instancing, is having crappy fps in a area with a little bit of grass to being able to turn off all forms of culling and render distance checks and having decent fps.

that isn't just talking what it could be, I'm talking something already done.

on the subject of DirectX 11, no, while it is true DirectX 11 has new features and some neat things, if you think 'higher version just = better' you have a lot of learning to do, DirectX 9 is a lot better than you probably think it is, problem is Flyff is doing countless things wrong in directX

before you go thinking flyff, did anything right, I suggest people scan for memory leaks, there are tools out there to do so, but going to have to find them on your own, here is a hint, the number of unique leaks are in the tens of thousands.

long story short, if flyff, then no matter how much sense something seems to make, they found a way to screw it up.

and I know this from experience because I went out of my way to fix them all and found where they broke ( it wasn't worth it honestly )

it's a miracle that flyff has ever managed to run at all.
 
Last edited:
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
85
Reaction score
149
Dont compare 3D engines to a programming language, it's totally different... Ogre is known to be efficiant.

I'm not saying Flyff is doing anything right. Of course we can optimize the source code, fix all memory leaks and get a quite better framerate. That's what I done in my tools, but in fact if you look the source code you'll see the algorithms are quite the same, so dont say Flyff's engine is a totally big poop. Flyff developers know how to use correctly D3D9, in reality it's just a problem of old source code, modified several times by different programmers.

And yes D3D11 is faster than D3D9, because it forces you to use shaders, and shaders are faster than a fixed pipeline (except if you're a bad programmer). That's why modern OpenGL doesn't have a fixed pipeline, like D3D10 and D3D11. Dont say I've a lot of learning to do because I learned and practiced these 3 APIs, I'm not a professionnal expert but I know what I'm talking about.
But I never said D3D9 is bad, I like the strong fixed pipeline (even if it's not the right way to go for new graphic cards) and it has a big advantage : the compatibilty with old graphic cards and Windows XP.

What I suggest is to use an abstraction layer to manage graphic things in the Neuz, with classes like IGraphicDevice, IVertexBuffer, IIndexBuffer, ITexture...
Then you can subclass this layer with classes for D3D9, D3D11 and OpenGL 3 in separate DLLs and chose the best at loading.
In this way you'll keep the game compatible with old systems, add the support of Linux/Mac, and improve performances (then you can improve somethings like shadows management) for recent computers which supports D3D11.
All recent games work with something like this.
It's a lot of work but it's not impossible, personaly I'll try to do it in my tools because I think it could be really interesting.
 
Last edited:
Ace of Hearts
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
739
Reaction score
104
Decided to keep this one short

Mac And Linux support?

Logicol - In terms of development, what would people want to see? - RaGEZONE Forums


<- a more clear but less specific one

Fixed pipeline Improving compatabillity? 0.67%
 
Newbie Spellweaver
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
85
Reaction score
149
The goal is to remove the old Win32 API, the linux/mac support is just a "little plus" easy to have when you use a multiplatform framework.
I can give you some articles me too :
I know current OpenGL drivers are very poor on Windows, this is why I suggest to support 3 APIs.
But where's your problem if someone wants to add OpenGL support ? Are you working for Microsoft ? ^^"

I dont understand what you say after...
In your first post you say D3D9 (so fixed pipeline) isn't as bad as I think and then you say it represents only 0.67% of the market, it's confusing.
What I see is D3D11 = 78.9% and I suggest to add D3D11 support on Flyff, I don't know where's the problem.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top