Subject: Re: running a majik world?
From: Lalo Martins (lalo@webcom.com)
Date: Wed Nov 10 1999 - 17:38:40 EET
On Wed, Nov 10, 1999 at 11:21:04AM +0200, Tommi Leino wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Lalo Martins wrote:
>
> > Of course WorldForge is what I need, but their pages imply it's
> > too far from playable for my needs. Majik already has most
> > important features (in the server, I mean).
>
> As said in the status.html, the server we speak of there is still
> "designed for a 2d environment" and in fact, that means the server is
> Majik 4's server. It would have been easy to convert it all to Majik 3D
> until we decided that we will not use LPC language for it and thus, it
> will need some more work. We really should update the text there, it's
> giving a bit false picture of our real status.
Hmm. IC. Still...
> Thus, for you, the WorldForge project seems more a viable choice, except
> that it doesn't really have any 3D client yet and I'm quite sceptical
> about if it will it never have. How can one represent a 2D world in 3D
> without missing any freedom?
hahahaha... this is basically a choice between running a 3D
client over a 2D server (Majik) or a 2D client over a 3D server
(WorldForge)? I'll take Majik any minute, thank you :-)
Fantasy worlds are basically 2D. 3D is a cool bonus but not
necessary. Hmm yes, perhaps dungeons could benefit from 3D, but
you are actually developing the server (and I would even be
able to help on that development) so if being 2D is a temporary
drawback, it's an acceptable one.
Also, I don't know why, but what I felt when I read
WorldForge's site was more or less the same thing you said -
``quite skeptical about if it will ever have'' a 3D client and
some other stuff.
> > How would you feel about that? IMVHO, having some other server
> > with a different world and setup running somewhere could give
> > you some interesting debug cases.
>
> I think I'm the most OSS friedly in our team, I would give you the source
> right away and allow you to have your server, but the others don't, and
> besides, there are some real facts about why we shouldn't do that. For
> instance, it wouldn't be not fun if the players could read the game
> world's source code and learn all the secrets and secondly, if it would be
> free it would lead to fragmentation -- we would have more than one game
> world. We prefer to have all those players on a single server.
Hmm... but what I'm asking for is exactly that... fragmentation
:-) I want my Brazilian players connecting to a server in
Brazil where people talk Brazilian Portuguese and the world is
the world of Tormenta.
Of course I don't intend to publish the source code. Publishing
the source code is solely your decision; if I had access to it,
but you tell me I shouldn't publish it, I would keep it to
myself and whoever else (_inside_ the company) would help me
implementing the world.
> However, as the server will be divided to to parts, the "driver" and the
> "game library" (lib), we really might publish the source code for the
> driver and only hide the game library. It is easy to make the driver so
> general purpose it would fit to serve any multiuser environment.
That's fine, if you ever decide to do that I'd like to know
about it.
[]s,
|alo
+----
--
I am Lalo of deB-org. You will be freed.
Resistance is futile.
http://www.webcom.com/lalo mailto:lalo@webcom.com
pgp key in the web page
Debian GNU/Linux --- http://www.debian.org
Brazil of Darkness - http://www.webcom.com/lalo/BroDar
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Feb 12 2002 - 00:03:52 EET