Nicely done

[begolf00]

Hey Chilvence your right about people having trouble getting Gemrb running. I've modded and tinkered with many games and when I saw Gemrb I though that it wouldnt be to much hassle, to make a long story short I never did get it running. The Gemrb project is one of the projects I look forward to the most, I really want to do a runthrough with BG2 and throne of Bhaal, anyway just encouraging you on your startup routine for gemrb, I think it would mean alot to quite a few people. I just want to thank the developers for working on this project also.

 

This is sort of a random question to the developers but i've looked all over and is there any good resource for getting models into the game engine/ I mean Gemrb, is it handled differently then just BG2. Just curious as i'm starting to get half decent at modeling and would like to contribute but there doesent seem to be much done in the way of models other then what big poppa did in the spellhold fourms and he's gone now. If you dont want to answer this, that's fine b/c this is probably the wrong spot for this Q. Anyway thanks for everthing.

[Guest Edheldil]

I am not sure what you mean, but GemRB is (or tries to be) fully compatible with original games' datafiles. That also means that if you create actor, area etc. for the original engine, it will work with GemRB.

 

With a bit of effort (and some BAMs etc) it's possible to start GemRB without the original games, so you can use it to test/preview your work easily.

 

Edheldil

[Guest Edheldil]

Anway, sorry for making a storm in a teacup issue over it. As it happens, what I have already done can probably be easily stretched to follow lynx's example, after I study the 2da module a bit. Then I should be able to cracking on my own experimental stuff that I have conceptualised on the back of an envelope

 

If you have some patches, post them to GemRB's patch tracker. Your idea of running without config file is interesting.

[the bigg]

I'm sure that anybody doing a commercially viable game with GemRB will face bigger hurdles (both technically and legally) than a couple of file names in the source code.

[Avenger]

I'm curious what is in your mind, care to share?

I'm aware of one technical problem, that is, no one was able to create avatars reliably.

This would obviously block any commercial approach.

 

If you hint about a possible D&D license problem, then it is greatly exaggerated.

D&D rules are a small fraction of the core and hopefully go away completely.

A new commercial game wouldn't be required to inherit ANY of the base rules, so, byebye D&D.

 

If you mean, the obsolete IE fileformats would pose a problem, the importers are easy to be changed, and a new game most likely will require some new fields, etc, anyway. It is possible, but I doubt anyone would insist on these fileformats

[the bigg]

From a legal standpoint, the biggest problem are the D&D rules; from a technical standpoint, the amount of work involved in actually making a game. Also, keeping "offending" files out of the core doesn't change anything - you're distributing the file names either way.

[Chilvence]

I don't know about the legal issues of re-cycling the D&D rules or emulating the original games, but my opinion on companies is deeply influenced by their behaviour on a moral scale. Companies that shut down their own fan projects remind me of that story about the king that murders all the babies in the land so none of them can be Jesus. The comparison is a bit fierce, I know, but it helps me to remember that when I decide never to buy their products again .

 

If a succesful, mega rich incumbent company is paranoid enough to feel threatened by non-profit, hobby projects that are put together with the immense effort and dedication of unpaid volunteers who have no motivation other than to improve their own skills and create something for the nostalgia trip, then legally they should deserve a good kicking, and it's a horrible crime that none of them get it. Really, they should have bigger issues to think about than that - it's like the baker breaking into your house and stealing your oven so that you can't make your own with his recipe! Maybe he should just try to keep making better bread eh?

 

Besides, most of the code is probably pretty generic - if you had to re-grow it in a bubble without the file references, it would stand on its own as a 2d game engine, there are millions of those and you can't exactly patent the idea...

 

Maybe if you are worried about it, you could try an experiment to see just how much of the code is dependant on the Infinity Engine mould (although I dont know how you would do that... make a small pseudo-game maybe?). My point is, however much of the engine you have to strip out and rebuild to make it "clean", you are still probably left with alot more than nothing at all

 

 

Anway, What I really came to ask about is a little help with the 2da file. Lots of the code just goes whoosh right over my head, I can't seem to figure out how to import a 2da file into a table I can use in the core... sorry to be a baby, but externalising the file lookup table into a 2da file is really the last piece of this puzzle before I can polish it up and submit it.

[Avenger]

From a legal standpoint, the biggest problem are the D&D rules; from a technical standpoint, the amount of work involved in actually making a game. Also, keeping "offending" files out of the core doesn't change anything - you're distributing the file names either way.

 

Yes, you distribute the filenames, for the original games. But for a new game, you don't

 

Chilvence: yes, a small stand-alone game, free of any original content is planned.

[lynx]

Look at other tables like modal.2da (grep for modal).