Topic: SFC 4 Project

[marstone]

Any SQL Admin worth his salt can upgrade to the current iteration of MS SQL any MS SQL server database and or server going back to SQL Server 6.5.  And yes, just like MS SQL, there will be sp_xx and Datatypes that will need conversion or replacement. 

no you miss the point.  If MS drops the free SQL versions, then you would have to buy the it for whatever MS wants to charge.  Thus for the free version you are stuck with that one forever, and it may not work on the next OS (MS might change things anough that it will brake)

Thus it isn't just installing the new version (yeah that is easy) as there will not be any current iterations for you to use if support is dropped.  Thus you would be left to maintain it yourself and without the code you can't do that. 

And if you hardcoded in MSSQL then you would end up having to rework your old code to support a new SQL you could work with.

[toasty0]

Any SQL Admin worth his salt can upgrade to the current iteration of MS SQL any MS SQL server database and or server going back to SQL Server 6.5.  And yes, just like MS SQL, there will be sp_xx and Datatypes that will need conversion or replacement. 

no you miss the point.  If MS drops the free SQL versions, then you would have to buy the it for whatever MS wants to charge.  Thus for the free version you are stuck with that one forever, and it may not work on the next OS (MS might change things anough that it will brake)

Thus it isn't just installing the new version (yeah that is easy) as there will not be any current iterations for you to use if support is dropped.  Thus you would be left to maintain it yourself and without the code you can't do that. 

And if you hardcoded in MSSQL then you would end up having to rework your old code to support a new SQL you could work with.

So, I guess it boils down to nothing more than being open source or not?

[Rod ONeal]

What's the reason(s) to use MS SQL instead of MySQL? I know servers have been run on MySQL. Seems that it would be easier to continue on with that work, but maybe not. Is there a reason to switch to MS SQL that might be an improvement or help somehow?

[toasty0]

What's the reason(s) to use MS SQL instead of MySQL? I know servers have been run on MySQL. Seems that it would be easier to continue on with that work, but maybe not. Is there a reason to switch to MS SQL that might be an improvement or help somehow?

Ron--

Dunno. I'm not on the development team. I do know that what little I do know of the development, I would not be as quick as some to dismiss MS SQL 2005 Express as a viable option.

I wish I could say more...

[toasty0]

What would make MS SQL a better choice?

 

[Rod ONeal]

What would make MS SQL a better choice?

 

Ah, it's a secret! Fair enough. I guess we'll see?

[marstone]

Any SQL Admin worth his salt can upgrade to the current iteration of MS SQL any MS SQL server database and or server going back to SQL Server 6.5.  And yes, just like MS SQL, there will be sp_xx and Datatypes that will need conversion or replacement. 

no you miss the point.  If MS drops the free SQL versions, then you would have to buy the it for whatever MS wants to charge.  Thus for the free version you are stuck with that one forever, and it may not work on the next OS (MS might change things anough that it will brake)

Thus it isn't just installing the new version (yeah that is easy) as there will not be any current iterations for you to use if support is dropped.  Thus you would be left to maintain it yourself and without the code you can't do that. 

And if you hardcoded in MSSQL then you would end up having to rework your old code to support a new SQL you could work with.

So, I guess it boils down to nothing more than being open source or not?

I would think it isn't just that it is open source, but that I for one do not trust MS to keep a product line free.  Standard idea is like a drug dealer giving out free samples.  Get them hooked on it, then put in the cost.  Happens all the time.  The opensource part just lets you know it will be free forever, unlike the MS product.  Microsoft might also try and charge for a license version for the developers to use to make the product even tho the end-user can use the free version.  I have seen that also, the main money comes from the companies who use it to make the programs and the end user can get it free (that is how PDF works, anyone can read it for free so it is a great way to put out your documents, but to write it you needed to buy the program to get the writer).

[marstone]

What's the reason(s) to use MS SQL instead of MySQL? I know servers have been run on MySQL. Seems that it would be easier to continue on with that work, but maybe not. Is there a reason to switch to MS SQL that might be an improvement or help somehow?

Ron--

Dunno. I'm not on the development team. I do know that what little I do know of the development, I would not be as quick as some to dismiss MS SQL 2005 Express as a viable option.

I wish I could say more...

The other and probably best reason MySQL is a better choice is that it is already coded for server use right now.  So it would be just following along the path of least resistance (no changes needed to keep it).  Simple is probably the best answer (we already use it so why change, unless there is a big improvement to do so).

[Cyberkada]

AFAIK, MySQL does require a $600/ server license  for any software not released under GPL or LGPL.

SQLite might be a better option.

[TFO Ghost]

Ok i didn't bother to read but the first 3 posts in this thread so if i missed something fill me in but hey I can do modeling with 3ds MAX and i am also a student at ITT-Tech and know alot of others that might be interested in helping out so i'll pass the word around on the project at school and have them post here too, and i will start working on some 3d ship models in the mean time If there is anything else email me or tell Killswitch and he will get me on vent or just jump on the TFO vent and chat.

[toasty0]

What would make MS SQL a better choice?

 

Ah, it's a secret! Fair enough. I guess we'll see?

Thanks Rod. Though, I just want to clarify that it is not so much a secret, as it is a matter that I have no right to post about a project that;

1.) I am not a member/developer on
2.) Do not have Frey's "all-clear" to relate.

What little I do know of the project I think MS SQL would be a very tight fit. But my opinion is based on a small amount of information . I'm confident the project leads will choose applications, servers, and IDEs that are best for the project.

[Pestalence_XC]

The reason MySQL is so popular with the SFC titles is because it works with the server kits better.. Taldren was the first to try SQL implementation and they tried both MS SQL and MySql.. the server kit at the time was much more stable under MySQL, at least according to Kenneth Yeast's Dynaverse Admins Group in Yahoo...

From there, Bonk and most of the Dyna Admins have been working on the kit with MySQL .. I'm not sure how stable MS SQL would be with Build 37 of the server kit.

I remember trying to use MS SQL with the server kit build 35 and I had a hard time getting MS SQL to recognize the kit.. and once I did get it to recognize, it was difficult for options to be adjusted in the kit.

However under MySQL, it recognized the server kit off the bat and working options in, though needing skill or borrowing scripts (as in  my case) for MySQL, it was easier to do changes on the fly.. Bonk is the master on it currently.

There is good and bad on both sides, but the major plus for me would be Open Source of the MySQL code .. this would allow for the programmers to go into MySQL source and make alterations.. MS SQL is a private code and alterations at the source levels are not possible, so that is a limitation to begin with..

[toasty0]

Thanks Pesty. I didn't know that Taldren had hooked MySql. It makes sense though.

I guess if the developers are going to try to use and maintain the old code base then it would make sense to use MySql. Otoh, if, as I hope, the project is going to develop things from the ground up, so to speak, many new features could be introduced while discarding a lot of the flaws and limitations of the old code base. I know this means an almost onerious timeline for the community, and it also means the possibility losing some of the good nuggests in the old code base. No way to ignore those ugly possibilites.

I think the results of a better scripting engine/interface; strong, more robust, stable server kit(s); and probably 25 other features I haven't thought of being included in a new code base make any negative result by abandoning the original code base worth the loss.

And, C# and MSSQL with managed code rock. 

[toasty0]

I have an interesting question.. What new things will work with the other SFC games, Will SFCers be able to access the q3files? and other files that were denied access too?

Well, Q3 is half broken out now, just need to get the image files to work out and that would be modifiable.

Did you finally crack this nut or not?

[marstone]

I have an interesting question.. What new things will work with the other SFC games, Will SFCers be able to access the q3files? and other files that were denied access too?

Well, Q3 is half broken out now, just need to get the image files to work out and that would be modifiable.

Did you finally crack this nut or not?

I got most of it (sort of), a few things in the format that I need to hammer out but still working on the graphics (as to what format so I can load and look at them).  Once I can look at the graphic images each area works with it will speed up what each asset type does.

I understand basicly how a screen or a subsection basicly gets put togeather.   Once I can see the images, then I will know what the three images some buttons point to, or the pair and two seperate images a scroll p0ints at and it will help.

Been reading up on graphic formats but still no joy.  Hopefully soon.

Of course, my laptop where I have done all the work on dying hasn't helped matters any either (but I did do alot of the figuring out on paper so I have some backup paperwork).  Oh to see the data structures that load the assets, but I dream.

[toasty0]

SFC 4 will be a stand alone production and will not require EAW, OP or SFC 3 installed to play.

Do we know if this is still the situation?

[Fornax]

Wow, interesting.  A friend pointed me back at this site - feel like I haven't been here in ages.

Sure seems like you have quite a bit of help coming in from the community on this one.  A thought or two I had from the fellow who mentioned ST: Supremacy.  I like the idea of open source - a lot of what was stated - however, that may not be available for SFC4.  As I recall, ADB picked up the license to do SFB on the cheap - before Paramount figured out what they had in their inventory.  The rights to do SFC at all was sort of a miracle in that the groups finally agreed to do anything and not continue to argue.  I do not know, at all, what happened to the SFC1/2/OP/3 rights although I remember the names of some of the people who had full code access (like Mags!)...but I suspect they're still locked up a little between ADP & Paramount.  I wouldn't even be surprised if Activision (or their successor) still had a piece.

Second, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole SFC4 project weren't much more than a tweak/update of one of the earlier generations of the series.  Basically, they work.  Why reinvent the wheel if you've got something that meets the technical criteria.  I've always felt that's been why the modding community did so well with this game...and how things like simply re-writing the shiplist worked.

That doesn't mean vast sections wouldn't be updated/altered.  Flatfile databases just plain stink for performance - I believe that was the point of the late conversion attempt to using MySQL for the Dynaverse play.

Keep in mind, these are just my guesses from information that was current...oh...4 or 5 years ago.

Sadly, my relevant credentials are limited to having been a Taldren beta tester (and then one of the few in the Activision Visioneer program)...
I have no idea if I'll make the time to play this game, however, I can guarantee I'll buy the darn thing just to support the effort.  I can't even guess how many thousand(s) of hours I put into playing back when these games were live.

I do have one request/suggestion.  I suspect you're probably already on this.  My opinion was that EAW and then OP was pretty much complete from a SFB point of view.  The only real missing component was the Dynaverse.  Yeah, it's there - and it works - we all remember the problems.  Loved it when it was up - but frankly, the dynaverse really was just an enhancement of the campaign/single player system.

This is the area where the game would shine - this is the point that would re-sell me on the game.  Design and build a multiplayer campaign system along the lines of the best community driven efforts (not dynaverse) - I mean the actual campaigns.  Remember Starlance?  GamerZ?  Design a system that allows the flexibility of providing that kind of campaign mode AND then the option of a much more dynamic Dynaverse type approach.

Nax

[Pestalence_XC]

Wow, interesting. A friend pointed me back at this site - feel like I haven't been here in ages.

Welcome Back

Sure seems like you have quite a bit of help coming in from the community on this one. A thought or two I had from the fellow who mentioned ST: Supremacy. I like the idea of open source - a lot of what was stated - however, that may not be available for SFC4. As I recall, ADB picked up the license to do SFB on the cheap - before Paramount figured out what they had in their inventory. The rights to do SFC at all was sort of a miracle in that the groups finally agreed to do anything and not continue to argue. I do not know, at all, what happened to the SFC1/2/OP/3 rights although I remember the names of some of the people who had full code access (like Mags!)...but I suspect they're still locked up a little between ADP & Paramount. I wouldn't even be surprised if Activision (or their successor) still had a piece.

MagnumMan gave Frey the SFC II : EAW Source Code

http://www.dynaverse.net/forum/index.php/topic,163376333.0.html

Second, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole SFC4 project weren't much more than a tweak/update of one of the earlier generations of the series. Basically, they work. Why reinvent the wheel if you've got something that meets the technical criteria. I've always felt that's been why the modding community did so well with this game...and how things like simply re-writing the shiplist worked.

SFC 4 is using the EAW source for the primary game systems, however much more is going to be added.. not just for looks, but functionality, bugs, etc..

That doesn't mean vast sections wouldn't be updated/altered. Flatfile databases just plain stink for performance - I believe that was the point of the late conversion attempt to using MySQL for the Dynaverse play.

Keep in mind, these are just my guesses from information that was current...oh...4 or 5 years ago.

Sadly, my relevant credentials are limited to having been a Taldren beta tester (and then one of the few in the Activision Visioneer program)...
I have no idea if I'll make the time to play this game, however, I can guarantee I'll buy the darn thing just to support the effort. I can't even guess how many thousand(s) of hours I put into playing back when these games were live.

I do have one request/suggestion. I suspect you're probably already on this. My opinion was that EAW and then OP was pretty much complete from a SFB point of view. The only real missing component was the Dynaverse. Yeah, it's there - and it works - we all remember the problems. Loved it when it was up - but frankly, the dynaverse really was just an enhancement of the campaign/single player system.

Dynaverse.net recieved the Directory servers from Taldren before Taldren closed as well as integrating Taldren's forums into our own.. Dynaverse.net is basically the sanctioned home for the Starfleet Command game series.. Activision even turned over the directory servers for SFC 3 to D.Net.

all the servers are online and people can host their own servers, all the client or server admin needs to do is apply the Dynaverse Directory Server Fix for the respective game which is located in our Downloads section in order to rejoin the Dynaverse.. However Dynaverse is only XP compatible.. Vista lags severely on the D2.. D3 is uneffected and will work on vista just fine.

This is the area where the game would shine - this is the point that would re-sell me on the game. Design and build a multiplayer campaign system along the lines of the best community driven efforts (not dynaverse) - I mean the actual campaigns. Remember Starlance? GamerZ? Design a system that allows the flexibility of providing that kind of campaign mode AND then the option of a much more dynamic Dynaverse type approach.

Nax

there are several ideas like that floating around in the public development forum area .. look at the main bord directory and enter the SFC 4 section, then go into the Public Development sub forum and start reading the ideas, and post your own thoughts there.. development is coming from that area.

[Verroc]

I'm in my degree year, of Games Software Development. My programming prob isn't at the required level yet, however we program in C++ and C#. We also study games design, development, marketing and testing in detail. If i could help with anything i'd be more than happy to.

[FCM_SFHQ_XC]

I'm in my degree year, of Games Software Development. My programming prob isn't at the required level yet, however we program in C++ and C#. We also study games design, development, marketing and testing in detail. If i could help with anything i'd be more than happy to.

Send in an application

If you would like to help out with this project, please fill out the form below and submit it to frey@xenocorp.net. All information is required.  Your name and address will be kept confidential and are only required to send the required paperwork.

The current plans on the table have the project being written in either C++ or C#, so programmers who would like to join the team must be fluent with the C/C++ language.

Name:
Address:
Phone# :

Job (IE: Programmer):
Skills (IE: C++/SQL):

Contact Email:

MSN Messenger (If applicable):

Please include a piece of sample of your work as an attachment.