New Horizon on 24/10/2010 at 18:49
Quote Posted by BPS
Project 1: code name OpenThief "Gold" - only make it run on modern computers, no graphics enhancements, no physics enhancements, no ai enhancements. Just provide original gameplay to old players.
An OpenThief project has the potential to be a bit broader than even this. Ideally, both projects are going to be run on the same base...so it would be worthwhile to rip out the reliance upon Direct X and switch to OpenGL. This can open Thief up to Linux and Mac users.
Quote:
Project 2: code name OpenThief "Platinum" - enhance everything, graphics (bloom, etc), physics, ai
Once project 1 has converted to OpenGL, it would then be possible to build upon that foundation and enhance the visuals...although a full enhancement with normal maps and specular will require remaking all the textures in hires as well.
nbohr1more on 24/10/2010 at 19:43
Quote:
Once project 1 has converted to OpenGL, it would then be possible to build upon that foundation and enhance the visuals...although a full enhancement with normal maps and specular will require remaking all the textures in hires as well.
Yes, OpenGL is the best way forward for all involved. I wonder if anyone already has an OpenGL based, Thief inspired project or Mod, where these textures could be prototyped to get the ball rolling early... Why folks could even contribute new and unique versions that would be entirely in the public domain... :thumb:
Renault on 24/10/2010 at 21:03
Quote Posted by d'Spair
Wow, some people here have real reading problems.
You say that yet, these appear to be criticism on your part:
Quote Posted by d'Spair
sometimes the community just makes unexplainable moves.
Nobody within Thief community is interested in finishing what remains from actual official LGS missions
the complete ignorance about official, canonical things don't picture the community very well.
And then you say:
Quote Posted by d'Spair
I'm not criticizing jermi, not at all, but there are some strange issues with priorities within this community.
I mean, anybody can make whatever FMs he or she wants.
Maybe what you interpret as "reading problems" is actually you speaking out of both sides of your mouth and/or not stating your point properly.
(It could also be a language barrier, as both you and vorob are russian).
d'Spair on 24/10/2010 at 21:32
Quote Posted by Brethren
Maybe what you interpret as "reading problems" is actually you speaking out of both sides of your mouth and/or not stating your point properly.
That might be considered a criticism, but definitely not a crticism towards FM makers and/or jermi. They are doing fantastic work, what's the purpose of criticising them? If I'm criticising somebody, than that would be the community as a whole which I wish had some different priorities. And of course, being a part of this community, I take a part of this criticism myself.
*Zaccheus* on 26/10/2010 at 10:12
The first priority will be to get the source code compiling at all. This can often prove to be a problem with old code. Does anyone have a copy of Visual Studio 6 ? To make sure that we got it right, ideally the EXE which we initially compile will be exactly the same size as the original Thief EXE. Alternatively we could compare the output of DumpBin.
Yandros on 26/10/2010 at 12:24
I have VS6 on CD, yes. But it's been 5 years since I actually did any dev work, so I wouldn't be the right person for the job.
Brian The Dog on 26/10/2010 at 12:54
Yep, I've got Visual Studio 6 - my MSDN-AA license gives me a copy. Although I'm currently using 2010 for my work. Since I only do ANSI/ISO C++ with simple MFC, there's not too much reason to change. I only upgraded to 2010 since everyone else was using it.
I'd be interested in compiling the code (or at least attempting to) when/if it becomes available. Presumably I'd have to include the DirectX SDK, which (a) I have only done with the DirectX9.0c version, and (b) I've never done it in VS6. But someone who knows what they're doing should be fine with it.
Myagi on 26/10/2010 at 17:03
I still have VC6 with an old DX8 sdk on my secondary machine.
sNeaksieGarrett on 26/10/2010 at 19:44
Seriously... is everyone just going to take what a TTLG member said (please don't take offense, but this is the internet so we have to be careful) for the truth about the source code rather than waiting for an official statement from Eidos? How do we really know the source code has been found? I did notice a post on Eidos Montreal's twitter page that suggests they are "looking into it", but that doesn't mean the source code has been found. Or am I missing something again?
Yandros on 26/10/2010 at 20:04
Well sure, you can believe what you want until something official happens. But I don't see what MoroseTroll has to gain by making this up.
