Multiplayer?

[Jyby]

Yeah but dehardcoding is a bad idea. For one it is very boring and could jeopardize multiplayers existence. Two why decode when we can write the same code and keep it non specific. Three it's very time consuming and leads to poorer designs when the systems grow and developers wish to extend. That is why it is really important to consider software design when making computer software. There is a lot going on in OpenMW from what I can tell and I wish I had a whole lot of time to figure it all out and review it's design. But if you really want to make great software use sound approaches. The GOF book is a good start.

[SquireNed]

Dehardcoding is crucial to OpenMW being its own standalone engine that can do a variety of things. Basically, despite Morrowind and its successors being "Mod-friendly", they aren't actually all that incredibly flexible. Something like Dungeon Siege, on the other hand, can have major changes implemented by modders because the core game logic is contained and loaded in the same way; Dungeon Siege's first two installments are essentially just wrappers for huge custom-written archives of data that influence everything in the ways that Elder Scrolls mods never have been able to.

[Tarius]

Yeah but dehardcoding is a bad idea. For one it is very boring and could jeopardize multiplayers existence. Two why decode when we can write the same code and keep it non specific. Three it's very time consuming and leads to poorer designs when the systems grow and developers wish to extend. That is why it is really important to consider software design when making computer software. There is a lot going on in OpenMW from what I can tell and I wish I had a whole lot of time to figure it all out and review it's design. But if you really want to make great software use sound approaches. The GOF book is a good start.

You didnt honestly just argue to leave....I dont even know how to put this?! leave things that should have been customizable in MW as not customizable in OpenMW?! This is the most I have wanted to slap someone on here.

In all seriousness, one of the first things to be dehardcoded will be that darned game map. Its gotten to the point where you cant see much in the province mods. Are you saying its a bad idea to allow people to see more on the game map?

[psi29a]

There is a lot going on in OpenMW from what I can tell and I wish I had a whole lot of time to figure it all out and review it's design. But if you really want to make great software use sound approaches. The GOF book is a good start.

Some of us actually do software engineering for a living, please do not preach. If you wish to contribute, then please do so. If you don't want to take the time to figure what is going on, no worries, no one is asking you too, but don't go slinging your weight around... leave that to those with time and energy to do so; such as Zini, Scrawl and Kcat (to name a few).

For years now, we've been keeping our eyes on the 1.0 prize. After that, comes the de-hardcoding for which Zini has already said will happen.

Multiplayer is currently not a priority and there is no (or little) consideration while we are working our way to 1.0.

[Jyby]

There is a lot going on in OpenMW from what I can tell and I wish I had a whole lot of time to figure it all out and review it's design. But if you really want to make great software use sound approaches. The GOF book is a good start.

Some of us actually do software engineering for a living, please do not preach. If you wish to contribute, then please do so. If you don't want to take the time to figure what is going on, no worries, no one is asking you too, but don't go slinging your weight around... leave that to those with time and energy to do so; such as Zini, Scrawl and Kcat (to name a few).

For years now, we've been keeping our eyes on the 1.0 prize. After that, comes the de-hardcoding for which Zini has already said will happen.

Multiplayer is currently not a priority and there is no (or little) consideration while we are working our way to 1.0.

Sorry I didn't intend to dis anyone. I must have mixed up the definition or context of dehardcoding. It was meant to be read in that paragraph I wrote and not taken out of its topic sentence

[WeirdSexy]

Yeah but dehardcoding is a bad idea.

N'WAH!

Seriously though, I think there might be some confusion on what de-hardcoding means when Zini talks about it - even by me.

But look, multiplayer has never been a priority of OpenMW and has not, as far as I can see, ever been a real desire for any of the major developers. The argument "X is a bad idea because it jeopardizes multiplayer" is probably not going to hold up in this project because a great many things that can be substituted for X are much greater priorities than multiplayer. The original game we are working with somewhat jeopardizes multiplayer as far as I can tell. Multiplayer is something that will be added some time down the road when the engine is more mature, major design goals have been met, enough developers are willing to work on it, and it is technically feasible. It is not something that will stand in the way of anything else of priority getting done before it.

OpenMW is about preserving Morrowind for all time and making it platform-agnostic and more moddable.

[Jyby]

I'd just like to reiterate my knowledge as a software engineer. If we take the time now, we won't have to scratch are heads later. Laying ground work has nothing to do with multiplayer per say. For example take crime, if you design it right future mods will let NPCs commit crime, and we won't have to redo much code besides proving an extension ("adapter"). Currently I don't see how this is even possible with OpenMW because we refer to "one" player everywhere.

[Chris]

If we take the time now, we won't have to scratch are heads later.

Similarly, if we take too much time now, we'll never reach our base goal before interest wanes. By all means keep multiplayer in mind when designing code, but don't let it take up valuable development time. If you have the choice between a good single-player friendly design in a couple days, or a good multiplayer-friendly design in a couple months, then go with the quicker option. You can always do the other option later, and having something usable sooner will get more interest in the project, which means more developers and users, thus more time and manpower to work on things.

This really goes for any non-vanilla feature, too. If you can get it in with little-to-no extra time, go for it. But if it's going to slow development down, recheck the priorities of the project.

[psi29a]

If we take the time now, we won't have to scratch are heads later.

Similarly, if we take too much time now, we'll never reach our base goal before interest wanes. By all means keep multiplayer in mind when designing code, but don't let it take up valuable development time. If you have the choice between a good single-player friendly design in a couple days, or a good multiplayer-friendly design in a couple months, then go with the quicker option. You can always do the other option later, and having something usable sooner will get more interest in the project, which means more developers and users, thus more time and manpower to work on things.

+1

I've seen a few start-ups fail because the product (as originally specced) couldn't be delivered due to feature-creep and over-engineering. Keep it lean, to the point and to the original goal. Getting it done now is preferable, when we have the luxury (as open-source and no funding) of re-factoring and re-engineering later.

We've achieved a critical mass of attention that has brought us more developers, we want to keep moving in this direction to prevent a possible project stall. Keep in mind that there are other factors at play.

[SquireNed]

Yeah, I agree. It is important to keep multiplayer a post 1.0 feature. Even if it's necessary to go back and change things to have a cohesive multiplayer and singleplayer experience, at least the traditional Morrowind format will be working.