You say that, I'm not sure it's that the lighting 'sucks', but more that it's a pain in the arse for modders because they don't have server farms to compile lightmaps unlike Valve.
On 17 June 2010 15:20, Harry Jeffery <harry101jeff...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I noticed that too, lighting is one of the major things the source > engine sucks at. Hopefully Source 2011 will make the life of modders > 10x easier. > > On 17 June 2010 15:11, Adam Buckland <adamjbuckl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Also, after looking at the Portal 2 gameplay footage from IGN: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5THiN8szSKM (there's 3 parts) am I the >> only one that thinks that the lighting system has had to have a large >> overhaul to support how the levels change dynamically? (particularly >> obvious in the part 1) >> >> On 17 June 2010 14:58, Alexander Hirsch <1ze...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>> Mesa3D? >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:20 AM, Katrina Payne <fullmetalhar...@nimhlabs.com >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> This also adds a rather odd burden here, that allows Linux to get a better >>>> standing for gaming. >>>> >>>> It is not that unknown that without mixing, Linux generally does not >>>> require >>>> anywhere near as much over head to run as windows. >>>> >>>> The minimum requirements to run a GUI on Linux is about 256MiB of RAM. This >>>> even includes GUIs like KDE and Gnome. Though XFCE and LXCE would be better >>>> if >>>> you really did only have 256MiB of RAM (well if you were using a DE... and >>>> not >>>> a slimmed down WM with only a few programs loaded into it) >>>> >>>> You can do just fine win 1GiB of RAM. >>>> >>>> Linux also, as an OS can run on some old Intel boards--that running an OS >>>> on >>>> would other wise be insane today. a Pentium 1 can still get (some) use with >>>> Linux. >>>> >>>> Not enough to really be noteworthy as a desktop PC... but, this is a lot >>>> less >>>> than the least you will get Windows 7 onto. >>>> >>>> So we have a nice toss up here: >>>> >>>> 1: Linux requires Software Rendering in place. IE: how rendering was done, >>>> before we got silly things like TNT and Voodoo on the market. >>>> >>>> 2: Linux requires significantly less overhead to run, as far as OS goes. >>>> >>>> If we can get it so that we can show Steam running on Linux, using mostly >>>> Software Rendering, and getting it to run as fast as the same game on >>>> Windows, >>>> on comparable hardware... >>>> >>>> This will definitely sell Linux as an OS... >>>> >>>> Which in turn will get various Graphics Card makers on board to add their >>>> support. >>>> >>>> You know--I kind of want to see somebody work on that goal then. I am >>>> almost >>>> ready to dig up some old books that go over the theory of 3d programming, >>>> just >>>> to pull make a software rendering engine for this idea. >>>> >>>> On Monday, June 14, 2010 07:59:45 pm Darren VanBuren wrote: >>>> > Yes, 3D drivers are definitely quite lacking on the GNU/Linux front, >>>> > but if Valve shows support for the development of these drivers, this >>>> > may prompt certain GPU manufacturers to step up their GNU/Linux driver >>>> > development. >>>> > >>>> > Darren L. VanBuren >>>> > ===================== >>>> > http://theoks.net/ >>>> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 18:35, Bob Somers <magicbob...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > > Something to consider, though, is that the 3D driver support is years >>>> > > behind from *ahem* a particular GPU manufacturer. I won't embarrass >>>> > > them by saying their name, so I'll just say their initials: ATI. >>>> > > >>>> > > Their driver support for Linux is, frankly, pathetic at best. The >>>> > > Fedora team is trying to solve this with their new free drivers in >>>> > > Fedora 13 (which, I'll admit, are quite good), but it's still not up >>>> > > to par with what you need to run a game. For example, the new free >>>> > > drivers have very little (read: practically none) support for basic >>>> > > vertex and fragment shaders. It will be at least another year before >>>> > > the free drivers are up to what ATI's crappy proprietary drivers are >>>> > > now. Even worse, right now you can get the proprietary drivers running >>>> > > on Fedora 11 alright, sort-of on Fedora 12 with some ugly hackery, and >>>> > > not at all on Fedora 13. Literally, ATI's Linux drivers are at least >>>> > > 12 months behind, and the free ones are 12 months behind that. >>>> > > >>>> > > Unless somebody gives ATI a swift kick in the nuts the situation does >>>> > > not look good. >>>> > > >>>> > > --Bob >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Darren VanBuren <onekop...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >> Spoiler Alert. It's like the ratman drawing that says "She's watching >>>> > >> you." Canonical is she in that case. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> I'm personally a fan of Fedora, but if Steam on GNU/Linux is >>>> > >> distributed as a tarball, that'd be best in the interests of Valve. >>>> > >> Even if some people (mainly Ubuntu users) would be a bit stuck on the >>>> > >> concept of a tarball, it'd be minimal work for Valve, and maximum >>>> > >> cross-distribution compatibility. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Darren L. VanBuren >>>> > >> ===================== >>>> > >> http://theoks.net/ >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 16:49, Harry Jeffery >>>> > >> <harry101jeff...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>> It's all down to personal opinion, as long as it does what you need >>>> > >>> quickly and effectively then it's fine. I've yet to see the dark side >>>> > >>> in cannonical so I honestly can't say much about their ethics. >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> Either way, I <3 Linux and so should Valve. >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> On 15 June 2010 00:19, Katrina Payne <fullmetalhar...@nimhlabs.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> Well a few points: >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> The commands in the Linux Commandline... and well those on any UNIX >>>> or >>>> UNIX >>>> > >>>> Workalike have not really changed since the 1970s. You could pick up >>>> a >>>> book on >>>> > >>>> BASH or TCSH from the 1970s, and still have most of what you should >>>> do. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> This kind of has allowed for tools to be put around these base >>>> functions, such >>>> > >>>> as autocomplete, history and well--quite a few other really handy >>>> tools, to be >>>> > >>>> added into the Linux CLI, to make its functionality go above and >>>> beyond >>>> > >>>> anything cmd.exe is capable of. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> I still have yet to look into Microsoft's PowerShell though. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> This is why most Linux users use the CLI. It has developed into an >>>> experience >>>> > >>>> that is completely unlike the root canal that is cmd.exe. You can >>>> actually go >>>> > >>>> in, and get some functionality from it. A lot of functionality too. >>>> It >>>> also >>>> > >>>> gives the feeling that the user has more direct control--without >>>> that >>>> Pesky >>>> > >>>> GUI in the way (though, technically, this just has a bunch of other >>>> items >>>> > >>>> typically in the way, such as init.d, bash, various bash >>>> extensions-- >>>> maybe >>>> > >>>> screen... you are just trading one thing in the way, that is, a GUI, >>>> for >>>> > >>>> another thing, that is a CLI). >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> Now, that said--there are plenty of Desktop Environments ('DE') that >>>> Linux can >>>> > >>>> make use of, that pretty much make requirement of CLI use >>>> unnecessary. >>>> That >>>> > >>>> is, between KDE4, LXDE, XFCE, E17 and GNOME2/GTK, the average Linux >>>> user >>>> > >>>> nearly never has to do anything on the CLI. Unless something has >>>> gone >>>> horribly >>>> > >>>> wrong. In which case, he should be able to get the local Linux Admin >>>> to >>>> fix it. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> As that technically is what he'd do if something went horribly wrong >>>> on >>>> > >>>> Windows. He'd get his local Windows Expert to fix it. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> The "required" use of the CLI rather than GUI to properly use Linux, >>>> is >>>> much >>>> > >>>> like how using Vi is "required" rather than EMACS for the proper use >>>> of >>>> Linux. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> Also, I use Fedora, and typically find it a LOT easier to work with >>>> than >>>> > >>>> Ubuntu. This maybe, because Fedora tries not to be a bunch of >>>> asshats >>>> to the >>>> > >>>> people upstream. The same cannot be said about Canonical, the owners >>>> of >>>> > >>>> Ubuntu. Where, from what I have seen on their policies by past >>>> actions... >>>> > >>>> their MAIN desire is to be asshats to the upstream. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> I have a long winded rant on why I do not like Ubuntu... I mostly >>>> just >>>> state >>>> > >>>> that nobody uses Ubuntu Linux. Typically most people go over to >>>> another >>>> Linux >>>> > >>>> Distro afterwards, generally agreeing that no matter what Linux >>>> Distro >>>> they go >>>> > >>>> to, be it Fedora, Puppy (well, prior to being based on Ubuntu), >>>> Arch, >>>> Slack, >>>> > >>>> Gentoo, Knoppix, CentOS, LFS, etc., is better than Ubuntu... either >>>> that, or >>>> > >>>> they return to Windows--only using Ubuntu as a rescue disk setup. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> Right, now then. Back to your regular discussion >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> ~Katrina >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> On Sunday, June 13, 2010 07:20:08 am Harry Jeffery wrote: >>>> > >>>>> People like the command line because it's very fast to do what you >>>> > >>>>> want if you know what you are doing. So far ubuntu seems to be the >>>> > >>>>> most user friendly linux distro and what a majority of linux gamers >>>> > >>>>> might use. >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Personally I'd just use arch-linux and optimize my system...a lot. >>>> As >>>> > >>>>> long as nVidia release decent linux drivers it's all good. >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> On 13 June 2010 14:01, Adam Buckland <adamjbuckl...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>>> > A couple of things: >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > Elan Ruskin gave a good talk on porting to consoles at GDC08. The >>>> > >>>>> > slides are on Valve's website. There's something in there that >>>> may >>>> > >>>>> > help you here: >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > #ifdef __GNUC__ >>>> > >>>>> > #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __thread >>>> > >>>>> > #else >>>> > >>>>> > #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __declspec( thread ) >>>> > >>>>> > #endif >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > You may wish to use another define for windows rather than an >>>> else >>>> > >>>>> > statement in case you wish to port it somewhere else in the >>>> future. >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > Also I agree, the Mac and Linux ports are incredibly similar. In >>>> fact, >>>> > >>>>> > on the Mac port a shell script is executed first to determine >>>> whether >>>> > >>>>> > it's running on OS X or Linux. >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > Finally Linux could be a great consumer platform. Before it can >>>> become >>>> > >>>>> > this, it needs to learn that not everyone is a power user, and >>>> make >>>> > >>>>> > things simple. Learn from the Mac app bundles, and remove >>>> reliance >>>> on >>>> > >>>>> > the command line (for example the output is shown on the update >>>> > >>>>> > software). It scares normal users. That, and a lot of power users >>>> > >>>>> > (like myself), don't want to have to rely on the command line for >>>> > >>>>> > everything. >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > On 13 June 2010 13:28, Jonas 'Sortie' Termansen < >>>> hlcod...@maxsi.dk> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>>> >> I'd like to share a few experiences about porting code and >>>> writing >>>> > >>>>> >> portable code. Scroll down, if you just want my thoughts on how >>>> portable >>>> > >>>>> >> the Source Engine is. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> Recently I've been porting my in-development digital >>>> distribution >>>> > >>>>> >> platform to GNU/Linux for the fun of it. Naturally, most of my >>>> code >>>> > >>>>> >> didn't work right out of the box. But it is worth that several >>>> > >>>>> >> subsystems actually worked at the first attempt, or with an edit >>>> or >>>> two. >>>> > >>>>> >> For instance, my string system and parser classes/functions >>>> compiled >>>> > >>>>> >> right away. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> However, stuff like accessing the filesystem, multithreading, >>>> user >>>> > >>>>> >> interfaces, networking, and so on didn't work because it relied >>>> on >>>> the >>>> > >>>>> >> Windows API. The interesting part here is that POSIX does things >>>> > >>>>> >> differently; but almost in the same manner as Windows. That >>>> means >>>> for >>>> > >>>>> >> each Windows API call you use, there is often one or more POSIX >>>> calls >>>> > >>>>> >> that does the same thing (if you add a little abstraction, that >>>> is). >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> Now, some of you heavily suggested the use of #ifdefs all around >>>> the >>>> > >>>>> >> code. You should not use #ifdefs each time you rely on platform >>>> specific >>>> > >>>>> >> behavior, but only in shared function calls or in headers. For >>>> instance, >>>> > >>>>> >> if you have to open a file. On Windows you can call the >>>> CreateFile >>>> > >>>>> >> function, while POSIX supports the open function. That means for >>>> each >>>> > >>>>> >> file opening, you need to write something like. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> #ifdef linux >>>> > >>>>> >> int FileHandle = open(Path, Flags); >>>> > >>>>> >> #elif defined(WIN32) >>>> > >>>>> >> HANDLE FileName = CreateFile(...) >>>> > >>>>> >> #endif >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> Naturally, this isn't very pretty. And if this was used all over >>>> the >>>> > >>>>> >> Source Engine you would spend a lot of time writing #ifdefs and >>>> checking >>>> > >>>>> >> platform specific documentation. However, I am not saying >>>> #ifdefs >>>> are a >>>> > >>>>> >> bad idea. But instead of using them all over your code, you >>>> should >>>> move >>>> > >>>>> >> them to a shared class or function that simply implements all >>>> this >>>> once. >>>> > >>>>> >> In my code, I declared an abstract baseclass called >>>> MaxsiFileSystem >>>> that >>>> > >>>>> >> implements all the common functions to access the local >>>> filesystem. >>>> So >>>> > >>>>> >> now when I wish to open a file for reading, I would call: >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> MaxsiHandle FileHandle = FileSystem()->OpenFile(Path, >>>> MAXSI_FILE_READ | >>>> > >>>>> >> MAXSI_FILE_SEQUENTIAL); >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> This additional layer of abstraction makes it very easy to add >>>> support >>>> > >>>>> >> for new platforms as you just have to define a new child of the >>>> abstract >>>> > >>>>> >> baseclass. I have also added such a layer for my Window System. >>>> This >>>> > >>>>> >> means I call my own APIs in my actual code, and then it >>>> redirects >>>> it to >>>> > >>>>> >> the Windows API or GTK+ depending on your platform. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> You might also have noticed I implemented a FileSystem() >>>> function, >>>> in >>>> > >>>>> >> the same manner I have implemented a WindowSystem() function >>>> that >>>> > >>>>> >> returns the window system in use by the current function/class. >>>> This >>>> > >>>>> >> makes it easy to simply swap the window system on the fly. For >>>> instance, >>>> > >>>>> >> my source mod links against my distribution platform (LGPL) and >>>> my >>>> mod >>>> > >>>>> >> then implements some of these interfaces. It could implement the >>>> > >>>>> >> MaxsiWindowSystem class using VGUI and then my programs could be >>>> > >>>>> >> natively drawn ingame with mininal work. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> Other porting issues includes how the VS compiler breaks a lot >>>> of >>>> the >>>> > >>>>> >> C99 standard. To counter this, I have simply declared a lot of >>>> macros in >>>> > >>>>> >> my header files that replaces platform specific behavior. >>>> #defines are >>>> > >>>>> >> very powerful for this. For example, to declare a >>>> thread-specific >>>> > >>>>> >> variable, I would use this header define: >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> #ifdef __GNUC__ >>>> > >>>>> >> #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __thread >>>> > >>>>> >> #else >>>> > >>>>> >> #define MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE __declspec( thread ) >>>> > >>>>> >> #endif >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> And then use the MAXSI_THREADED_VARIABLE macro to declare each >>>> threaded >>>> > >>>>> >> variable. My experience is also that the GNU Compilers throw >>>> much >>>> more >>>> > >>>>> >> errors and warnings than the Visual Studio compiler - and it is >>>> often >>>> > >>>>> >> right to do so. Visual Studio teaches you to write bad >>>> > >>>>> >> standards-breaking code, even if you just compile using MinGW >>>> you >>>> will >>>> > >>>>> >> get to fix a lot of issues that makes your code rather >>>> non-portable. >>>> > >>>>> >> (Like avoiding Microsoft-specific extensions to the C Library, >>>> in >>>> some >>>> > >>>>> >> cases.) But Microsoft did break the standard enough that you >>>> might >>>> need >>>> > >>>>> >> to use some of the above methods for porting, just to get your >>>> code >>>> > >>>>> >> compiling using MinGW. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> Now to return to the Source Engine. In my experience a lot of >>>> stuff >>>> in >>>> > >>>>> >> the SDK code is already defined using interfaces, classes, and >>>> such. >>>> > >>>>> >> That means the actual porting issues have been outsourced to the >>>> Engine. >>>> > >>>>> >> This, in turn, means that the SDK code will be rather easy to >>>> port >>>> > >>>>> >> compared to the Engine. Fortunately, as the Source Engine >>>> already >>>> is >>>> > >>>>> >> highly modular using interfaces, it is easy to just swap a DX >>>> renderer >>>> > >>>>> >> with OpenGL. As such, they already have the framework to make >>>> their >>>> code >>>> > >>>>> >> work on new platforms - all they have to do is implement their >>>> > >>>>> >> interfaces using the local system calls. If you start to do this >>>> on >>>> the >>>> > >>>>> >> low-level interfaces and move upward, then soon your program >>>> starts >>>> > >>>>> >> working in all its glory. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> As for a Steam Client for GNU/Linux. It exists. I lost the link, >>>> but it >>>> > >>>>> >> seems that Valve uploads nightly builds of their Steam Client, >>>> and >>>> each >>>> > >>>>> >> day it works just a bit better. Last I heard, the Steam Client >>>> actually >>>> > >>>>> >> logged on and the actual UI was partially drawn. I am not sure >>>> why >>>> Valve >>>> > >>>>> >> is so silent about this - perhaps it's just experimental, or >>>> they >>>> they >>>> > >>>>> >> to make a big deal about it, like they did with the Mac. >>>> Seriously, >>>> when >>>> > >>>>> >> are they gonna shut up about it? Last I saw was that they made a >>>> funny >>>> > >>>>> >> TF2 comic about it. >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> >>>> > >>>>> >> Porting programs to Linux hasn't been very hard for me, though >>>> it >>>> is a >>>> > >>>>> >> lot of work, if you want to do it properly. It seems that the >>>> Source >>>> > >>>>> >> Engine is already highly portable and GNU/Linux build doesn't >>>> seem >>>> too >>>> > >>>>> >> difficult, as it seems from the nightly builds. There is no >>>> doubt >>>> about >>>> > >>>>> >> whether we need a client for GNU/Linux, it is just a matter of >>>> time >>>> > >>>>> >> before they announce and release it. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>>> > Bucky >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >>>> please visit: >>>> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >>> please visit: >>> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Bucky >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, >> please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders > > -- Bucky _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
