oen432
Legendary OT User
Unusual 2D things like?As far i understand a tibia client requires more than the usual 2d things(like sprite batching).
Unusual 2D things like?As far i understand a tibia client requires more than the usual 2d things(like sprite batching).
Source, because this couldn't be more false.do not use unity.. any reputable game company moves away from unity once big enough. Unity is a good starter engine to get into game development but not many high profile games use it.
I could list the games who started in Unity... im not saying its not a good engine.. im just saying its not the standard in the industry. Just weigh all the options, pros and cons before making a decision.. many do not use unity for specific reasons and that might apply to the OTS situation.Source, because this couldn't be more false.
- Legends of Runeterra (card game from Riot Games)
- League of Legends: Wild Rift (upcoming mobile version of League of Legends)
- Subnautica
- Call of Duty: Mobile
- Temtem
- Boneworks
List few big titles or from known developers, pleaseI could list the games who started in Unity and moved away but I wont xD would take me too long
I could list the games who started in Unity and moved away but I wont... im not saying its not a good engine.. im just saying its not the standard in the industry.
You are expecting way too much from others. You wanted to make it from scratch and look how it endedI highly agree that games should avoid engines that tries to conquer the world, such ones like Unity. Developers must know that they are paying a high price to use a engine that tries too bee to flexible. Any game who uses such engines will be bloated and have efficiency issues due to the engine unused stuff and unneeded flexibility and in some cases higher complexity due to the engine flexibility and style. Developers who uses popular engines hidden themselves of too much valuable knowledge and access to the engine parts, this leads to games where have undesired consequences and issues that the developers can't handle well and becomes much harder to adapt such a complex engine to its goals. I can see why many game makers move away from them, its better to use something polished for your specific needs and just having things you use. Unity are good to prototype games fast and to introduce to the concept of game making, but in my opinion should not be used in end products. Developers need to learn how things work under the hood, that's is the best way to have software that can work without bugs, issues and efficiency. Anyone trying to make a game while skip learning how things work will always be at risk of ending up with undesired issues that can't be fixed by themselves because they never learned how things worked in first place, or even if they do learned the engine will take away some control.
Everyday I see a new game released in Unity I feel bad for seeing programmers potential being under developed because they opted to use a ready engine so they could work faster. Really good games and game studios will always have an engine polished for themselves. If a developer really wants to use an engine I suggest him to always search for one that just have what is needed and being smaller the better, because with time he will have to dive in its sources to make improvements, changes and fixes.
Otclient for example at first I did implement using Qt, but did throw away the code in just a few weeks, with Qt the thing was turning in something with unwanted complexity, odd code style and heavy that made the coding experience not fun for me. So I implemented its own engine with just the piece it needed. Today Tibia itself implemented their own client with Qt and I find that funny. I don't think it's a good ideia, looks like for me they were just trying to rush or were out of good developers.
If every developer today start using engine like Unity, the developers of the future will be full of morons, and the games full of issues and limitations because morons will be unable to do anything better. For me is always better to pay the price of learning more how things work with more time, than to trying to rush and skip to end up with issues and limitations you can't handle.
There is already very few people that try to really learn stuff. The majority of this community is not interested in developing skills, they want the easy things. Unity will make it easier and customizations will be more acessible to those people.I highly agree that games should avoid engines that tries to conquer the world, such ones like Unity. Developers must know that they are paying a high price to use a engine that tries to be too flexible. Any game who uses such engines will be bloated and have efficiency issues due to the engine unused stuff and unneeded flexibility and in some cases higher complexity due to the engine flexibility and style. Developers who uses popular engines hidden themselves of too much valuable knowledge and access to the engine parts, this leads to games where have undesired consequences and issues that the developers can't handle well and becomes much harder to adapt such a complex engine to its goals. I can see why many game makers move away from them, its better to use something polished for your specific needs and just having things you use. Unity are good to prototype games fast and to introduce to the concept of game making, but in my opinion should not be used in end products. Developers need to learn how things work under the hood, that's is the best way to have software that can work without bugs, issues and efficiency. Anyone trying to make a game while skip learning how things work will always be at risk of ending up with undesired issues that can't be fixed by themselves because they never learned how things worked in first place, or even if they do learned the engine will take away some control.
Everyday I see a new game released in Unity I feel bad for seeing programmers potential being underdeveloped because they opted to use a ready engine so they could work faster. Really good games and game studios will always have an engine polished for themselves. If a developer really wants to use an engine I suggest him to always search for one that just have what is needed and being smaller the better, because with time he will have to dive in its sources to make improvements, changes and fixes.
Otclient for example at first I did implement using Qt, but did throw away the code in just a few weeks, with Qt the thing was turning in something with unwanted complexity, odd code style and heavy that made the coding experience not fun for me. So I implemented its own engine with just the piece it needed. Today Tibia itself implemented their own client with Qt and I find that funny. I don't think it's a good ideia, looks like for me they were just trying to rush or were out of good developers.
If every developer today start using engine like Unity, the developers of the future will be full of morons, and the games full of issues and limitations because morons will be unable to do anything better. For me is always better to pay the price of learning more how things work with more time, than to trying to rush and skip to end up with issues and limitations you can't handle.
Just 10 silver premium members a month could put forth $100/m to improve the client.. I would easily pay 20/m and many developers would as well if they knew their money was going toward the right place developing the OTC further.
I don't know how many times I've repeated myself saying that it is strictly forbidden to talk about sales of OpenTibia resources on OTLand. Just by mentioning it yourself, you're advertising his offer.
I agree with your points, I was just trying to think of ideas to further development because the open source idea is whats in place now, and it obviously isnt working to further the client at a decent pace.remember 0.4 problem? Either:
- (otland premium model) developers are funded, but less people have access to develop a server (which requires a lot of dedication from the devs btw) and you have less testers. Also leakers gonna leak. 5 people will pay, one will leak, everyone will use.
or
- (github model) you do changes for free on github but nobody gains money
returning to what 0.4 repo access was like is unlikely to happen because admins already decided about this forum being fully about open source. Selling access to repo (or discussing specific resources accessible this way) is against otland rules btw so starting a similar service to what otland premium was like would also be not welcome here.
You are expecting way too much from others. You wanted to make it from scratch and look how it ended
Btw. there's LOTS of great games made with Unity, UE4 and other game engines. Do you really think they would be made if not these engines?
There is already very few people that try to really learn stuff. The majority of this community is not interested in developing skills, they want the easy things. Unity will make it easier and customizations will be more acessible to those people.
And those who want to learn might be discouraged when faced with a client like OTC, where some knowledge is necessary to do anything.
And I think this is why Kondra was able to do his version and earn money from it, one of the few that actually knows stuff and is able to do something with it.
I don't think we should focus on forming/creating new developers.
You have gained experience, great, that's why I'm here too, haven't been working with C++ before, not to mention Lua. Working with TFS and OTC allowed me to learn new skills, partialy thanks to you so I'm grateful.Ended well for me because the knowledge I have accumulated I have used in other pursuits in life. The thing I was earning the most when I was younger and did start otclient project have always been knowledge and experience and at some point that lead me to somewhere else, just like happened with many OT developers.
Unity isn't one of them. UE4, yes, CryEngine, yes but Unity? No. Unity has the best 2D support of all the engines out there.Also I find an overkill people using 3D engines to make 2D games, like trying to shot an ant with a bazooka. At least find an engine simple enough to just be 2D and the needed stuff, and consider doing a 2D engine from scratch before also just to learn.
This is a great point, Slavi is doing something new and open that is actively getting better. We should support it regardless.After all these years, it's time to move on, don't you think? OTC isn't getting better, why should we wait for a miracle when we can work on a better alternative instead?
After all these years, it's time to move on, don't you think? OTC isn't getting better, why should we wait for a miracle when we can work on a better alternative instead?
English.OTClient foi essencial para todos os criadores de servidor até o momento. E pelo menos para mim, carrega uma enorme memória afetiva, acima de tudo. Mas talvez, toda essa situação nos ajude a perceber que precisamos de alternativas ... Talvez agora seja um ótimo momento para apostar em Slavi e seu projeto.
Todos nós poderíamos contribuir com melhorias, e aqueles que não são capazes de fazê-lo, contribuem financeiramente, para que tenhamos um cliente ótimo e otimizado e não dependemos de US $ 5.000 para ter materiais de qualidade ...
Sugiro que o Slavi nos atualize nas condições da OTU e nos diga o que pode ser feito daqui para frente.
Se mobilizarmos a comunidade, talvez possamos avançar. Existem várias pessoas que desconhecem a existência da OTU e que certamente contribuiriam para o seu desenvolvimento. Então eu acho que deveria ser mais explorado ...
Google Chrome's automatic translator got in the way ... It's done.English.