Allegiance's reorganization

[Wasp]

It's easier than that...

Build 197 has BOTH of the clients available for build. You can select from the drop down menu which one to build. So, from the very SAME Visual Studio solution, you can build two different Allegiance.exe clients and run them side by side and see that the problem is right there in the client "AllegianceR.exe" Doofus submitted. I've gone to the trouble of building these clients for you so you can see for yourself!

Download THIS file and unzip it into your Microsoft Games folder (windows 7 x64) so that the path is C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Games\AllegR5Test when unzipped. Also, merge the registry file (right click, select "merge") so that you will have a useable alleg 1.1 registry setting and can then launch the game.

Play the tutorial. Better yet, create a shortcut to both clients and use the -multi switch and you can run them side by side. The most noticeable difference is in how your cursor accelerates and decelerates. That is what gives you the feel of snappyness and high precision. When there is little going on in the game, it is harder to detect but when your game is going full blast with a sector full of action, your game gets even more out of sync. With the AllegianceR.exe client, you are plagued with constant corrective inputs compensating for the varying and unpredictable behavior of your cursor / physics and ships on your screen.

With the regular client, it's smooth as silk.

[MagisterXF94]

Thank you I'll make a sticky post in news and update the MOTD. the more people we get on board with this, the the better

[Wasp]

If you want a short term "solution" or a way to reveal this to everyone, I suggest you put up both clients so that players can select which one to use. I don't know if this is even possible considering it would mean taking the Dx7 client from way back and making it co-exist with the current setup.

Before R5 was released, the R5 "Alpha" version was tested and shown to exhibit this flaw. The alpha version could run side by side with the R4 versions. Some of us tested and reported that we were unable to use that "Alpha" client and had to remain with the current R4 client.

They (FAO) released R5 in the light of this revelation and removed R4 entirely. Most of the community didn't test or experience this flaw until it was too late and forced upon them. Why FAO didn't pull R5 until it was fixed, is beyond me.

BT made it so that we could have a "Dx7" client however, it too contains the flaw so the problem must lie elsewhere inside the rest of the code submitted by Doofus.

See if you can get the R4 client (from the zip file I offered or from a VS solution on Github) to run on the servers (you'll need BT on this one). If you can make it available, I can test the $hit out of it and help make it compatible.

EDIT: I'd like to say that if anyone doubts my findings and thinks this game is running fine, download that zip file and test this. You WILL see. It isn't subtle...it's smack dab in-your-face $#@!ed up! How the hell can you give a squat about key-mapping when the real barrier to your gameplay is in your inability to aim, hit, maneuver, turret...etc.?

[Terran]

for what it's worth, i do recall a period of time when aiming was all screwed up after some change (probably R5? but my memory of the exact timing is fuzzy) and was told that it is in the in-game mouse settings. it was possible to make it a bit more bearable but i could never make the annoyance completely go away. i guess i just got used to the new response over the years and so did the rest of the vets still around.

[Wasp]

QUOTE (Terran @ Aug 10 2016, 05:21 PM) i guess i just got used to the new response over the years and so did the rest of the vets still around.

they did? are you sure? did you actually check or are you just making that assumption?

[Terran]

QUOTE (Wasp @ Aug 10 2016, 05:16 PM) they did? are you sure? did you actually check or are you just making that assumption?

it's a fair assumption given that it's the vets that are still around. i would have quit if i wasn't able to deal with it.

having said that, i am by no means implying that this isn't a problem. i was actually trying to support your claim in case there are people out there who doubt it (people less skillful at aiming will probably be less affected by this thing)

[Wasp]

QUOTE (Terran @ Aug 10 2016, 08:04 PM) ... (people less skillful at aiming will probably be less affected by this thing)

On the contrary, the people less skillful will be more affected even though they will be less likely to notice.

We should stop comparing controller response as a means of determining the magnitude of this flawed code. It is affecting everybody (whether they notice it or not) and it should be fixed regardless.

If this were revealed in any other game or to any other community, this would have become a #1 priority. Nothing like this should have ever been released.

[KGJV]

QUOTE (Wasp @ Aug 10 2016, 03:35 PM) Developers here have a habit of doing exactly what Kage is doing. Ignoring the feedback from those who reveal their flawed code or discounting it as just a "js bug". I took the time to narrow it down to the very build where it all started and it still goes ignored.

When faced with a problem bigger than their ability to correct, the devs pushed their code anyway and stuck their head in the sand when the helpline flooded with complaints.

Kage is right about one thing though, this game will never see any development / advancement until EVERYONE who is in the position to screw it over, are removed.

It's not that simple.

The #1 problem and it's still here is the "delay to publish".

You can't ask a developer to code some stuff then take his hard & free work and literally stash it away for months if not years before releasing it. Goofing around with indecision and 'bull@#(! beta tests or whatever' and waiting to have enough changes to push a 'big release' is what killed not only the game but also the developers community we had.

The guy who made the DX9 port waited months before that code was accepted and published, no wonder that later he didn't want to go back in time and fix whatever bugs were found (he was MIA from the dev team by then). Coding is hard and debugging code you just did is hard but debugging old code you made months or years ago is even more difficult. And debugging old, non commented code someone else made is just a nightmare.

RERO ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Release_e ... ease_often ) is what work. It's a freaking video game, it's not a software for a bank or a nuclear power plant.

Secondly, If you want a bug/issue to be found and corrected you need to diagnose it correctly and not add confusion by stating hypotheses or doing some blind 'Google searches' and posting links to random 'look alike' problems. Stick to facts and to what you understand. See https://xkcd.com/1180/. It's the same issue here. Giving leads and pointers is not helping at all. On the contrary, it tends to push developers away.

That how you make and keep developers happy: release their work early and often and don't try to 'explain' what the cause of a problem could be. Stick to showing them the problem. Lower the "friction" for them: they don't want have to have to do complex installations or builds or do complex tests to understand a problem.

That been said, I'm willing to do stuff but I need to see signs that things have changed here, that people are finally committed to treat developers correctly (RERO mainly).

So first fix that freaking default keymap ffs (even I, I'm waiting on this to play again).

Then and only then we will talk more.

[KGJV]

ps: i'm on vacation for 15 days starting tomorrow. so don't except anything before September.

[Wasp]

I am speculating because that is all that I'm left with. All the devs are gone and it's already clear that you're not interested. I'm trying to narrow this down using observations and absolutely zero coding skills. With that alone, I am WAY ahead of all of you even if I've no clue what's causing it, I can see it plain as day and I can even point you right to it.

You've made it clear that you're only willing to contribute on your terms and it appears that you're attempting to manipulate FAO to abide by your demands in exchange for service. I doubt that will happen, so I think it's obvious that you're out. Thanks anyway.

Nonetheless, With the build 197, the solution and the problem both exist. One build is fine, the other isn't. I would think any coder worth his salt, should be able to analyze the two to determine what went wrong. I'm still pointing my sniffer at the frame rate management that Dogbones pointed out.

I'm considering hiring a professional team to fix this. I'm no coder but, I do know this isn't rocket science.