Jump to content


Photo

UFO2000


  • Please log in to reply
100 replies to this topic

#1 Timil

Timil

    Captain

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 132 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 06:06 AM

I think UFO2000 have the best code I ever see (even if not enought commented)

Why not starting with such a source code? After all, it's a good and robust code, even if not finished.
Grenadoholic

#2 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 October 2002 - 11:23 AM

Is this an XCOM game where the source is public? If so I think it would be a good idea to have a look.

#3 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 12:32 PM

It's well coded but the OOD isn't the best it could have been.
Posted Image

#4 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 October 2002 - 01:00 PM

Probably the result of a bunch of kids in a group hack?

#5 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 01:23 PM

Not sure, Think it is by just one guy. Been along time since I downloaded the source.
Posted Image

#6 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 October 2002 - 02:27 PM

What compiler is it for, or is it fairly independant.

#7 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 02:39 PM

It's for both windows and linux so could possibly do visual c++. I know it does g++ for sure.
Posted Image

#8 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 October 2002 - 02:48 PM

I'll have to dust it off, I think I have MS Visual C++ V5.0, I hope that's okay!

#9 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 03:13 PM

http://sourceforge.n...ojects/ufo2000/

Looks like It's been worked on sourceforge reports the project has 70% activity. been 1 to 2 years since I last looked at it so maybe the OOD is better :)
Posted Image

#10 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 October 2002 - 03:25 PM

What does 70% activity mean?

#11 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 03:30 PM

It shows if the project is active or not. Anyone can put up a project on sourceforge, but many people don't work on them. It is common to see project with 0% activity or 5%. Then projects like the Enlightenment Window manager there are people working on it everyday and those tend to have activity ratings of 95 to 99 percent. Also note that the files available for download are the releases. You need CVS to get the latest stuff they are working on. Activity rating is how active people are in updating files to the CVS.
Posted Image

#12 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 October 2002 - 03:35 PM

I figured; I was just wondering what the actual ratio is.

#13 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 11 October 2002 - 08:11 PM

I've looked at the source code and they have been busy since I last downloaded it. OOD is better. For the network code they use sprintf instead of snprintf which should be fixed to avoid possible buffer overflows. Saw some big nested for-loops which I wonder if they could be simplified. Also I'm not sure but they might being using a byte each to store the palyer's stats. Things like ranged accuracy I might personally want to store in larger memory with 4th and on digits represent the value after the decimal point. Seems also that they are only interested in making the battlescape part of xcom. After all the name is X-Com: Gladiator. Also looks like you need g++ to compile UFO2000. I recomend you download gcc 3.2 in the form of min-gw if you want to compile that thing. might not work with 2.97 and down because I saw it use the std namespace which is a sign that they are using ISO C++.
Posted Image

#14 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 October 2002 - 08:29 AM

How big is that compiler/linker? That's a problem we might not all have the same compiler to work with and may not be able to standarize it. The only way I can think of doing this is that each group of people with the same compiler do the same engine. We can standarize the communication between modules but the Black box guts may not matter.

#15 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 12 October 2002 - 09:20 AM

Full version of min-gw is about 10megs big. That includes gcc, g++ and the win32 API. UFO 2000 also requires allegro.

http://www.mingw.org/
Posted Image

#16 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 October 2002 - 12:07 PM

Could you and some of the other "open source" guys make a table or something of all the tools that are being suggested for using. Include their size and where to get them and any other useful info you can think of.

#17 Serge

Serge

    Project Leader: UFO 2000

  • Xenocide Programming Department
  • 785 posts

Posted 12 October 2002 - 04:26 PM

Hi guys!

I am one of ufo2000 developers now and if you have any questions about it you can ask me ;-)

I saw here questions about the compiler ufo2000 uses. It can be compiled (at least I have checked) with MSVC 6.0 or GCC 2.95. It uses STL strings and containers but does not use any streams (streams are the main source of problems with STL on older versions of GCC).

I also read with great interest your discussion about OOD model ufo2000 uses and quality of its code ;-) I do not like current sources myself but ufo2000 is a really working project (as opposed to those projects which did not release any line of code after years of discussions in forums - just don't become offended, it's not about you ;-). But one of the primary targets of ufo2000 now is to cleanup the sources and fix all the known bugs. And I think that in the latest versions we have advanced a lot. I hope we will have clean and well commented sources soon.

PS. Sorry for my English, it's not my native language

Best regards,
Serge Semashko,
ufo2000 development team
ufo2000 development team
http://ufo2000.sourceforge.net

#18 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 12 October 2002 - 09:54 PM

O:) ok It really is all my fault. I spoke of UFO2000 without checking the latest version (and I know better). When I spoke the last version I probably looked at was the first one to be released to the public back in 2000. I should have known someone has been busy on it since then. :) Heck I should have even known the open source author probably was watching. You guys are always around. :) Mean when I report a bug to an author I usually get a response the next day and it gets fixed right away. Sorry :)
Posted Image

#19 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 October 2002 - 09:57 PM

Is this UFO 2000 multiplayer with 3D battlescape? If, so what are we doing?

#20 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 12 October 2002 - 10:06 PM

It basically a multiplayer version of X-Com that uses the original tiles.
Posted Image

#21 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 October 2002 - 10:07 PM

How does the multiplayer work. Everyone is an XCOM soldier? Two players, one XCOM one alien?

#22 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 12 October 2002 - 10:15 PM

Why not just download the version that is on this site and see? ;) Might not be the latest version but it probably can answer more questions than I can.
Posted Image

#23 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 October 2002 - 10:22 PM

Cause I figured it would be easier to ask rather than to fire up the ole 28k (on good day).

#24 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 13 October 2002 - 12:34 AM

:LOL: Well the thing was :) that I didn't want to comment about what I downloaded 2 years ago since that already has gotten me into trouble. ;) But I uh fired up my old 33.6k and downloaded the files here at the download directory for the windows version. It's X-Com Vs. X-Com, as far as I am able to tell. (couldn't play over the internet cause I don't know anybody to play with).. One mode lets you play against the other player on the same computer and both were X-Coms. I think the project just recently got picked up again. And from what Serge says they are cleaning up the source right now. I'm guessing once that is done pretty soon they'll start adding things. Also like I mentioned before the name is Xcom: Gladiators or something like that suggesting that it is mainly ment to be a two player battlescape game. I could be wrong but that is how I interprid. From what I hear around here I think we also want the geoscope. Personally, me before I even went to this site was thinking about making something X-Com like from scratch using 3D since it seems easier to implement an X-Com like game from scratch with 3D. But I'm willing to go along with what others want on here..
Posted Image

#25 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 October 2002 - 11:36 AM

So it's just battlescape with XCOM guys trying to kill each other.; no aliens, no bases? Or do you mean it's coop play?

#26 Guest_Guest_*

Guest_Guest_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 October 2002 - 12:28 PM

It is the battlescape right now anyways. Browsing through the source code it think it loads the alien graphics too. Logical, to me that it would be X-Com vs X-Com because aliens probably over some sort of advantage over the humans. Who knows? Maybe you can play aliens and I just wasn't able to figure out how to set it up right. Battle scape is the basic farm/field type although you might be able to change it because I think there was a load option. New thing is that you can throw knives. All in all a pretty good start to redoing the battlescape in X-Com without the AI added for vs. computer (hard part). No bases cause there is no geoscope, if that is what you mean by bases. You could always use one of the farm houses as a base I suppose in the battlescape.

#27 Guest_micahdg@xcomufo.com_*

Guest_micahdg@xcomufo.com_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 October 2002 - 12:43 PM

It doesn't do coop, just deathmatch xcom vs. xcom. I tried it via TCP/IP with PeterDragon. I think it has the capability of loading saved battlescape games and playing them, too. I haven't tried it yet, though. I'll check for a newer version of UFO2000 and update my links if there is a newer one.


-Micah

#28 Serge

Serge

    Project Leader: UFO 2000

  • Xenocide Programming Department
  • 785 posts

Posted 13 October 2002 - 01:24 PM

UFO2000 is just not finished yet. Now it is basically a tactical combat engine with some features that are not yet used. It has code for save/load but this code still is not quite usable. It was added to provide replay ability later for hotseat game (hotseat game is not very playable now as you can not see what enemy did in his turn - replay should help).

Addition of aliens is very simple (at least their skins). But if their abilities will be different, here comes another question - balance.
Also it is possible to make simple AI later (maybe as dumb as in XCOM ;))

And maybe the project will grow and at some point in the future will also have geoscape and all other features from XCOM.
ufo2000 development team
http://ufo2000.sourceforge.net

#29 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 October 2002 - 07:09 PM

How many people are working on that XCOM 2000 project? If it's a few years along now and that is the present state of it. Then how is long is what we're cooking up here gonna take?

Maybe we should cooperate with these guys and say work on a Geoscape for them or something like that.

#30 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 13 October 2002 - 09:06 PM

Well like many open source projects it was originally developed by someone else who then went on to do other things. Think it just recently got picked up again. Soon as they clean up the source I'm sure they start adding things. :) Wouldn't mind helping out but then again they might not need any help. Most good groups consit of 5 to 7 main guys working with CVS access with many more providing minor diffs via mailing list where if they do a good job they get CVS access. Having too many main programmers can be counter productive. but then again if like you said we mainly work on the geoscope it could be a diffrent story.
Posted Image

#31 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 October 2002 - 09:16 PM

Well first we should find out if "we" are interested in that idea. Then, if so, we should find out if "they" are interested in that idea.

#32 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 13 October 2002 - 10:49 PM

:) sounds good to me.
Posted Image

#33 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 October 2002 - 08:16 AM

Maybe that Serge guy can lets us know.

#34 Guest_micahdg@xcomufo.com_*

Guest_micahdg@xcomufo.com_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 October 2002 - 10:32 AM

How many people are working on that XCOM 2000 project?  If it's a few years along now and that is the present state of it.  Then how is long is what we're cooking up here gonna take?

Maybe we should cooperate with these guys and say work on a Geoscape for them or something like that.

Red Knight (the guy requesting artists) has a really nice geoscape setup.

http://www.xcomufo.com/rednite.html

#35 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 15 October 2002 - 10:42 AM

Glue? Could we work on glue? Those are really nice looking BTW? But is this guy who's protective about his stuff? If so that may mean we have to do our own anyway.

Actually I don't mind the idea of working on Geoscape. While I'd like to see 1st person combat and if our "first" version has basic multiplayer (to start, ie multiplayer Battlescape but turned based Geoscape), then I'm okay with others working on that for now.

A lot of stuff I'm interested in doing would probably be done in Geoscape anyway (additional base facilites, more complicated diplomacy and item availability, logistical functions, things like that).

#36 red knight

red knight

    Xenocide Project Leader

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 16 October 2002 - 08:41 AM

Glue? Could we work on glue?  Those are really nice looking BTW?  But is this guy who's protective about his stuff?  If so that may mean we have to do our own anyway.

Hi, im not protective because i want, it is because i required to (by my tutor). You dont know how much i want this project to work...

About gluing with UFO2000 is a good idea, the problem is that the geoscape and actual UI classes are just too integrated with the philosophy of the engine, so it could be a very unpleasant job to integrate the other work, besides it is posible (i think)....

As im implementing the prototype i have to hand out, i can release just in binaries (library) the 3D Engine... and a documentation in Doxygen. It is still in pre-alpha but it works (at least some things because i implement on demand) and the component library and you can start to get used to the engine's philosophy... (it is not difficult, i hope)...

If we want to make our dream game there are a lot of things that we have to do... For example Character Animation, Particle Effects (i have a skeleton of the particle system if anyone wants to fill in the blanks - code - ), Colision Detection, 3D Landscape rendering (tile movement, but without tiles like in Jagged Alliance), AI, processing Geographical data to generate similar real(like) world places (for example People Distribution in the world, terrain height, etc), all countries capitals not just some of them, etc...

Anyone interested???

Greetings
Red Knight
Sourceforge Nick: flois - Federico Andres Lois
Visit my blog at: flois.blogspot.com

Posted Image

Pookie cover me, I am going in.

#37 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 October 2002 - 09:43 AM

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming you for protecting your stuff. What I'm saying is that because you are it's not really available to us so we shouldn't think of it that way, that all.

#38 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 16 October 2002 - 12:20 PM

Maybe that Serge guy can lets us know.

Well ya could get his email from the uf02000 site at sourceforge. :) who knows if he'll be able to come to this site again. I mean you know how it is if you are working on a project with time. Being a former sysop I know that busy people don't always have time to visit your site even if they like it. :)
Posted Image

#39 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 16 October 2002 - 12:22 PM

Red Knight (the guy requesting artists) has a really nice geoscape setup.

http://www.xcomufo.com/rednite.html

Wow that looked very impressive for a geoscope. :) Maybe after he is done with his school thing he might be willing to join us.
Posted Image

#40 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 16 October 2002 - 12:35 PM

Red Knight: First off looks like great work :). The question though is if you are willing to share your work with us after you are done with school this semester. Certainly, looks like something worth waiting for. I myself am interested in working on an 3D version of X-Com. Would you by any chance be willing to open source the source after you graduate? If I remeber correctly you like ISO C++ like I do. :) I think I can contribute to the game design and code wise too.
Posted Image

#41 red knight

red knight

    Xenocide Project Leader

  • Xenocide Inactive
  • 3,310 posts

Posted 17 October 2002 - 08:15 AM

Red Knight: First off looks like great work :).  The question though is if you are willing to share your work with us after you are done with school this semester.  Certainly, looks like something worth waiting for.  I myself am interested in working on an 3D version of X-Com.  Would you by any chance be willing to open source the source after you graduate?  If I remeber correctly you like ISO C++ like I do. :)  I think I can contribute to the game design and code wise too.

Of course after i present the thesis we can start an open source project (with a real OPEN Source ), in fact as i told in another post i tried to start an open proyect in my university but there wasn't people interested... We had even started a Games Development Group in my local IEEE Student Branch... I started to teach basic computers graphics technics to the assisting guys (like matrix transformation, openGL, scene partition techniques, texture, i even convince a professor to gives as a small lecture (8 hs) on collision detection techniques), but they just freak out (i dont know why)... only one artist survive :P (and most of them were CS Students like me, some Comp Eng too) . The one that made all UI graphics (except the debug manipulator i was using, i take the blame for it, the one that looks pretty ugly; now it is fixed).

I dont know i start the semester on July, i dont think it will be finish before December, maybe April next year, but the engine turn out to be very user friendly you can use it anyway in binary form (.lib), it use OpenGL as the base and actually i'm using the Borland Compiler, but i trust it will compile with minimal modifications on Gcc or any ISO (or ANSI) C++ compliant compiler...
Sourceforge Nick: flois - Federico Andres Lois
Visit my blog at: flois.blogspot.com

Posted Image

Pookie cover me, I am going in.

#42 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 October 2002 - 09:15 AM

Actually now you can find at used computer book stores and libraries (well books of course) that describe all the games algorythms we'll need. ANd there's probably a lot of stuff on-line too.

Remember, the Battlescape environment is more complicated than the Geoscape one, and if I'm not mistaken it will be turn based. Being turn based is going to make things a lot easier than real time. Time delays to make, say, calculations, for example, just aren't an issue as they would be in real time.

#43 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 17 October 2002 - 10:17 AM

Hmm maybe we can work on a 3D battle scape at first using a 3D engine such as Crystal space so we don't reinvent the wheel on alot of 3D tech that are there. :) Dunno if I can wait till aprill to work on something.. Perhaps we can use some of the stuff in UFO2000 with the 3D battlescape.
Posted Image

#44 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 October 2002 - 11:38 AM

What does UFO2000 use? Crystal Space? They do it all themselves? What?

#45 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 17 October 2002 - 01:43 PM

Was thinking since UFO2000 does handle the battlescape part corectly and the code is 3D that we might could combine it with the isoscape generator of cyrstal space to start out with. On the other hand, we can also write that code ourselves. I feel comfortable that I already know the basic algorithms.
Posted Image

#46 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 October 2002 - 02:04 PM

Yeah, I don't really see a problem there either way.

#47 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 17 October 2002 - 02:10 PM

Well like you said in another forum we probably should plan this out a bit more before coding. See who does what and so forth. Besides who all is still interested?
Posted Image

#48 Guest_stewart_*

Guest_stewart_*
  • Guests

Posted 17 October 2002 - 03:48 PM

I think a lot of people are interested. Some people are though prefer just to be told what to do, given their task, and sent on their way. Some people just like to plan things but not actually do the roll-up-your-sleeves work. Some people like both. Once the talking over the get-your-hands-dirty types will show up.

#49 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 17 October 2002 - 09:32 PM

Ok then is everybody agreed that we should use Crystal Space for the Battlescape or for that matter the graphics engine for the project? It is well documented and in C++. :) Only little strange thing about it is that it uses struct instead of class to implement objects. It still uses virtual inheritence. guess only diffrence would be they can't use private: and public: with structs.
Posted Image

#50 gangsta

gangsta

    Colonel

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,203 posts

Posted 17 October 2002 - 10:25 PM

Ok just discovered a small problem. As far as GCC is concerned you have to compile CS with GCC 2.96 or down. It errors out on a file that uses the qsqrt.h file of the project. that file contains inline ASM code. Having experience with this sort of thing I say it is probably a bug in the precompiler of GCC 3.1. compiling XMame in the past with 3.0x had simular problems but that got fixed in 3.1. THe main diffrence with GCC 2.96 and 3.1 as far as C++ is concerned is 3.1 is more ISO C++ complient. More so that more things are in the std:: namespace whereas in the older compiler they were in the global namespace. I don't know if 3.2 fixes the problem :) (don't really feel like downloading it for linux right now) But eitherway I think I will email the author of CS and am sure to get a quick response.
Posted Image