Totaly agree with you haraldzz.
Why following the stupid mainstraming shit packing everything into browsers hmm? just beacuse "its possible" don't mean its usefull - may sound paranoid: but with the actual PRISM intel affair, my aversion against this kind of "programming style" has grown even more...standardization of everything being browser and therefore http compatible just makes the workload for the GESTAPO, sorry NSA ... much easier thats all. There is no benefit to run this game in a browser, except it makes datamining easier.

>There my be areas where this kind of technologie makes sense, but this applies mostly to buisness company related software and tools and certainly not to FPS games. Especialy if packages are provided for all the main Distribution types out there ( Win, Linux, Mac ). Maybee your idea is born from the rather complicated tce/cqb install process at the moment with all its traps (right patching order, punkbuster and masterserver problems etc.),
but if Coroner provides a standalone CQB package, this would all be over. And like Haraldzz said, the game data has to be downloaded anyway.

So I'm begging you don't discuss such utopian things like "will it bee brainlessly fit into the mainstream browser crap" at this moment here. Thanks!

JagdKampf

Get used to Haraldzz, is a good person, but sometimes speaks so hard just to make clear their opinion. Just understand and accept.

Long story short - Browser based games have no benefits over desktop launched games.

Let's not go overboard here.

Haraldzz, respect your opinion.

The browser game work on FACEBOOK, I found this very interesting.
I've had the opportunity to play QUAKE browser too, but thought BALLISTIC much better, that's all.
To try ... BALLISTIC, pause to imagine the success (marketing) that would CQB ... excuse me by insisting I just wanted to help CQB because I love TC: And others and their evolution excites me a lot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRCPQyTYgkY

LOL it works on Facebook....duhh browser...
Haraldzz, one positive would be that a browser game is already cross platform in
a way, it doesn't need to be compiled to different OS distros. For tools it's interesting
(sas), but for games ....

Back to CQB : What I would like to know is, does ETLegacy have the same options as
ETxReal in regards to
* Clever usage of vertex buffer objects (VBO) to speed up rendering of everything
* Avoids geometry processing each frame using the CPU (worst bottleneck with the Q3A engine)
* Renders up to 500 000 - 1 000 000 polygons at 80 - 200 fps on current hardware (DX10 generation)

Couldn't find a feature list for ETLegacy that could answer this question.
Would be an interesting feature, if not only so certain aimbots won't work so
well anymore but also so we can up the ante on map making.

Just posting here to ask the stupid questions.
When?
Where is it?


Coroner probably isn't going to answer, but it's worth trying, isn't it?

Hey Coroner. I'm a former TCE player who decided to re-register here just so I could answer to you in this thread.

I think it's time for TCE to become standalone once again. Considering the current status of the old TC builds and the unpopularity of MWTC, I feel now it may be the ideal time for you to GPL TCE/CQB, the reason for this being that, well, it's just the best damn multiplatform tactical shooter available, and it's a shame it hasn't been open source since day one, which is what it eventually led to its demise. If you open source TCE, you'll get extra contributors which will maintain the game for you, ensuring compatibility for future generations, thus providing a chance to revitalize the old community. Just keep the project core under a site like github, and keep track on what goes and what doesn't in the main trunk. Simple, effective, and trouble free.

I was so far thinking of a new CQB release compatible with ETL which also allows to run unofficial servers and custom maps, as well as Bodycount, Demolition, and CTF.
I would make sure it runs, as far as possible without WolfET paks.

This would still mean closed source for the mod code (which stays an ET mod), but it can be started or combined with a GPL engine like ETL.
This distribution model is also used by Urban Terror.
Working on the engine code will offer a lot like server side anticheat measures, etc.

Since CQB/TCE is very modable itself, community could grow again around making maps.

I will then decide whether I finally GPL CQB source code, too.

Convince me. The only reason for me against it is that CQB still offers a so complete and rich weapon simulation. Though I probably never have the time to commercially exploit it, even if there would be anybody willing to pay for it.

Coroner why not start with kickstarter ? and post on some magazines like RockPaperShotgun (maybe they will even do it for free)

Kickstarter? Doubt it. The game does not have a particularly large community that is going to put down some bucks on the project. And just because the project sounds like yet another modern military shooter, there aren't going to be a lot of people who have no connection with TC who are going to put down the dosh.

Rock Paper Shotgun, etc. Maybe? It wouldn't hurt, definitely. There are going to be those people who are like "It's just another CoD clone" but eh, whatever. Those guys are going to be everywhere.

I feel one major turn off for TCE for new players is that it's a bit of a pain to install. Having a simple standalone package would be great to make the game quick and easy to install.

As for the whole open-source deal, I just had one idea: as luka suggested a Kickstarter might be a good idea to incentivate contributing towards a finished package. I recall seeing some open-source projects getting a lot of attention and donations from the free software community by promising a source release and expanded features by achieving overfunding goals, like this one. And keep in mind opening the source would make fixing bugs a tidy up the codebase a smoother process.

I think there's just no point in keeping it close at this point considering there's no solid development team to keep updates flowing, and cheating will always be a reality in Q3-based games, which should be handled by server moderators, not backwards closed-source models. Not to mention there are plenty of open-source shooters who managed to build themselves neat communities with little to no cheating, and a competitive scene going.

Open-sourcing it would definilty make things much easier for everyone involved, and probably also bring in more outside contributors (which would speed up the process of making it completly stand-alone).

It would also offer a nice chance for a promotion drive to attact more players, and the Linux crowd certainly loves open-source games.

A Kickstarter (or better Indigogo, because Kickstarter is difficult to set up if you are not in the US/UK AFAIK), might be a nice incentive for you to finally let go of the (very unrealistic I might add) commercial aspirations you seem to have. But please don't make the initial open-sourceing barrier too high (maybe 500, max 1000$?), most of the money from these funding drives does not come from real funders, but rather people looking for cheap preorders, thus a open-sourcing drive attracts far less "funders".
You can always add additional goals if people are really exited about it and pledge by the masses.

But really... I think it's the only chance CQB will have to come out of the total obscuity it is in right now.
If you look at the download to install, and install to actually start and test (and then the actual player retention) ratios of "free" games there is maybe 1 in a 100 downloads that actually plays the game at least a little bit. Add any sort of barrier like having to install a mod or onything like that and I would guess you are rather talking about 1 in a 1000.

And last but not least... open-sourcing it it the "right" tm thing to do

submit

CQB portable to open the game with a stick.
Just like Urban Terror portable to Windows, Mac and Linux.
CQB portable to Linux would be great!!

I hope that we don't lose the possibility to use bots. It's always helpful to have some target (even if non-human) to attract players, try maps and learn when you are a beginner.
Allowing the use of bots could be interesting in the future ... with just some little changes to the source code you could manage the behavior of civilians/hostages or make the game more interesting.
Another change that might be useful to adopt is regarding the options: you could modify them in order to reduce to zero the number of bots when the number of uman players grows.
In this way, you can start the server with a few bots to attract players and then remove them when no longer needed because the presence of the players is enough.