Engine Standards

mh · Post by mh » Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:17 pm

Coming from my post here, what do people think about using the Quake Wiki to start documenting standards? Is it worthwhile doing? Does anybody even use the Wiki anymore? Is it just a waste of time?

I've written up a (fairly rough) example for skyboxes, which should give an idea of what I have in mind. You can view it here: http://quakery.quakedev.com/qwiki/index ... ox_Support

frag.machine · Post by **frag.machine** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:42 pm

It's a good idea. I'd love to see something like that for more complex aspects like network protocol, for example.

Urre · Post by **Urre** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:17 am

Sounds good to me! I hate to be dull, but people generally have moved on with their engines, either they have their features in already, or are not planning to support them at all. New engines which could have use for this documentation are rarely started anymore.

However, it'd be cool if someone could get existing engines to settle on such standards, and agree to support (most) existing standards, so that as many maps/mods work in as many engines as possible. This might be harder, since like I said, most people are sort of "done" with their engines, mostly just working out bugs and whatnot.

r00k · Post by **r00k** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:56 pm

True but, Quake still needs engine coders simply because as new hardware comes out, old engines lose functionality. That, and maybe different pathways are present to get better performance.

Standards, help bring about new projects. It would be cool to see more new mods and such, without really having to push the envelope of what Quake is. Then again, an updated netcode that was standardized would be nice too!