InsideQC Forums

I was wondering if Someone could make an hlbsp tutorial or csqc tutorial for Psp quake.
Thank you.

Mexicouger wrote:csqc tutorial

leileilol wrote:

Mexicouger wrote:csqc tutorial

mh wrote:

leileilol wrote:

Mexicouger wrote:csqc tutorial

:?

I love this topic

Problem is doing a good level of documentation requires some conformity and most importantly people working in tandem together towards one goal. Its been suggested a dp sdk kit of sorts (which'd surely cover csqc) even fairly recently but then there's one hiccup of "oh well i dont want to do this part its boring" and everything goes to shit.

Convince people in meaningful places and be consistent it may happen. But the random request every few months is the same as nothing at all.

One day someone might just get a wild hair up their ass and make something of worth all at once but don't hold your breath.

Just feel like presenting the reality of the situation instead of quoting the above poster and adding another emoticon (all the good ones were already used anyways)

That's understandable. The Quake 1 engine SUCKS. I hope to learn c myself, and Just code hlbsp myself. I can learn csqc myself, and Do it through qc, and Not engine.

I love Team xlink for the fact that He focuses also On the psp quake engine and Gives helpful tutorials on it. I would bet that He of everyone here would write it.(If anyone at all)

if the quake 1 engine sucks why are you bothering to do anything on it....? :?

Spike wrote:

mh wrote:

leileilol wrote:

:?

Mexicouger wrote:That's understandable. The Quake 1 engine SUCKS. I hope to learn c myself, and Just code hlbsp myself.

We are looking forward for the first version of your project, buddy. Good luck.

Chris wrote:long rant

this isn't about dp.

the main problem with a csqc tutorial, that is, adding it to an engine, is that its a heck of a lot of code.
adding support for csqc, in a full and complete manor, requires gutting your existing qc vm. *all* interactions with the vm would need to be fixed up.
and then you need to write enough code to get a client-side world state.
and redo the 2d parts of an engine to get sane apis.
and then change network protocols.

I hacked up a 'quick' netquake engine with some csqc support a while back (should be able to find a link to it on these forums somewhere). In practical terms, its a nightmare. I think Baker had a tiny bit of success with it at least.
Yeah, I ought to fix it up a bit more, but gah. It'll never be a 'tutorial'.
It also won't perform too well on a psp, probably (heap issues).
In all seriousness, if you're making a psp mod, just change the engine to use whatever clientside stuff you need.
If you just want to change the hud, all the changes you would need would be just inside sbar.c, instead of nearly everywhere.

I agree that there needs to be a decent enough base mod for csqc. The question is, what should such a base mod actually do/support? And if it were to do/support those features then it would be more of a demo than a useful base mod.

leileilol wrote:

Chris wrote:long rant

troll

And ya I agree csqc is a really big difficult task hence the idea of a baseline example game which is what this dp dev kit I mentioned before had as one of it's facets. From what I understand DP and FTEQ are the only two engines with full on csqc support however have some minor differences as per how things should operate.

But the baseline would be enough to copy over and give people a solid concept of how it works. Its a tough thing to wrap one's head around, and very tough to coordinate. Itd need to be a large community effort most likely of those who already have such games working using csqc in depth (from my looking about seems mainly dp games have such users currently active, sorry to keep bringing up dp but it just seems to stand out more when looking).

There is Urre's tutorials somewhere for csqc stuff but honestly if people know svqc enough csqc is just a simple extension of the concept and can be learned bit by bit. the problem is like you say, the knowledge has to be indepth enough to comprehend the server client model and gut most of quake to make something worthwhile.

frag.machine wrote:

Mexicouger wrote:That's understandable. The Quake 1 engine SUCKS. I hope to learn c myself, and Just code hlbsp myself.

We are looking forward for the first version of your project, buddy. Good luck.

I Am using kurok which Is Quake 1 modified. It is alot better.

But still... THere are many things that Need to be added onto it. I bet Flaming Ice is gonna make an awesome engine like that.

And by the way, Whatever happened to Bakers engine he was doing? It sounded very cool.

Mexicouger wrote:That's understandable. The Quake 1 engine SUCKS.

If you ask me that's one reason why modding the Q1 engine is a lot more enjoyable and fulfilling than Q2 or Q3A.