Helbreath In 800x600

Dax · Post by **Dax** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:10 am

I still get around 100-120fps@800*600

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:30 pm

lol back when the client source was first released that was like the 2nd thing I did, I got bored and made the client run at 1920x1080 res....mainly cuz thats what I use normally but it was kinda funny to see, never finished it tho, left some dialogs floating around in the usual spaces cuz I was never that serious on completing it

marleythe9 · Post by **marleythe9** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:39 am

dude i have everything working just i have this gay problem

, when you insert game your go into new map. the screen like gos from one position then moves down to center my char...

thers a few parts of code i couldnt find

the (short)(dX) part... i wouldnt dout thats the problem.

also i couldnt find code "int _tmp_iMoveLocX[9][37] = {" and whats under it...

could you be more pacific of were its at... like mabey a function?

Cleroth · Post by **Cleroth** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:39 pm

Blazin wrote: Great idea man, But thing is this would open alot of exploits With all private servers out there. I mean imagen all there clients for a specific server thats hosted is running in 640x480. And then you get someone with A Client thats running in 800x600 .. Or 1024x768. That would be a pure exploit right there seeing as if they were a mage they could cast out the view range of a standard 640x480 client. I mean If everyone has this client it wont be so bad, But i cant help to think About my Ragnarok Hosting days. Everyone back then was using a Standard client until someone made it possible to actualy zoom all the way out by holding down ctrl aand using mouse button 3 to see everything outside on there normal view range. it was very hard to know if a person was actualy using that feature or not because the zoom was hack was used on a standard client that was sending the same packets as what they used to connect to the server. Might be alright tho if the client was sending packets that the server could refuse or accept. that way it would stop people in there tracks from using such an exploit. However i will say this Good job on this Sounds like a very interesting project. ive often wondered what Helbreath would look like zoomed out. Must say looks very nice indeed

stfu

Sprint · Post by **Sprint** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:53 pm

omg revived for the word "stfu"
xD

Drazz · Post by **Drazz** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:37 pm

Blazin wrote: Great idea man, But thing is this would open alot of exploits With all private servers out there. I mean imagen all there clients for a specific server thats hosted is running in 640x480. And then you get someone with A Client thats running in 800x600 .. Or 1024x768. That would be a pure exploit right there seeing as if they were a mage they could cast out the view range of a standard 640x480 client. I mean If everyone has this client it wont be so bad, But i cant help to think About my Ragnarok Hosting days. Everyone back then was using a Standard client until someone made it possible to actualy zoom all the way out by holding down ctrl aand using mouse button 3 to see everything outside on there normal view range. it was very hard to know if a person was actualy using that feature or not because the zoom was hack was used on a standard client that was sending the same packets as what they used to connect to the server. Might be alright tho if the client was sending packets that the server could refuse or accept. that way it would stop people in there tracks from using such an exploit. However i will say this Good job on this Sounds like a very interesting project. ive often wondered what Helbreath would look like zoomed out. Must say looks very nice indeed

You need client and server work together. If you has a client@800x600 but server isnt modified your view range stills 640x480 (beautiful popping effect). That's all.

Dax · Post by **Dax** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 2:22 pm

Ahhh! This is fucking killing me... Has anyone got anywhere with the 800x600 object data?

I've expanded the range to 800x600 on SendEventToNearClient_TypeA/B but still the client persists in drawing objects inside the 640x480 viewing range. I've also tried a billion other variables but the ones in TypeA/B look the most logical to change.

So much work for 1 fucking tile I'm beginning to think 800x600 would be better with Fog of War

. Any tips would be greatly fucking appreciated.

Dshaked · Post by **Dshaked** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 2:41 pm

make 100x100 client, and try fps.
xD

Sprint · Post by **Sprint** » Wed Nov 29, 2006 1:59 pm

2000?? xD

marleythe9 · Post by **marleythe9** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:52 am

well i will post the source when i fix it its 3.82 snoopys release.

onley problem i see is, npcs when you first log on are in incorrect positions.
but after moveing them out of your screen it seams ok. i think i can fix it

Dax · Post by **Dax** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:11 pm

marleythe9 wrote: well i will post the source when i fix it its 3.82 snoopys release.

onley problem i see is, npcs when you first log on are in incorrect positions.
but after moveing them out of your screen it seams ok. i think i can fix it

And what about when they display near the edges of the screen? For me they still only appear at the boardering tiles while moving. If they are stationary they will not be displayed. I havn't tested this but i think they would also display in attack and also when receiving damage. The sources seem to indicate those types of actions require a "buffer" tile to make sure the sprite is "played" while moving onto your screen, not just when it's inside of your screen. I'm also guessing they are only 1 tile short at 800x600 because the server also gives another buffer to every action (I think it's for lag). But i don't know i havn't really tried to understand it i've just been looking for a "range" in which objects are sent to clients.

I've looked into the server's functions of sending the objects and increased the size of the area it checks and sends objects in the sendeventtonearclient functions. I think i've overlooked somthing server-side. Well that'd be the logical explination but this is hb and nothing is logical, so the client could also be fucking with me somehow...

If you find anything on this and could offer any advice on it i'd love you loooong time

Oh btw there are more smaller bugs too but i'd give you the rest of the fixes if you gimme a good tip on my objects lol. This code took me too long so i've stopped since it's not much of a priority right now. However it does piss me off how it's the only incomplete thing i've started in these files

..

Orkl · Post by **Orkl** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:24 pm

Not sure if this helps.. But:

With a smooth scrolling tile engine, the render routine displays more tiles than the screen actually holds, therefore the tiles on the edge of the screen are "clipped" so that the screen moves by pixel, not by tile.

So technically, things that are on the edges of the screen, are already there, but clipped by the engine to emulate the "smooth scrolling" effect. If you're getting NPC's and things displaying in the wrong places, not animating correctly, you've fucked it up somewhere (or stech has).

Increasing resolution should just increase the amount of tiles displayed on the screen at one time. Therefore the map array should still be exactly the same, but instead of displaying (x) amount of tiles at once with a low resolution, you're displaying (y) amount of tiles at once, with a higher resolution, just increasing the field of view.

If the code is any decent at all, and you've made neccessary changes so that the tile engine works properly at a higher resolution, then you should have no problems at all. That is of course, unless the way everything is drawn is all based off of 640x480, then stech majorly fucked up their engine and should be shot and you'll need to change a fair amount.

In regards to only showing an entity whilst moving, and not being able to see it whilst stationary, could indicate a problem with the clipping or with the way that the sprites are blitted onto the screen. There aren't too many ways that either of those two things can be done, and I wouldn't be surprised if Stech fucked them both up.

That probably didn't help at all, but meh. At least you have a better understanding on how it -should- work

ADDKiD · Post by **ADDKiD** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 4:09 pm

Seems Logical from my position. 1000000x out of my League. I expect Dax to come out with a 100% working one. Just a random guess,

bone-you · Post by **bone-you** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:47 pm

Really, the main concern with making the client 800x600 is the lag issue. Some can argue that it won't be any different, but it is rather inefficient the way it is now and to turn it into 800x600 will only add to lag. Those who know my system setup know what I mean. I run at around 60-80fps during decent conditions and 90-110 when few things are on the screen. (amd 4800+ x2, geforce 7800gtx, 4gb ram on x64 xp for those who didn't know) It amazes me how powerful all of that is yet my sempron 3000+ with a 6800 and 2gb of ram keeps up with this machine in fps just fine if not PASSES. Either way, both machines rarely go above 110fps. I was lucky to get 210fps steady before but that was in my own client after making a few adjustments which have been offset by the additions now. x.x You need to redo a lot in the client to make 800x600 a decent option for all.

Dax · Post by **Dax** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:07 pm

bone-you wrote: Really, the main concern with making the client 800x600 is the lag issue. Some can argue that it won't be any different, but it is rather inefficient the way it is now and to turn it into 800x600 will only add to lag. Those who know my system setup know what I mean. I run at around 60-80fps during decent conditions and 90-110 when few things are on the screen. (amd 4800+ x2, geforce 7800gtx, 4gb ram on x64 xp for those who didn't know) It amazes me how powerful all of that is yet my sempron 3000+ with a 6800 and 2gb of ram keeps up with this machine in fps just fine if not PASSES. Either way, both machines rarely go above 110fps. I was lucky to get 210fps steady before but that was in my own client after making a few adjustments which have been offset by the additions now. x.x You need to redo a lot in the client to make 800x600 a decent option for all.

Well we are here to code. Wouldn't be as fun if we had nothing to do. Plus i've been working with 800x600 using defines to switch between hard coded versions of 640x480~800x600 because i never put much faith in this idea either.