Is anyone developing a 1.x fork?

[Lord Apocalypse]

yeah, DX6 is what the retail version used. Don't think it would be too difficult to get it up to DX9 though. 2.x and 3.x though run only on opengl though.

[Chojun]

It's been a couple years since I looked at it but I seem to recall that DX's interfaces changed after version 8, so it would not be easy to go from D3D 6 to D3D 9. And of course there's always D3D 10 which would eliminate those who are still on XP, but that's a different discussion.

The real question is whether or not WZ 1.10 would indeed benefit from a more recent version of DirectX. The answer is a firm and resounding NO because as it is, WZ 1.10 doesn't even utilize all of the features of DX6 (or even a substantial subset of it). Warzone's rendering engine is actually very, extremely basic in its capabilities. Just about the most fancy thing it does is transparency effects on the menus

On top of that, the engine itself is ponderously inefficient.

[Jorzi]

Which may not be surprising since it was devoped to run on the psx, a device which doesn't even have a dedicated 3d accelerator. (its processor has vector support, though)

[zany]

are you saying that the current warzone project with master needs major improvements and you want to go back to the original since they don't seem to listen to feedback?

[Chojun]

Which may not be surprising since it was devoped to run on the psx, a device which doesn't even have a dedicated 3d accelerator.

Which is interesting that you should mention it because I've always believed and I'm even willing to put money on the idea that Warzone 2100 wasn't originally designed with PSX in mind, but in order to secure a publishing deal with Eidos, Pumpkin needed to add PSX support for the release. If that's the case, then Eidos grossly miscalculated because Warzone would've been in (IMO) good position for a 1998 release and thus reasonably compete with the then-leading RTS - Starcraft. I think Warzone was always in a better position to beat Starcraft, but the game was too late and wasn't polished enough (esp. multiplayer).

are you saying that the current warzone project with master needs major improvements and you want to go back to the original since they don't seem to listen to feedback?

Lolwhut?

[stiv]

you want to go back to the original since they don't seem to listen to feedback?

Given that the publisher and original developers are, in a sense, dead, good luck with that 'listening to feedback thing'.

[Lord Apocalypse]

necro yes, but for a good cause

@stiv I do believe the reference was aimed at the current dev team (as it were) and not at pumpkin or eidos.

@zany um.. NO! As long as your not a pain or disrespectful the current arm chair coders are a good bunch to beat up on. But if you are always nagging or whining about this or that then all bets are off.

To All: As popular as warzone is and was I am surprised there is only one project to be found working on the source. I figured there would be at least 2 different forks on the game heading off into different directions.

[Emdek]

Lord Apocalypse, personally I would like to see single engine with flexible scripting allowing to change literally everything to get different visions working on one (see my threads about mutators, GUI redesign ideas etc. ).

[zydonk]

Is their a good reason for wanting to play some form of the original cd game patched to v1.10. It seems to me - having played the original game for many years - that v2.3.9 with the 1.10 mod created by Delphinio provides much of the original (tough) gameplay. I have recommended the exe version of 1.10, created also by Delphinio, but I find after extensive play-time that the AI is "soft" - more like the 2.3.n AI, in fact.

When you have experienced the "hit" of the original game, it's hard to get used to more "dispersed" gameplay of the later rebalanced versions.

[Emdek]

zydonk, ability to fully reimplement old behaviors (or create purely new ones) is something what I would aim for (using flexible scripts driven engine), using current master as a base.

[zydonk]

zydonk, ability to fully reimplement old behaviors (or create purely new ones) is something what I would aim for (using flexible scripts driven engine), using current master as a base.

Good luck with that...

[Emdek]

It is doable, for sure, but will require large architectural changes, and the only ways to get there to start from scratch (cleanest) or do it in small steps.