New Developer

[blkcrow]

> I think epicly optimized engine will be best, and i am trying to do it with EA and as i see Iris is trying too  But i think engine without any features is not very good too. Atleast event system is good start . I now downloaded EO 2.0, EO 3.0 and CS:DE and i gonna compare speeds, CPU usage etc and i am gonna find what i maybe done wrong (but i think my speed is almost exactly same as CS:DE, but i am not 100 % sure about CPU usage). I gonna use same tileset and graphics and same maps on same PC so i will try to compare everything and then i will try to optimize EA code a lot too (i done my GUI cls few days ago i must now just test it and then i will implement it) And i suggesting to you Iris to rewrite or optimize Event System, becouse it have really impact on packets and CPS on server (i removed packet flooding check in my game becouse Events, but then i readded it becouse i maked custom Event System and implemented it to it  )

A base engine needs to be as much flexible as it can. Not every game needs guilds and pets. Its really a pain having to remove uneeded features. I end up covering them up because i am lazy but its a waste of resources.

[Synergy]

The best thing about the Eclipse community was the helpfulness of people and as for the engine itself, all it took to expand the engine was VB6 and the ability to follow a tutorial.

What _I think_ the next engine (VB6 version) needs to be is an optimised engine; the better it can be in that respect, the more you can bastardise it without screwing it over so much with extra tutorials.

I also think that it should have the event system properly debugged (I think there are still some bugs? I might be wrong). Maybe add in a quest-log type feature for the event system. That way it gives people a really good base to start off and if they want, then they can add extra features easily.

Also, maybe an updated GUI? To keep up with the move from DX7 to DX8, but I don't suggest we just rip one from CS:DE.

[SkywardRiver]

I could care less who becomes head developer, although I do have my favourite, I would just like to see a stable, dynamic, easy to use system that runs well on all but the oldest computers. What would also be nice is a system where the developer doesn't have to 'break the law' to customize their engine. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people lose interest when they find out that the either have to pay 500 dollars or break the law to code. What REALLY wouldn't hurt is a graphical coding system similar to engine 001\. It's dynamic, you can switch between script and graphical, and is easy to use for new programmers. I'm not trying to complain, if anyone took it that way I'm sorry. Eclipse has played nice with me over the years. I hope for progress, but not 'feature packed' progress. That's great for people with no VB6\. But for others, it's just a pain.

Jaxx

[or3o]

so 3.1 was a myth? 

[Synergy]

Jaxx almost hit the nail on the head there, however, rather than having to add in scripting and various other things, we simply need to move the engine an updated language, like the C# version that Jeff is working on. Or Marshy's C++ one (if it's still being done).

However, for now, we'll just have to stick to VB6 and hope people realise that Microsoft aren't going to hunt them down over software they don't sell anymore. ;D

[Guest]

> …

If it's just as slow as CS:DE then, again, you're doing it wrong. CS:DE is as slow as you can possibly get really.

[jcsnider]

> so 3.1 was a myth? 

No, it was (is) real but I have no point in releasing it because it included a few simple bug fixes which I will release sooner or later and a few changes to how the GUI is rendered with the inventory and such which again, does not matter with these current custom versions.

[Jeff]

If the community is going to vote, I would like someone to do a breakdown of the code, for each one or for a few of the more promising ones. Maybe a couple of people could do it so it goes faster or whatever.

As far as engines go, if anyone rewrites the packet system with UDP packets they have my vote, unless they seriously duck up.

[Joyce]

UDP would require the entire core mechanic to change though, as nothing is built to account for data loss in Mirage.

[Keebler Elf]

> Slap tutorial after tutorial, feature after feature, we'll be going down the same path Eclipse Evolution did, building a castle on top of a shakey foundation is not a good path.

[media]http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=nU2y6ztlMAQ&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DnU2y6ztlMAQ[/media]

[Guest]

Ill probably get flamed for this. mayby a new language other than vb6?

[Marsh]

> Ill probably get flamed for this. mayby a new language other than vb6?

That is not the point of this topic. We have people trying to port it to a couple of different languages currently. Unfortunately we have tried for years. It is a ton of work. Hopefully one day someone will pull it off. This is not the point of this topic, as i mentioned earlier.

[Jeff]

> UDP would require the entire core mechanic to change though, as nothing is built to account for data loss in Mirage.

Yup. Anyone who can accomplish that clearly has enough skill.

[JohnPony]

UDP would have a bit of trouble with some things, especially movement considering the packets could arrive in any order.

[Likestodraw]

> I am long from gone. I auctually have many surpises in store that should be coming in the near future. Stay tuned  I am only dropping my position has the head developer of the vb6 engine.

Why, though? I understand if you're done with VB6, Robin was and is now reprogramming CS because of it, but if so, why are you?

[Pikachu]

I haven't been lurking here as often as I used to; what's the current version of Eclipse?

[jcsnider]

> Why, though? I understand if you're done with VB6, Robin was and is now reprogramming CS because of it, but if so, why are you?

Why am I dropping Vb6? In reality, I am not. However, the more-up to date programming languages have much better IDEs, I am playing with those and seeing what happens right now.

[Marsh]

> I haven't been lurking here as often as I used to; what's the current version of Eclipse?

The one in the downloads section. Eclipse Event System

[iSnow]

Getting the 3.0 download link back up would help, I want to take a crack at a engine build myself regardless of entering or not.

[jcsnider]

It should still be up in my nightlies topic in custom versions.

[iSnow]

Tried, no dice.

[Exception]

[http://jcsnider.free…fied Events.zip](http://jcsnider.freemmorpgmaker.com/Eclipse%20-%20%203.0%20-%20Electrified%20Events.zip)

There you go.

[Exception]

> ..Plus, the thing about others ripping from your engine and then being able to use it is rather unfair. Any inefficient engine can just rip something from a dedicated project, and then call it efficient, albeit most likely using it improperly, or not making a difference…

Hmph. Just saying.

[Saga]

> [media]http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=nU2y6ztlMAQ&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DnU2y6ztlMAQ[/media]

lol i did just open this site (its a mobile version) and wondered what YT does:P

[Miguk]

I prefer my bases as bare as possible, IMO EO has too many features. That said,

Stop epeen rubbing for a moment and just let people like what they like. It's severely annoying to see people make assholish comments and lower the view of people cause they like EA. I use EO, it's technically better, but if people prefer something and they spend time they can make any tird shine, so lay off yanno, it just makes you seem like an ego douche.