proquake *optional* replacement textures support

[talisa]

@kiling
oh yeah, fteqw is very actively developed still.

spike updates it regularly, and if you have a bug or such that you found, he'll jump in and fix it within a couple of days, or hours even sometimes

[killingtime187]

wow. fteqw works! there is one important test that i do with all clients to check compatibility with pq -- the rocket jump script. fteqw passes with flying colors. rj on dp does not work -- there is an entire thread with bay talking about this. so, canned rj script support = pq, qrack, fteqw for gl (it works in dq as well).

unfortunately, there is one key missing piece for fteqw -- locs support. maybe it's there and i just don't know the command to enable it, but out-of-the-box, it doesn't work. also, looks like texture locations are different -- hud, fonts, etc. -- need to figure out where these are for this engine. the engine itself looks neatly compartmentalized as well -- https://fteqw.svn.sourceforge.net/sv...n_1_00/engine/ -- the gl vs dx code are isolated in their own dirs ... without digging any deeper, it seems to suggest that the core client code is render-neutral with the actual build determining which drawing code gets used.

spike - is this engine still being actively worked on ?

[killingtime187]

Yes it does, and I prefer the mingl version myself.

[kt] interesting. i thought i've tried every netquake engine out there ... i'll dload and give this one a shot.

All i can say is pick an engine u find with what u want feature wise and learn to adapt to the mouse "feel".
Like like buying a new car. You cant bitch at BMW cause your steering wheel "feels" odd, can you?

[kt] i think you might have a point here as i've spent almost all my early/learning years on pq -- qrack wasn't around then. if this is the case, then this request is for those that have "grown up with"/adapted with pq.

Also use pq_drawfps 1 and then show_fps in qrack and (whatever command the others have) to show your fps rating.

[kt] i've done this and the "only" engine that gives me a constant max fps (i have it set to 400) is dq. all other gl implementations (might be related to gl i suppose) vary between 200 and 400 during gameplay.

Also is it a ps2 mouse or a usb? Do u have it set to 500hz or standard?

[kt] usb with all advanced features turned off. i'll double check the polling rate, but i suppose it's whatever the mouse driver's default is, but again, pq plays better (multiplayer tdm performance) than others with the same mouse. this is the mouse -- CM Storm Products: Spawn.

Personally, I cant feel any diff from non dinput proquake and non dinput qrack. The only reason to use directinput to me is to gain extra mouse buttons.
But you can do this with Raw input too. So.... as long as mouse acceleration is OFF, i think your fine for what ever client you use.

[kt] it's not just the mouse feel, but the overall gameplay performance. i'm not sure i notice the diff myself either. all i know is that i move faster, aim faster and better and play better overall with pq in tdm matches than with other clients. again, you might have a point with the bmw analogy.

Oh and having a super duper gfx card means nothing if your wanting 24bit textures. It's just having enough memory on the card.

[kt] card has 1gb ram - i hope this is enough for q1 with 24bit textures

[R00k]

Yes it does, and I prefer the mingl version myself.

All i can say is pick an engine u find with what u want feature wise and learn to adapt to the mouse "feel".
Like like buying a new car. You cant bitch at BMW cause your steering wheel "feels" odd, can you?

Also use pq_drawfps 1 and then show_fps in qrack and (whatever command the others have) to show your fps rating.
Also is it a ps2 mouse or a usb? Do u have it set to 500hz or standard?
Personally, I cant feel any diff from non dinput proquake and non dinput qrack. The only reason to use directinput to me is to gain extra mouse buttons.
But you can do this with Raw input too. So.... as long as mouse acceleration is OFF, i think your fine for what ever client you use.

Oh and having a super duper gfx card means nothing if your wanting 24bit textures. It's just having enough memory on the card.

[killingtime187]

Lol Spike. Like I said, I wish it was actually only me, then I can "definitely" chalk this up to something I'm doing wrong. However, the fact that we have people scattered between pq, qrack, dq, and do shows that it's probably a combination of both the person's gameplay and their hw/os setup. So, each picks the client that feels the best for them. Does fteqw do netquake ? If yes, then I have another one to pick on, err try

[Spike]

client->server packet rates, framerates/vsync, micro stalls, mouse acceleration, interpolation, sensitivity, mouse smoothing, the 'wait' command.
even non-round sensitivity values can give different results in different engines.

Yeah, its purely serverside...
Doesn't feel like it.

[MH]

In multiplayer the physics, movement, etc are all running on the remote machine, so any difference you may percieve is purely placebo. Where clients can differ is in their handling of input, but once input is read and transmitted to the server, everything else is likewise identical.

[killingtime187]

well, right now, pq is working the best "feel"-wise. i love qrack, but for some reason i'm not getting as good movement/aiming as i am with pq ... again, no idea why. im using cm storm spawn mouse, but i've disabled all fancy stuff and it's pretty much just a standard windows hid mouse device at this point. os is win8, but again ... why is pq so much smoother for me vs the other engines ? no clue. i definitely want the external textures because i've got this great gfx card, hence my request in this post ... i.e. everyone will have their preference when it comes to engine because everyone is different and their setups are different ... which as you might be suggesting ... could also impact the game play. so, why not just make all engines support external textures and let the user pick whichever ones feels best for him ... again, depending on both his play and his setup (pc, os, cfg, etc).

what's fullbright skins ? makes enemy larger and glowy-er ? no wonder he does so well these days

[R00k]

The only reason people run wq is because u can use fullbright skins on a modified player model.

I completely understand the mouse feel; its the #1 interaction between the player and the engine. Everything else is just conveniences.

It really depends on your OS and mouse. I had the best mouse response in win98 for ProQuake. And when i went to XP it felt different EVEN though same mouse same engine.

DieHards like Dave will play like an old fisherman. He caught a whale of a fish using 1 lure, bingo that lure is his "lucky" lure.

But the bottom line is, nothing stays the same. Everything about life is adaptation to your environment. If your mouse feels diff, u haves to make choices, and sometimes you just get stuck.

I can add external texture support to pq3.50 if thats what u really want. But does it really solve the problem?

Can you tell me what mouse/os/driver version u have? maybe your cfg, if i have to go out and buy your mouse to compare it i will...
maybe record a demo playing one engine vs another, same cfg?
is "enhanced precision" turned OFF in your mouse settings??

Or just stick with what works!

Qrack might be what you are looking for ... R00k has tons of options and graphics features while having almost everything ProQuake ever had.

I was a competitive quaker, and when JPG stopped updating ProQuake, i just absorbed features i wanted, to make the game better.

[killingtime187]

rook -

is it just the same mouse routines ? what about movement/physics -- yea, you said it's server side controlled, but the client still has to render ... any differences here ?

well, i've seen others complain about different "feel" between engines, so i'm definitely not the first. for me, i just want the feel to be exactly like pq or even wq speaking of wq, dave (concept) swears that he runs only wq because the difference is too much for him to use anything else.

[R00k]

but for some reason the "feel" with pq is different --

It's kinda odd but at the core, the mouse routines are the same in most of these engines. Each might haves additional mouse features/input paths but still retain the original.

[Mindf!3ldzX]

yea, i use qrack and dq and dp on/off, but for some reason the "feel" with pq is different -- i always end up playing better with pq than with any other engine. not sure what it is ... it would be nice to have, for each engine, a config that clones the same feel of pq -- i.e. set these vars to get the exact same feel, precise aimining, etc as pq.

KT, you could (painstakingly,admited) compare the config files for both engines...

or try execing the proquake config file in the other engine,and any compatible variables will be changed to reflect proquake! may or may not work,but worth a try

[killingtime187]

yea, i use qrack and dq and dp on/off, but for some reason the "feel" with pq is different -- i always end up playing better with pq than with any other engine. not sure what it is ... it would be nice to have, for each engine, a config that clones the same feel of pq -- i.e. set these vars to get the exact same feel, precise aimining, etc as pq.

[Baker]

i wondered ... why not also "optionally" allow for replacement textures ? proquake, out of the box, will always give you the classic/original look and feel of quake without you having to configure anything. however, for those that want to alter the sound and/or gfx *without* losing the classic netquake feel, it should be possible to do so.

Well, ProQuake isn't a "features" engine. It runs exactly like GLQuake except a bit easier to setup.

Qrack might be what you are looking for ... R00k has tons of options and graphics features while having almost everything ProQuake ever had.

[Spike]

cl_movement is the DP-specific cvar to enable player prediction.
Its fairly dependant upon the mod, like the QW counterpart. Expect prediction errors if the mod does anything remotely exotic (like hooks).