Elysian Shadows

TheBuzzSaw wrote:Seriously, I respect "the original". I wouldn't cheat at all during a first playthrough. But seriously, don't lock down the Lua at all. No binary encryption nonsense.

Why it could be a fun project to decrypt it.

... OK. You have your fun decrypting it. Get back to me when you've busted it, K?

K




I'll twiddle my thumbs until its released.








...

dandymcgee wrote:

TheBuzzSaw wrote:What's wrong with letting people tamper with them?

Seriously. I understand the need to prevent mass pirating in commercial games, but I don't seen anything wrong with leaving some things to be modified. I also don't like being told I'm not allowed to break apart software (or hardware) I legally purchased for personal use.

The only time i would be giving an shit about locking up a game completely is when its an MMO. Otherwise, why not let people mod it? i mean, borderlands, bloody 2k decided to make a patch to prevent modding. Simple solution, add a way for people to mod the single player.

Even in MMOs, let players tweak the assets. Those don't affect gameplay all that much. Logic is often protected by the server anyway.

TheBuzzSaw wrote:Even in MMOs, let players tweak the assets. Those don't affect gameplay all that much. Logic is often protected by the server anyway.

That would lead to such an imbalance in some circumstances, consider the example of a "rare spawn" in an mmo. If you can tweak the assets, for example the objects model, and say quadruple his size, or his color, or really anything, it would make him much easier to find as he would be quadruple the size.

short wrote:

TheBuzzSaw wrote:Even in MMOs, let players tweak the assets. Those don't affect gameplay all that much. Logic is often protected by the server anyway.

That would lead to such an imbalance in some circumstances, consider the example of a "rare spawn" in an mmo. If you can tweak the assets, for example the objects model, and say quadruple his size, or his color, or really anything, it would make him much easier to find as he would be quadruple the size.

Um... since when have rare spawns been difficult to spot? Every RPG I play, I can see all loot everywhere just fine. The drop rate is what makes it rare, not its visibility. -_-

Am I missing something?

TheBuzzSaw wrote:Even in MMOs, let players tweak the assets. Those don't affect gameplay all that much. Logic is often protected by the server anyway.

Lol, that would NOT work.

MadPumpkin wrote:Ahh, so I read this, but it appears that you can convert .love files into .exe's because the game I downloaded made in love2D was a .exe file

You can't convert renamed zip folders into .exe files. You would have to include it in the .exe by using a resource script. Whether the game data is stored in a .love file or embedded in the executable, the same love2d "engine" is still required for the game to run. Love2d is very similar to flash.

TheBuzzSaw wrote:Even in MMOs, let players tweak the assets. Those don't affect gameplay all that much. Logic is often protected by the server anyway.

I would say to let people customize things like the GUI. The assets? sure, though even if you edit something like a model, the collision checking would be the same for the original model resulting in some weird looking collisions. So yea, assets probably fine to tweak, but the game would have been already built around the original assets. If you said, give the source out, then i would probably being going "ERR, THE FUCK?"

I'm wondering if a Lua compiler would be possible. Not something like luac, that just turns the Lua code into bytecode, which the interpreter does anyways. I'm thinking something like ghc. Wouldn't that make Lua just as fast as C?

lotios611 wrote:I'm wondering if a Lua compiler would be possible. Not something like luac, that just turns the Lua code into bytecode, which the interpreter does anyways. I'm thinking something like ghc. Wouldn't that make Lua just as fast as C?

HELL. FUCKING. NO.

There's more to speed than just turning something into machine code. Lua is dynamically typed. There would have to be a shitload of metadata and overhead associated with implicit type conversion, memory management, and tons of other high-level scripting language constructs that the language allows.

There's a reason that C/++ is so fast. Their complexity and the amount of explicit management left up to the programmer directly results in their performance.

GyroVorbis wrote:

lotios611 wrote:I'm wondering if a Lua compiler would be possible. Not something like luac, that just turns the Lua code into bytecode, which the interpreter does anyways. I'm thinking something like ghc. Wouldn't that make Lua just as fast as C?

HELL. FUCKING. NO.

There's more to speed than just turning something into machine code. Lua is dynamically typed. There would have to be a shitload of metadata and overhead associated with implicit type conversion, memory management, and tons of other high-level scripting language constructs that the language allows.

There's a reason that C/++ is so fast. Their complexity and the amount of explicit management left up to the programmer directly results in their performance.

I'm not gonna dissagree, but luaJit can do some pretty amazing things.

Here's an article I read recently that shows it compiling vector functions straight into pretty tight SIMD code: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lan ... eral/81280

That's really badass.

I had no idea luajit was so... awesome! That's damn nice.