The Dink Network

Well...this might sound bad to some of you after all this hype, however I imagine it was to be expected after I mentioned my lack of experience in C++. As much as I'd like to, I'm more than likely not going to finish this new edit of v1.08. Why? Because the simple task of trying to implement DirectShow (for mp3 support and removal of midi lag) has proven to be incomprehensible to me, and shown me that I don't know what I'm doing at all; I don't have the time to completely learn to code in C++ properly just so I can implement things without breaking everything. It's also worth mentioning that most of the changes I would actually have the skills to implement into the engine could be done just as easily (or in most cases, more so) with modifications to the DinkC scripts instead, and is likely the direction I will be taking now.

In other words, I'm not giving up on making Dink more accurate and fun to play, but I am basically giving up on directly modifying the v1.08 code.

Sorry for the meaningless hype surrounding this release, but I hope you understand and are not too disappointed.

If anyone wants to take up my place, and work on the source in my stead, I can supply you with my current edition of the source upon request.

Original Post:

Well, as some of you may already know from my previous topic, I've been dabbling in the source code of Dink v1.08. I have a few goals in mind, and hopefully by the time I'm done I'll have something that resembles an unofficial "Dink v1.09 Aural+" which will have as many of my fixes you may have seen on here already incorporated into the source as I can do. At any rate, I thought it was about time to make it a topic of it's own.

For me, this is quite ambitious as I don't really have much experience at all with C++/C; what little I have is from years ago and I've forgotten almost everything since then. I do have a lot of experience coding in DinkC and in Game Maker, but they aren't quite the same thing.

As for what I have accomplished so far: I have successfully compiled the source, which is more of a feat than it may sound like. I've also managed to make the damage text set to nohit (which replaces a part of my exploding missiles fix). Every DMOD I've tested so far seems to function exactly as it did in v1.08 which is great.

Here is my current list of changes that I am hoping to attempt to work on. Please note that because of my inexperience, I don't know yet if I will actually be able to solve all of them:

-Reimplement the mp3 feature that was present in v1.08 Aural+.
-Fix where if you have the escape menu open and close it after you die, you can move around for a while.
-Exploding Missiles Super Fix changes.
-Make it so sp_kill_wait(1) actually works (thus fixing the attacking delay with weapons and spells).
-Function that does the same thing as hurt, except you can also specify some more things, like the target to take, so that you can make custom damage formulas (using hurt_ext(), for example) without the enemy losing it's target when you hit it and without you losing experience from killing the enemy.
-Fix where monsters instantly revive sometimes when entering/exiting areas (a problem with secret trees?).
-Increase the variable max from 250 to a higher number.
-Editable choice menu colors (maybe...)
-Update version information
-Add a delete savegame function?
-fix where enemies "wait()" functions aren't frozen when opening the inventory, since it can do things like make dragons really dangerous to inventory surfers.

Feel free to make suggestions if you can think of any good things to add to the engine or to fix, just bear in mind I'm no expert, so I can't promise they'll be implemented. Also, if I fear that compatibility will be a serious issue with any change, I will more than likely not do it. I want this new "Dink.exe" to be as compatible with v1.08 as possible.

At the minimum, at some point I will need at least a couple testers to make sure that the .exe file I've created works the same on other people's computers and that I'm not overlooking any errors. So if you would like to help test, then please send me a private message on here telling me what email to send the .exe to and that you would like to help. When I send the "Dink.exe" to you I will also include some instructions to help you in the testing process.

I'm also open if anyone wants to work on fixing up the source with me, although you need to document everything very carefully (I will be doing the same thing) so that we can find the changes we've both made without trouble. If you are interested, please private message me with contact information.

Thanks for the support you've shown in the previous topic, Dinkers; it makes me a lot more enthusiastic to work on this. Although I have to admit, it's already very satisfying to be able to fix some things in the engine itself, that will then positively influence the gameplay in every DMOD.

What I'm working on now: Getting mp3 playback to work again so it's like v 1.08 Aural+.

Update! Original post edited for clarity.

I fixed the loopmidi() freeze at the beginning of DMODs! It was missing a return statement...which for some reason only caused problems in Main.c and not elsewhere.

Not sure if anyone cares too much, but this was how it was fixed:

if (compare(ev[1], "loopmidi"))
{
     h = &h[strlen(ev[1])];
     int p[20] = {1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0};  
     if (get_parms(ev[1], script, h, p))
     {
          if ( nlist[0] > 0 )
          {
              mLoopMidi = true;
          }
          else
          {
              mLoopMidi = false;
          }
     }
     //TheNewGuy: this was missing, causing errors at startup!
     strcpy(s, h);  
     return(0);
}

Sounds like a great idea, good luck!
I'll let you know if I think of something to fix!

This is good news. It's awesome to see someone here that still has a ton motivation.
I wish you luck, and hope you succeed!

Well, I'm beginning to understand DirectShow but it is very slow-going. The most useful resource I've found so far to help me with it is it's official documentation. I haven't really been able to find any good google search links that were simple enough to help me.

I'm impressed Redink1 was able to make Aural+ by modifying the source for a few hours. But don't worry, I'll do my best, it just might take me a little bit of time to figure out how DirectShow works and how to implement it properly.

Sounds good. The only change that sounds a bit questionable is the last one (-enemies "wait()" functions aren't frozen when opening the inventory, for example, making dragons really dangerous to inventory surfers.) - that's a big gameplay change, and the reason that makes aural+ so unequivocally excellent is that it's just a clean improvement over the original 108. Would be cool if this were the same way.

If this is finished, am I going to need to give this an unofficial title or would it be acceptable to call it Dink Smallwood v1.09? I'm certainly trying to handle it in the manner of being a version 1.09, whether or not I can call it that.

I believe DinkHD already calls itself v1.09, so that one is taken, at any rate.

Sorry Scratcher, I wrote that wrong. What I meant was that I wanted to fix current wait()'s not freezing in the current version, not add where the waits are no longer frozen. In my DMOD I've had to put lots of wait()'s instead of just one for longer waits on enemies and bosses, because otherwise they can be manipulated by the player by simply opening the menu for a moment and then closing it.

I'll edit the original post to make it more clear.

Thanks for the clarification on v1.09 being DinkHD. If that is the case for sure than I will be thinking on some other possible names for it.

-Make it so sp_kill_wait(1) actually works (thus fixing the attacking delay with weapons and spells).

What do you mean by this? Either I didn't understand what you meant, or I have never encountered this "problem".

I talk about it in more detail at the beginning of this topic:

http://www.dinknetwork.com/forum.cgi?MID=172482&Posts=35

It's a small difference (smaller than the missiles fix that you also couldn't tell the difference with). The easiest way to see the glitch in action is to attack while standing still as fast as you can, then compare how fast you can attack while also moving. You can attack quite a bit faster while moving at the same time. The reason you can't attack as fast when standing still is because sp_kill_wait(1) in the void use( void ) script doesn't work, and it waits for the next frame of animation to start the attack regardless of whether sp_kill_wait is there (and Dink's idle animation cycles much slower than his walk animation, making the difference significant). Sometimes Dink will even stand there for a long moment before attacking, leaving himself open to attacks in the meantime. It is only a small issue, but something I'd like to fix nonetheless as I've had my fair share of noticeable delays.

Hmmm... I like your list.

But when will we finally graduate from the original Dink's limitations? You want to maintain perfect compatibility, which I understand, but is that really what we need?

This is exactly what DinkHD set out to do, fix some stuff, make it HD (well, higher res), run on mobile, etc... but almost nobody here uses it! That's because for all of its improvements it's still the same old Dink engine that doesn't offer much "new".

My dream is for a version of the engine to surface that would not be chained by the past and instead looks towards the future. I'm not talking about the graphics or core engine parts or anything. I mean changing stuff that would assist authors in (optionally) creating new things. On your list you've said you would like to expand the global variable number. I know for a fact Seth looked into this and couldn't do it without breaking compatibility. He also couldn't remove the 99 sprites per screen limit because of compatibility. The very annoying script end "bug" when a sprite gets hit/talked to/etc... can't be fixed without destroying compatibility.

And the list goes on and on and on. You seem to have a lot of talent and learn extremely quickly. I'm afraid that you'll be spending too much time looking at compatibility at the cost of the things that could REALLY make a difference here, to make your version of the engine the one and only for NEW d-mods to come in the following years.

In light of that dream, I've made my own list of things I would love to see:

- Different variable types (float & string come to mind) and the ability to access these in dialogue. Imagine what you could do if you could pass strings into say() lines.

- Multiple math operation support within one line. As in: &x = &strength + 10 / &magic - sp_defense(&target, -1)

- Combined if statements so we don't need to nest a million times for simple stuff.

- Removal of global variable limitation and the limit of concurrent local scripts/variables running.

- True timer support that doesn't rely on frames per second. We could have a wait(1000) actually be 1 second, imagine that.

- Removal of the 99 sprites per screen limit. How I yearn for this.

- Unlimited hardness blocks. No more of this crap we have to put up with.

- Fixing that darn script ender bug. Just run a timer script on a bed and then hit it. Bye bye timer. Or even look at the original dragon scripts, they also have this bug with their callback function.

- Support for instant return values to be used. So we could freely do stuff like: create_sprite(sp_x(¤t_sprite, -1) * 2, sp_y(1, -1), 6, sp_seq(&dummy, -1), 1)

- Accessing the target that we just hurt with a fist/sword whatever to modify the damage or spawn a script. This way we could build reliable proc effects or critical hits for example.

- Global functions. Redink had this ALMOST ready but released it in a bugged state He even states he regrets this in the DinkC book.

That's just off the top of my head. I doubt many of these things can be achieved while maintaining percet compatibility. Also, I'm only telling you MY opinions, for all I know everyone else would just like a marginal improvement over 1.8 while still being able to play every d-mod there is without changing one setting in their DFArc, which is all it would take It already supports multiple engines...

People working on the engine is great! Just one thing, though:

For quite some time, the original engine has not been modified. Even bug fixes have not been applied. Freedink was forked from this source, and it is well-maintained. Many fixes have made it into freedink, but not in the original engine. Freedink is also cross-platform, because it uses SDL instead of DirectX.

The only issue that people seem to have with Freedink is that it is missing some sounds (for legal reasons; they can't really be distributed with original Dink either, but nobody seems to care). I have recorded some sounds myself and will send them to Beuc after minor editing. If I'm missing something, people should speak up and say why Freedink is inferior to regular Dink. IMO it is superior, due to bugs being fixed.

So I would suggest that you would team up with Beuc and improve Freedink instead of the original engine. Otherwise you'll have to duplicate most of the work that has been put into it.

Either way, I'll repeat myself: great that you're working on the engine.

I understand what you mean now, NewGuy. This can be seen especially well with throwing axes. If you move to the direction you're throwing them, Dink throws them around 5 times faster than while standing still. But I don't think it's something that should really be bothered to be meddled with. Most Dinkers already exploit the "moving while attacking" method anyway (some without even knowing it). I also think that changing it could perhaps effect some D-Mods negatively, but I'm speculating that as a major possibility, more than anything else.

I know for a fact Seth looked into this and couldn't do it without breaking compatibility.

I wonder if there's a good way to fix the limitations but implement a compatibility mode so older D-Mods will still work. The front end could have a feature that would ask you which version of the engine to use (or try to guess from the D-Mod's date, if they have those).

I know for a fact Seth looked into this and couldn't do it without breaking compatibility.

I managed to find the place in code where the max number of variables and sprites is set...but I haven't yet looked into the implications of changing those numbers.

@Kyle

Honestly, if I had more experience I might not mind improving the engine like you wish. I wouldn't have a clue where to start with most of those suggestions, although I can always try and see which ones might be possible. But I would like to go all or nothing. In other words, either a small fixup that won't break compatibility at all, or an all out revision of all the limitations in DMOD authoring, possibly/probably breaking compatibility in some cases. But yeah, I don't think I could do the more ambitious approach alone; like I said, even the small fixes are kind of ambitious for me when I don't know much about C++.

For now I'm still trying to figure out getting DirectShow to play mp3s and midi's again, I'll get that first, and then implement some smaller fixes that won't break compatibility, and then decide what to do next.

As for my personal reasons for not using DinkHD, it's because I find downloading DMODs for it less convenient, and the compatibility is not always the same as Dink v1.08. I would probably use it if not for those things.

@shevek

The main reason I'm working on this version of the Dink Engine is because it is the one I've worked with for so long. You may be right in saying the FreeDink engine is better, but I don't know it quite as well, and most people do still seem to use v1.08 or v1.08 Aural+. I've also noticed that people have had trouble playing DMODs sometimes and I haven't wanted to risk not being able to finish one because of discrepancy between the two. I'll tell you what though, I'll take a look at the FreeDink Engine after I've finished making the smaller changes that don't require as much effort to the v1.08 source. I've already spent too much time modifying v1.08 and getting it to compile properly that I feel it would be a waste to not release something now, even if it just a mildly bugfixed version of 1.08 Aural+ with a hopefully less error-prone source release. The amount of effort it took just to compile the source was insane, and at the least I'd like to make a less difficult to compile source, that includes mp3 support like Aural+ and some minor updates.

@Skull

It will change the gameplay minorly, possibly making DMODs a bit easier, but I think the difference will be minor and enjoyable enough to not really be a negative thing.

Edit: Yeah... So much for that. Well, I'll share the source I've successfully compiled to anyone who requests it. I don't think I'll be releasing it as a Dink Network file though...

why doestn't Shevek get a DN account again?

I have an important announcement, which may disappoint some but at the same time may not that unexpected either. You can read it at the beginning of the first post.

Also: @Shevek

I finally went and tried out FreeDink a bit, and am so far impressed, although my testing is super limited (only the beginning of the main game). The lack of finished sound is a bit of a disappointment, and something I might end up helping out with a bit myself (mostly with music). I know you can just add your original Dink sounds, but it's still a bad impression to any non-Windows user who tries the game. If you are going to send in some sounds to add to it, I recommend a punching sound, and any other weapons if they are missing. The weapon sounds are very important to have, as they affect the gameplay a lot (Imagine mario with no sounds for jumping or hitting boxes!). Looking on the bright side, maybe with our combined efforts we can get a useful chunk of sound back into it.

As for working with Beuc on the engine itself, my programming skills outside of a few niche areas are relatively weak (as has been proven trying to work on v1.08), but I'll still think about it. It's certainly a benefit that Beuc already has made source for a .ogg playing executable. I won't try asking him personally to work on the source until I've at least figured out how to load, edit, read, and compile the source myself. Otherwise I'd just be wasting his time. As for implementing the fixes like I mention in the topic post, I don't know if those are part of his goal, since it sounds like he's essentially just making a free open-source version of Dink.

So my future around here is a little bit cloudy right now. My immediate goal is to release my script changes in a pack, made so they can replace the originals once I feel they are improved enough and ready. My long-term goal is to create a great DMOD. My mid-goals... well I'm not so sure about those at the moment, but I'm thinking there is a reasonable chance now that they will involve FreeDink.

You gave it your best shot, nobody here blames you

We'll still enjoy your other fixes. If you bundle them up into a pack later on it might become a staple of new d-mods to use

Thanks a lot for understanding, Kyle, and I will definitely release some kind of script pack when I'm satisfied with everything that has been changed/fixed and I have documented it all well. I may know little about C++, but DinkC is something I do have skill with.

You managed to make it compile? That is great! I have been trying for some time, and not have been able to do that. Could you please lay out a set of instructions for your fellow Dinksters to compile the code?

Perfectly understandable. To be honest I think DinkC script fixes may be the better route, as there is already a lot of clutter with versions. Currently, developers have to ensure compatibility with 1.08, Aural+, and DinkHD (which is 1.09). You would think people would jump right in to 1.1, but there are people now that have never heard of Aural+, when I think it's clear it's superior.

Also, if you were to make a Skeleton that includes all these fixes and rights the wrongs of past Skeletons, you would be a hero.

I've made my own list of things I would love to see

My engine does all of those, except new variable types. I'd like those, too, but I want my scripts to be compiled into original DinkC, which limits the options to things which are possible with it.

@ Shevek

When were you coming to Michigan again, also why not make an account, for one you won't be considered a possible sacrifice to The DDC.

I will acquire RPG Maker VX ACE in six or seven weeks, whereupon I will start making an RPG version of Dink.

I did try to make a game with RPG Maker some years back, but I gave up because the mapping was plain awful. I thought I was doing something wrong, but when I looked up a tutorial online, the visual end result looked horrible even in those.

Well, this one is the newest one. I'm playing this awesome little parody game called Forum Fantasy, and the graphics are pretty cool.

I own RPG Maker VX Ace Kris, if you ever need some help, I'm fairly adept at it

how is Forum Fantasy, and I would like to see a multiplayer Dink game.

@Kyle: *Half-jokingly* Well, one thing that would save a lot of time for me is if I were able to procure it via other means than directly buying it, but alas, I must simply be paid $10 a week for turning every school assignment that I get. (Need approx $60.)

@Dack: It's a parody of rpg games and internet forums. I rather enjoy it.

@Androrc

I used some instructions layed out by Jayon in a topic you made a long time ago to fix the errors in the code: http://www.dinknetwork.com/forum.cgi?MID=104880&Posts=11

After that, it was all problems on my part, except for one glitch I found that wasn't in the compiled version, a glitch with looping the music in the main.c script that freezes the game, which I fixed as mentioned in the second post in this topic.

The hardest part was figuring out how to set the directories for Visual C++ to get it right, because the end folders I actually had to set it to to get it to compile right were a little strange. If you need help, let me know and I'll write down all the folders I used in directories to get it to work.

If you want, I can save you some trouble and just email you the source I've managed to compile: you'll need Visual C++ 2005 or higher, I think. If you are using the Express version, which I think most people do, you'll also need to download Platform SDK and DirectX SDK for it and set the directories properly within the program. If you want to do it on your own, you basically need to do everything I mentioned, and then do everything Jayon mentions in your old topic in order to fix up the source itself. If you need some more details let me know. If you want me to send you the source, let me know what email to send it to.

@Pillbug

MsDink already said she was working on a great Skeleton, so if she finishes it, I will likely team up with her to get an even better one.

@Shevek

I knew you were working on a map editor, but I didn't realize you were also working on a new engine. Now I'm even more glad I decided not to go through with the new engine as it sounds like yours will be a whole lot more useful. Just out of curiosity, which engine are you basing yours from, the FreeDink Engine?

@Kris, it isn't a wise idea to say you enjoy something, I may not go far to destroy stuff, but we do have someone who might.

@The Everyone else, since we are talking about creations, can someone help me find the thing that stores Scripts and allows you to make them I can't find it, I think the problem is I moved Windidink edit, not 100% sure though.

I dare Skorn to go to the Chaos Theater site and try to 'destroy' that game. While he's at it, he can put on a french maid outfit and give me a bacon sandwich for all the good it'll do for him.

In other news, my little brother is squandering his 40-some dollars on having me do small, petty things for him. I think it will take me less time getting the money I need.

Kris has a little brother, and what kind of tasks.I think Abs might put on a french maid outfit if it confused you enough so he could rob you, and he can destroy certain things just by going to them.

http://members.webs.com/s/sitebuilder/pages/293964891/

Wow.

Mom is Wow upside down

You just pulled a 180 on this conversation, Dack.

I updated my werewolf sprite today, I'm going to upload it to DeviantArt soon.

Werewolf Sprite (All) v.2
How does it look?

heh thats pretty cute - i like the two front teeth

I think she insulted it.

Thank you, MsDink. I appreciate the comment.

@Dack: I don't care if people insult my work or not, I prefer constructive criticism.

Hmm. Why did you choose to give it a shirt and pants?

'Cause he doesn't do fanservice.

Actually, it's more along the lines of that he likes to wear clothing.
Or, perhaps that's just how I designed him. There doesn't need to be any form of logic behind why a Werewolf would wear clothing, except maybe that he's used to wearing clothing.

It's all very meta, I assure you.

You are welcome Kris and I wasnt insulting it

mabye hes wearing the clothes so he can hide in town and attack the people secretly with a fake mustache

TheNewGuy, I don't think you should cancel this really. Maybe put on hiatus at most. You are one of the most skilled and determined people to visit this site in ages, perhaps ever. Who knows, maybe your skills will grow in the future, and it would be a shame if something like your cancellation is something that prevents you from coming back to work on this. The reason I'm saying this, is because I feel like the cancellation of some Dink projects has actually prevented people from coming back to work on them, even if they wanted to.

I could do great things for dink as long as I knew here the script folder or whatever is, or how to make grapics and other things, I have tons of spare time.

I could do great things for dink as long as I knew here the script folder or whatever is, or how to make grapics and other things, I have tons of spare time.

That's almost like when I said I'd like pea soup if it only didn't have the peas.

Or like that one time I ordered an anchovy pizza with bacon, chicken, pepperoni, sausage, and hamburger. Without the anchovies, of course.

I may of walked into that, and I love pea soup without the peas.

which engine are you basing yours from, the FreeDink Engine?

No, it's written from scratch. My editor started as a DinkC preprocessor, because I wanted the sort of things Kyle listed in his post. My engine is designed to natively run those scripts. It cannot actually run DinkC scripts; only the format which my editor uses.

I did use the Freedink source a lot for looking up how things should behave, though (especially for loading and saving files in ways that other engines understand it).

Does the ghost of the DN have a Facebook

@Skull

I understand how you feel, and I appreciate the compliment. But, I don't have any reason to learn C++ except for this one project, and the chances of me learning it for this one scenario are pretty low. If I did, I might revive this project, but for now, I think cancelled is the most accurate term for what is. If I somehow did procure the skills to finish this project, or if I figured out how to base it off the FreeDink engine, I would not be afraid to lift the "cancelled" status of it. In other words, just because I call it "cancelled" won't be a big enough reason to make me forget about it entirely and it won't make me afraid to try again if I get the skills to do so.

However, there are actually more reasons than just my skill level in C++ (abysmal) that I've decided not to finish this. I also think that it would distract people from Freedink, which would be a much better source to go from than v1.08 from what I can tell. Also, from what Shevek said it sounds like he/she is already making a better engine than what I was going to make (hopefully it get's finished ). I'm slowly working on the Dink scripts right now as I work on my DMOD, and I think a combination of these new scripts, possibly a skeleton from MsDink, and possibly a new engine by Shevek, will really be a nice improvement to Dink.

By the way guys, FreeDink is a really is a nice thing. I know there isn't a lot of reason to use it with Windows since there is v1.08 Aural+, but there's no harm in downloading it and keeping the .exe handy in your Dink folder. If it keeps getting improved, it very well could become the best version of Dink out there for all platforms.

@Shevek

Oh, thank you for the reply! I missed it while writing my previous comment.

If your engine is designed with Dink in mind (and not something new altogether), my suggestion is to make your format as close to DinkC as you can while still retaining all it's power. That way it's easier to change DMODs from one format to the other. If not though, I guess it isn't really a big deal (it would be a good thing in some ways).

I wish you the best of luck completing your engine; from the sounds of it, and based on the progress you said you've made on your editor, you really seem to know what you are doing.