questions
October 6th 2004, 04:55 PM
blackhawk318
When will a Dink Smallwood engihe be made so we could play multiplayer?
We could have a constant server up and rpg there and ppl could add maps and stuff like in other free online rpgs, right?
Also, people should be more active mabye a weekly aim or teamspeak chat?
We could have a constant server up and rpg there and ppl could add maps and stuff like in other free online rpgs, right?
Also, people should be more active mabye a weekly aim or teamspeak chat?
October 7th 2004, 12:49 PM
blackhawk318
LOL. C'mon man. I understand that some of you, Merlin included, are used to technology and games from the time of Dink's release. You are still stuck in that age. I, on the other hand, others reading this perhaps also, know some about todays technology.
With a game that is only 23 megs to begin with, multiplayer would not requre much bandwidth.
So am I saying that servers would be cheap.
No, I'm not.
I'm saying they'd be free.
All it takes is someone with a broadband connection to do some cummunity servers and host a server. This works especially well if said person has a secondary computer that can be used to host the server, and kept on all the time.
So yeah, I'll pay for it:
$0.00
With a game that is only 23 megs to begin with, multiplayer would not requre much bandwidth.
So am I saying that servers would be cheap.
No, I'm not.
I'm saying they'd be free.
All it takes is someone with a broadband connection to do some cummunity servers and host a server. This works especially well if said person has a secondary computer that can be used to host the server, and kept on all the time.
So yeah, I'll pay for it:
$0.00
...
With your comments, I think we've established that you know *something* about today's technology, but not nearly enough.
1) Game size has absolutely nothing to do with multiplayer bandwidth. The only typical things sent on a network are positions of players, their current frame of animation, and what action they are trying to perform. While Dink would likely take up less bandwidth than something like UT2004 (only having 2 dimensions to worry about instead of 3, amoung other things), the file size has nothing to do with this.
2) I believe Merlin believed that you were talking about a MMORPG of sorts, with dozens or thousands of players at once. Or perhaps something in the vein of Diablo II, where a whole bunch of games are started off of battle.net.
If it was just a typical multiplayer server supporting a handful of people, then yes, that would be fairly cheap to support, not including the time and effort spent to create a client and server to handle it.
3) Don't be so condescending. I think very few people, including Merlin, are 'used to' technology from the time of Dink's release. Or do you think we're all running Windows 95 on Pentium 90s?
With your comments, I think we've established that you know *something* about today's technology, but not nearly enough.
1) Game size has absolutely nothing to do with multiplayer bandwidth. The only typical things sent on a network are positions of players, their current frame of animation, and what action they are trying to perform. While Dink would likely take up less bandwidth than something like UT2004 (only having 2 dimensions to worry about instead of 3, amoung other things), the file size has nothing to do with this.
2) I believe Merlin believed that you were talking about a MMORPG of sorts, with dozens or thousands of players at once. Or perhaps something in the vein of Diablo II, where a whole bunch of games are started off of battle.net.
If it was just a typical multiplayer server supporting a handful of people, then yes, that would be fairly cheap to support, not including the time and effort spent to create a client and server to handle it.
3) Don't be so condescending. I think very few people, including Merlin, are 'used to' technology from the time of Dink's release. Or do you think we're all running Windows 95 on Pentium 90s?
"Or do you think we're all running Windows 95 on Pentium 90s?" I'm running three machines with win 95 and 25 MhZ, two win 98 with 90 MhZ, one win 3.1 with something I don't want to know 
and one XP with 1.8 GhZ 
and one XP with 1.8 GhZ 
