Author Topic: What are we working on?  (Read 21122 times)

NilG and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline troflip

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #210 on: April 03, 2019, 04:28:34 PM »
Yeah, that's crazy... not crazy that ScummVM has it wrong, that's understandable - crazy that no one noticed it until now!

Also, as someone who had to implement their own integer polygon pathfinding for this, it's really f***ing hard.
Check out my website: http://icefallgames.com
Groundhog Day Competition

Offline Collector

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #211 on: April 03, 2019, 06:44:27 PM »
I think I have said this before, but it is known that Sierra had a test suite for their polygon code. That would be interesting to get my hands on.

I wonder if Omer has a contact. Not sure if he has any systems guys in his contact.
KQII Remake Pic

Offline OmerMor

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #212 on: April 04, 2019, 12:17:17 AM »
I don't believe I got any pathfinding test suite.

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #213 on: April 05, 2019, 04:56:31 PM »
So it seems they're working on remaking ScummVM's pathfinder in SSCI's image. I'm gonna be watching the commits even closer now!

And hey. Thanks for the ❤️, OmerMor ;)

Offline OmerMor

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #214 on: April 07, 2019, 12:31:13 PM »
And hey. Thanks for the ❤️, OmerMor ;)

Thanks for improving ScummVM!  :)

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #215 on: April 08, 2019, 06:10:07 AM »
Did I?

Offline OmerMor

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #216 on: April 10, 2019, 12:19:37 PM »

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #217 on: April 10, 2019, 08:11:19 PM »
I don't feel like that counts :\

Offline MusicallyInspired

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #218 on: April 11, 2019, 09:30:04 AM »
Someone there says it might be a regression?
Brass Lantern Prop Competition

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #219 on: April 11, 2019, 10:43:05 AM »
Someone does. But if it was based on incomplete information anyway, that regression would just be two different implementations based on incomplete information where one of them just happens to give better results. If the plan is to rewrite it based on complete information, that'd be even better.

At least that's how I understood it.

Offline MusicallyInspired

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #220 on: April 11, 2019, 03:23:21 PM »
Yeah, that makes sense.
Brass Lantern Prop Competition

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #221 on: April 11, 2019, 05:01:43 PM »
What makes considerably less sense than a polygonal pathfinding patent is the one feature in SCI11+ that's the least likely to appear in ScummVM if only because The Dating Pool doesn't use it¹, and why it keeps shooting me in my goddamn face.

I mean, of course, the part where double or triple-byte UTF8 sequences cause text to measure wider than it really is. I've tried rewriting the mentioned function in C but that made it eat the first character of every line after the first (when compiled with UTF8 support, that is), with garbage taking its place after. I backported SCI32's C++ version of the same, but found I was actually pretty close in my attempt, in the sense that it gave exactly the same results.

The shit's on my github if you want it.

(¹: There are plenty more features like that. I have a branch ready to PR.)

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #222 on: April 12, 2019, 10:20:13 AM »

Offline lskovlun

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #223 on: April 13, 2019, 01:12:41 AM »
AAAAAH! AAAAAH!
I hope you can understand that commit message  8)

Offline Kawa

Re: What are we working on?
« Reply #224 on: April 13, 2019, 04:10:13 AM »
Perfectly well, thank you. It's not exactly drunk coding.

As you know, text resources are quite under-used in SCI11, in favor of messages. The only text resources you can expect to find are some debug format strings. Now, my toolset includes a message converter that can go from the raw message resource to a text file in the same format as SV and back again, with the added ability to have defined names instead of numbers, comment lines, references, and of course UTF8 if the file has a magic marker as the first line.

If I were to make a text resource counterpart and made it use SV-style output too, you'd get this visually strange case where each entry has a number key, but they're not actually part of the file and don't add anything when editing the data for later conversion back to a resource. The only reason to keep them in is to allow multi-line entries: if a line starts with a tab, it's part of the current entry (the message table parser uses a bunch of tabs, and still allows more to be part of the line proper). But if I remove the superfluous numbers, I can't easily tell if a newline ends the current entry, or is actually part of the entry.
Code: [Select]
2 "Leisure Suit Larry in the Land of the Lounge Lizards" contains some elements of plot which may not be considered appropriate for some children.
3 Use the TAB key to select,
then ENTER to continue.
4
5 Sorry, but this game can only be played by adults, or with an adult. Please find an adult, come back, and try again.
I could of course just shrug and make it use escaped newlines to mean the latter?
Code: [Select]
"Leisure Suit Larry in the Land of the Lounge Lizards" contains some elements of plot which may not be considered appropriate for some children.
Use the TAB key to select,\nthen ENTER to continue.

Sorry, but this game can only be played by adults, or with an adult. Please find an adult, come back, and try again.
"But Kawa, what if you want to use the text files to look up which tuple to use?" Well, besides comment lines, obviously you could enable line numbers in your text editor and subtract one to make it zero-based... or you just frikken import the resource and look it up from inside SCI Companion?
« Last Edit: April 13, 2019, 04:37:37 AM by Kawa »


SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder

Page created in 0.12 seconds with 23 queries.