Unreal Tournament 469

Discussions about UT99
User avatar
PrinceOfFunky
Godlike
Posts: 1200
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:31 pm

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by PrinceOfFunky »

OjitroC wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:56 pm
PrinceOfFunky wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2020 2:34 pm 45) When pressing Esc while holding the OpenVoiceMenu key, the voice menu will close but the cursor will still be available;
Can't see why one would do that (it's not easy to do if your OpenVoiceMenu key is a long way from Esc) but if, when you have done that, you let go of the VoiceMenu key and press Esc the cursor will go.
Basically every time a new window appear while you're on the voice menu. E.g. the mapvote.
"Your stuff is known to be buggy and unfinished/not properly tested"
User avatar
Sp0ngeb0b
Adept
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Sp0ngeb0b »

Another proposal: Add an unique client identifier to 469. Something similiar to Nexgen's key + ID pair. Could be used for some convenient functionality...
Website, Forum & UTStats

Image
******************************************************************************
Nexgen Server Controller || My plugins & mods on GitHub
******************************************************************************
User avatar
esnesi
Godlike
Posts: 1018
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 12:58 pm
Personal rank: Dialed in.

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by esnesi »

i assume when a client has a unique ID, it will be easier to create systems like chat etc.
or atleast less time consuming.
User avatar
Barbie
Godlike
Posts: 2792
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:01 pm
Location: moved without proper hashing

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Barbie »

Hmm, if you create an static unique installation ID, copying the installation duplicates the ID. On the other hand if you bind the ID to the hardware (e.g. MAC address) dynamically, the installation cannot be moved to a new computer easily.
"Multiple exclamation marks," he went on, shaking his head, "are a sure sign of a diseased mind." --Terry Pratchett
User avatar
Sp0ngeb0b
Adept
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Sp0ngeb0b »

Same applies for the Nexgen ID right now. I don't see the requirement to bound it uniquely to the computer, this is possible via ACE's features. New functionality could use such an ID for new features which are comfortable for the client and therefore it is in the interest of the user to not share his ID.
Website, Forum & UTStats

Image
******************************************************************************
Nexgen Server Controller || My plugins & mods on GitHub
******************************************************************************
User avatar
Feralidragon
Godlike
Posts: 5489
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:24 pm
Personal rank: Work In Progress
Location: Liandri

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Feralidragon »

You guys are forgetting that you can always meddle with an unique ID, and that the uniqueness of the ID itself will depend a lot on how it's generated, and there are no guarantees that 2 IDs will be unique, so if you intend to use this to make something like kick/ban a player for example, it will be completely useless in that regard (even HWID already is, for anyone really bent in cheating and such).

You can guarantee uniqueness to a great extent using a standard UUID generator, but then another problem arises: where would this UUID fall in respect to GDPR in EU?
Because the same user could then be tracked across different servers for example, so GDPR-wise it may fall into gray-area of sorts of what kind of identifier this UUID would be defined as in GDPR, what is allowed to be used for, and if it requires the user's explicit approval (opt-in).

And so it starts to be exceedingly tricky from a legal point of view as well, which I am pretty sure Anth doesn't want to get into.

Then also consider that a feature like this being present in v469 alone would mean that v436 would have no ID of their own?
You would then build a mechanism of fallback in that case?
So it also starts to feel like a redundant feature since you would have to build a generator yourself anyway if that's the case, otherwise would you then exclude non-v469 clients? Your server would be empty if the entire reason why they couldn't play there would be to be identified through this ID.

So, if you need an unique ID in your mod for any reason, simply generate your own, it's fairly simple to do, you can make it work in any UT version, there are plenty of UUID implementations out there which are possible to implement in plain UScript for the most part (even a basic RNG should suffice for most purposes), thus there isn't much reason for Anth's hard work to be spent in a feature like this, in my honest opinion.

Given the number of people working in the patch, at most only features that are useful and cannot be done with the current version should be proposed, since Anth for one is likely not working on it full time.
User avatar
Sp0ngeb0b
Adept
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:16 pm
Location: Cologne
Contact:

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Sp0ngeb0b »

I am absolutely aware that it is very easy to change that ID, using it for banning was never my intention. It's also clear that this feature is not backward compatible, but from my point of view it's up to the modder to handle that (we simply can not say now what his use case will look like and whether it makes sense or not). Since I expect a lot of players to upgrade to 469, this is a great chance to include "convenience functions" aimed at these clients.

To make it a bit more tangible, I came up with this proposal after reading the ICU thread, where a "buddy" functionality is directly restricted by the fact that you are unable to identify players except using their name. If - that's where my thoughts came from - the UdpQuery would be adjusted to include such an identifier of 469 clients, you are directly able to create this mod supporting 469 servers and clients. Older versions simply won't support that feature, that's all. If such an ID is not available by default in 469 (and included in the query responses), servers and clients would need to install additional mods - you can forget the feature from the getgo then.

I understand that the amount of ressources for development is limited and I definitely don't want to propose unrealistic things. In this case however I see the opportunity for enhancing "global" modding and I believe the work overhead for adding it should be rather moderate (please correct me if I miss something though).

I haven't thought about the legal stand point at all, so if you think that this is a problem in terms of tracking I accept that.
Website, Forum & UTStats

Image
******************************************************************************
Nexgen Server Controller || My plugins & mods on GitHub
******************************************************************************
cracka
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2020 6:37 pm

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by cracka »

when will the patch be released? are we talking about weeks, months or end of the year? would be cool to know what you are roughly aiming for
ive seen the changelog of 469, but is there also a todo list and what you are currently working on somewhere?
User avatar
anth
Adept
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 2:23 am

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by anth »

The first Mac patches have been available for over a month now. I'm releasing the first Linux patch to beta testers today (register at oldunreal.com and send a PM to anth if you want to participate in the test). Windows will take a while longer since there are many, many UnrealEd issues we're still working on.

We don't really have a public TODO list.
User avatar
sektor2111
Godlike
Posts: 6403
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 6:15 pm
Location: On the roof.

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by sektor2111 »

anth wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:58 pm We don't really have a public TODO list
But you can record a few things, those which won't break anything if map manufactured in such version will have as target a 436 server. We have several nasty problems:
- Editor doesn't log clearly where surface is non-coplanar - neither other "ModelX" problems - this is hard to find in heavy loaded maps;
- Editor doesn't log where "Scout did not fit" for fixing stupid inventory placement;
- Editor might lose dependencies, like a texture used as skin for a monster in mylevel which is not in map but spawned later - happened and it's not funny;
- Editor doesn't show PrunedPaths - lol, EPIC;
- Editor shows some properties which should not be touched by mapper being run-time related things - TimeDilation and so on;
- Editor don't show Paths properly UpStreamPaths PrunedPaths In NavigationPoint properties neither reporting ALL Reachspec content - I recommend an attached builder for mappers not for Servers;
- Editor has no support for disconnecting bad Paths - such a task is not affecting default UT navigation but improves A.I. when crapped paths nearby ledges are removed wrapping entire array - aerial paths are also recognized by 436 but nothing is mapping them except XC_Engine;
- Paths Rebuild button should Not Add New ReachSpecs before DELETING old ones - damn there are maps with over 40000... garbage ReachSpecs;
- Editor has nothing for excepting creating paths over items over-crowded when this is not needed - using a Tag for exception or something simple... To not say how many debugging tools are doable separately as completion. If you fix bugs from those stupid NavigationPoints, a lot of stuff can be improved because we open gates for debugging and doing more quality.
Such tweaks will only deliver good maps compatible with ALL UT versions - yes, more debugging is needed instead of adding assets for making maps useless in plain UT. Here if we really do need newer stuff just make a damn extra BonusPack, we don't want to ruin original game integrity unless we want people to get mad - I did not saved old feed-back toward 451 "fixes" which I found in that time in forums which are now gone for good..., admins weren't that happy as expected.
Of course, Server-side might do other fixes when items are screwed up if replication is taken in account.
Game-Server - like XC_Engine if server is capable to send files to player at a high speed (option configurable) admins are excepted from spending money for redirects - simply allow server to send the exact FILE needed and tell to client about it without rejecting with a mismatch - this is a pain.
I might say that this game has constants which... NOT ALL of them have to be constants - this is only restricting development... When you compile such a code wisely, plain UT works without issues. Simply allow admin/coder to solve some map glitch by adjusting a MOVER, read well, I have already doing these not in a single map with client participation of course. I don't say to screw game integrity, I'm speaking about COMPILER, UScript is executed, problem comes at compiling said script. We should have a parameter set and code should ignore original goofing.
USaaR has compiled with constants, Feralidragon has compiled with constants, self person has compiled codes with constants - it's serious stupid what they did with restrictions to constants... Else, I have to admit that you will want to know what you are compiling unless net-games are going down-hill.

Extra:
If you guys want a demonstration about destroying some doors doing another type of compilation but perfectly compatible with UT, I'll write a mutator like that GuardiaCannon thing, but aiming CTF-Niven. Purpose will be to get rid of entry doors before entering bases - happening in certain day of week - configurable. Eg: Sunday we don't have doors, lol.
User avatar
Chamberly
Godlike
Posts: 1963
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2011 4:32 pm
Personal rank: Dame. Vandora
Location: TN, USA
Contact:

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Chamberly »

I was wondering what's up with the mover issue when they both sync they jam up/down Together. Something get very weird on this part because since it is very common in BT, map have to be restarted so it doesn't happen.

Then sometimes they are invisible. I'm asking everyone to tell me something to try. I'm thinking it may be related to framerate or replication issue. Other times it go straight out invisible and then at times it can get locked in as invisible.

@BTMappers/BTPlayers
Image
Image
Image Edit: Why does my sig not work anymore?
User avatar
PrinceOfFunky
Godlike
Posts: 1200
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:31 pm

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by PrinceOfFunky »

48) Looks like mouse wheel doesn't support certain multiple keybindings: "set input MouseWheelDown Jump|Type" works but "set input MouseWheelDown set playerpawn drawscale 2|set playerpawn fatness 0" doesn't, for comparsion "set input U set playerpawn drawscale 2|set playerpawn fatness 0" works. EDIT: AnthraX said this works on 469.
"Your stuff is known to be buggy and unfinished/not properly tested"
User avatar
sektor2111
Godlike
Posts: 6403
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 6:15 pm
Location: On the roof.

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by sektor2111 »

When I modified doors/lifts or such I had to apply changes in both cases: server and client. When I applied only server-side, mover somehow worked but always attempted to stay in old position heavily tracking what server had. They are... nasty, after a small private chat with Higor from a few months (maybe years) ago, he said that he figured what was the problem, a wrong deal by default - colliding code is resident in Render, lol, and a server doesn't render anything that's why movers are so... lousy On-Line - for me went clear and logic.
By working in two parts and hard-coding changes, movers are changed properly. Anyway I wrote the toy, I had to setup a few explanations about ini and what else is doing - of course, during testing a few games in plain UT, those bad paths were quickly showing up effects, so I added an option for removal of those which I saw that are bad, in hoping to not have a missed one. Paths are tweaked on demand each time or not, but doors are removed only in the days defined in ini sau using word "Daily". This small "hooligan" mutator won't need XC_Engine as a must have, it's even for plain UT. Here I just brought in attention compiler limitations which sometimes are way so stupid... Maybe UT469 will be more wise at this point.
Cya later !
User avatar
Berserker
Experienced
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2019 5:08 pm

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by Berserker »



vertex editing mouse lag. If you are using low mouse dpi like me, this is a nightmare.
Visit us on Discord:
https://discord.gg/fcRakgNCjR Image
huvgoga
Novice
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:16 pm

Re: Unreal Tournament 469

Post by huvgoga »

@anth

It seems that our discussion was interrupted as Discord suddenly asked me to verify my account using phone. Unfortunately I'm not going to give them my phone number.

Anyway, I already managed to say what I wanted. Since you are already aware of the issues, I believe you can come up with a good solution. Thanks for your time and thanks for working on the 469 patch.
Post Reply