Reve

Originally Posted By: The Lost Anvil Something I'd like to see if an Avernum: Origins ever comes out... It being made with something like A3 graphics. Something I'm sure everyone is wishing - but it'll never happen

I think, in all the games, Erika was the person I missed when she died the most.

So Erika is back as a Crystal Soul then?

I think this message on your support page isn't quite right: "Microsoft inexplicably made DirectX 10 unable to support earlier versions." Vista comes with DirectX 10 and supports all previous versions of DirectX too. The "d3dx9_*.dll" files are "helper" libraries which have been gradually added to DirectX over time - Vista obviously doesn't ship with those released after it (neither does XP in fact). Of course, the real farce is Microsoft screwing over their OpenGL support, making it harder to write something cross-platform (which is obviously their entire reason for screwing it).

Azuma - That's correct. Unfortunately, I killed the chitrachs, and my characters riposte levels are so high they'd probably be killed by riposting instead EDIT - actually, I've just realised, I didn't kill them after all! So I can probably do this after all.

I want to join the Anama with my mage characters dead - however, I killed the hostile chitrach, and my characters are very high level (got to Melanchion's keep). So, a weird question, but is there another way (including cheats if need be) to kill some of your characters?

Quote: Originally written by Spidweb: I have done a lot of work on the interface. Geneforge 5 now supports OpenGL and will tap some of the power of your graphics card. Out of interest, what sorts of things are you doing with OpenGL in this engine?

Quote: Originally written by Spidweb: In Avernum 4, we didn't have time. In Avernum 5, I just forgot. Hopefully, Avernum 6 will have cave cows. Beautiful, beautiful cows. And, at the end, there will be cake. - Jeff Vogel Cows! I'm making a note here, huge success!

Actually there are quite a lot of small bits of dialogue changes for nephil, and a few for slith - mostly when you're talking to either a nephil or slith. e.g. the nephil at the start and the slith in New Harston.

I must say that the writing in the Spiderweb Software games is probably the thing that makes it more than anything. Avernum 4 was a bit lacking in this regard, as Jeff knows - I'm looking forward to playing A5 when it comes out for windows.

I think the thing I missed most with Avernum 4 was the loss of a sense of scale of Avernum. I played Exile 1-3 and the demo of Blades of Exile, and I played BoA and A4 (I never replayed E1-3 as A1-3, though playing A1 to see the new bit added about the Lost Bahssikava is something I've pondered). While I did like the increased detail of the integrated world, the issue I had was that the sense of scale died out compared to previous games, where you really felt you were in a gigantic sprawling neverending maze. The descriptiveness of the earlier Exile games really made up for the lack of graphics for me. I think that if A4 had been in a subsection of Avernum (e.g. almost entirely set in the honeycomb, but at the same scale), it would have worked much better. I think that seeing as A5 is set in new caves, this sounds like the issue of loss of scale of the existing world will not be a problem, which I am looking forward to. I just hope that it's not like ZKR in that it doesn't link anywhere to the known world With regards to super-weapons, I think that generally they ought to be optional but with much more complex sub-quests to get them. They were a bit easy to get in A4. More like the Black Halberd or original E1/A1 Demonslayer quest.

Bugsbane - double damage vs Bugs Bunny

Quote: Originally written by Daniele C: Quote: Originally written by Andrea: That list of reserved rights is invalid and legally troublesome enough to render the code dangerous to use, even without the CPL. It's certainly incompatible with every known open source license, because it puts restrictions on the end user's right to license his or her own creations as he or she sees fit. Sadly agreeing... These added restrictions don't appear to be in the third release of the code, so yay for Jeff for doing that. Also, I see from looking at the license (see the readme) that he released it as GPL "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version" rather than the less flexible GPLv2 only which is excellent news, as I was worried it would be stuck as GPLv2-only. So another big thank you again to Jeff for that, you've really listened to the community here. For those of you who don't know that much about open source software licenses, this means that once the GPL3 comes out we will be able to freely use Apache 2.0 licensed code in the project as well, which gives us a bigger pool of existing open source code to potentially utilize in the project.

With regards to code hosting, if it's under the GPL, Google's code hosting might be an option. With regards to development, the consensus seems to be the logical: - Make it work on new versions of Windows/MacOS - Fix bugs After that, the following are definite options, in ascending order of difficulty (in getting agreement mostly ): - Linux port, or cross-platform code base - Extensions to the interface, to make it easier to use, without changing the game - Support for more things in scenarios (e.g. new forms of scripting)

Quote: Originally written by jg.faust: Quote: Spiderweb Software, Inc. Reserves the Following Rights: - Right to place any and all applications, game scenarios, and derivative works created in whole or in part from or by the Blades of Exile game/editor source code for download on our web site without prior approval of the author. - Right to place any any all applications, game scenarios, and derivative works created in whole or in part from or by the Blades of Exile game/editor source code on 3.5" disks, CD-ROMs, or similar media for distribution and sale, without prior approval of the author. Fees charged for said media will not be part of or be construed as part of any shareware fees set forth by individual authors. All fees are for production and distribution of the media only. IANAL, but shouldn't a "non-exclusive" qualifier be in both of those clauses? Right now, it sounds almost like only Spiderweb is allowed to publish these derivatives. I know that this doesn't make sense in relation to the rest of the license, but I hear that stating and restating the obvious is the lawyer way... If he is relicensing under the GPL, as he says, he doesn't need to worry about specifying either of these, as the license explicitly allows you to do both. Basically, the GPL allows you to redistribute any works under it, and charging a fee for doing so is also allowed under it. Here's the bit from the GPL3 on the fee bit for example: "You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey, and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee." On a side note, hopefully the GPL version will be "GPL-going-forwards" (i.e. GPL(any version), GPL2+ or GPL3+) - being able to use it under the GPL version 3 means we can merge in any code under the fairly popular Apache 2.0 license in the program, which GPL2 is not able to do so. Also as an aside, I'd like to thank Jeff for listening to the community here and taking time to help make his wonderful contribution of code as valuable to us as possible.