Scooper

For multiplayer you can increase the limit by increasing the following line in "codemp\game\NPC_stats.c": #define MAX_NPC_DATA_SIZE 0x40000For example doubling it to 0x80000. And recompile the game. For singleplayer it's the same thing, but in the "code\game\NPC_stats.cpp" file instead.

I didn't suggest that, at least not how you're explaining it. Don't pull fake facts out of thin air =p I explained how the Axis Aligned Bounding Boxes are actually used for collision in the engine; as a 6 sides brush model that gets reshaped to fit whatever bounding box settings you use. And when performing collision on this type, it disables rotation. So the way to do it isn't replacing it with a bmodel, it's enabling rotation for the bounding box bmodel that is already being used when the collision test is on a proning player. Programming steps: 1) Reshape the bounding box to fit an axis aligned person proning 2) When the collision system checks the player collision, make it apply the rotation portions of the code if the player is currently proning. 3) ... 4) profit

We could do it before, now that the source is released it would be even easier. But someones still needs to actually do it. Which won't be me, sorry =p

Ent modding: http://holonet.antarat.com/wiki/index.php?title=Map_Modding I don't really know much about Script editing. I can barely remember looking at icarus scripts. There are probably a few people who can figure it out though, myself included =p. But I don't have time to dedicate to helping you on your project, sorry. You could go and ask for help on the #jacoders irc channel. Some minutes help from bored coders is always useful. That's how I usually get tricked into helping someone. =]

I'm extremely curious as to how you think that was my email. It's not my email, it isn't remotely close to any email I've ever used, and I have no clue who jeff / lucas is.

You do require an account to send PMs on mm forums, and yes there are some issues with the mailing system that haven't been resolved yet. But my email is in the makermod readmes, and you can send me private messages here as well.

This, this is how easy it was to get in touch with me. I haven't changed my email, and you could have contacted me here or on the makermod forums. I haven't received any emails or any private messages from you. I'm quite easy to get in touch with if you give it a try. I don't remember you though =p Says who o.o? I check it multiple times a day. I have a habit of hitting my "Makermod forums" tab in my browser. Now to answer some questions! I have been contacted a few times years ago where people wanted a linux version of makermod. And more recently I got contacted by escaped turkey, because they've gotten quite a lot of requests for hosting makermod. So I'm aware that people want this, but unfortunately I can't promise that it will happen very soon. I'll try and get it done though.

Didn't consider that, didn't download it =p

You could also patch it like this: PatchMyStuff();PatchMyStuff is a function that patches all my stuff. I'm just pointing out the futility of posting code with function/macros you don't give the definition of. I know you're giving the general idea, but come on :/

Why not teach yourself by editing the source code? That's how I did it. And Raz0r too I think. My point is that you apparently have a goal/project in mind. So start working towards making it happen. You can head over to jacoders for tutorials on how to get started.

Can't embed with timestamps :/ Anyways, welcome.

How are you able to get any work if you don't have a professional portfolio that actually shows that you are capable of professional work? Logos are fine to post just a version as well, and there are tons of well known professional artists who post their work on their webpages. Why should you be different? I would at the very least like to see at least 1 piece of professional work that you did.

Early videos of Metal Gear Rising is what inspired me to make this for my bachelor thesis, and it was released yesterday (According to wikipedia =p). I've intended to make a quick video of it for a while, so seemed like an appropriate time to make one. It was very hasty though. Read the description if you're curious \o/

I wasn't aware that he had released his tools, I don't know how extensive they are but they might help. =p But yes, my opinion is that you're underestimating the work involved.

Example of the stuff you have to read through to do the changes you want: .text:200B9553 mov edx, [esp+2980h+var_2970] .text:200B9557 push 64h .text:200B9559 push 7 .text:200B955B push edx .text:200B955C push ebp .text:200B955D push edi .text:200B955E call sub_20032790 .text:200B9563 mov eax, [edi+110h] .text:200B9569 mov ebp, 1 .text:200B956E mov [eax+1190h], bp .text:200B9575 mov ecx, [edi+110h] .text:200B957B mov [ecx+118Ch], bp .text:200B9582 mov edx, [edi+110h] .text:200B9588 xor ebx, ebx .text:200B958A mov [edx+1194h], bx .text:200B9591 mov eax, [edi+110h] .text:200B9597 mov cl, [eax+274h] .text:200B959D add esp, 14h .text:200B95A0 test cl, 4 .text:200B95A3 jz short loc_200B95C7 .text:200B95A5 fild [esp+2980h+var_296C] .text:200B95A9 mov ecx, dword_201F4B54 .text:200B95AF sub esp, 8 .text:200B95B2 fmul dword ptr [ecx+1Ch] .text:200B95B5 fstp [esp+2988h+var_2988] .text:200B95B8 call _floor .text:200B95BD add esp, 8 .text:200B95C0 call __ftol2 .text:200B95C5 mov esi, eax You can get it a bit clearer than that if you have the right tools, but in the end you'll have to find exactly where in this where you gotta change stuff.

The problem is how many places the SP code needs to be changed for the new hierarchy to work. Might just be one, but there's no telling before actually checking it out (or if you're already very familiar with how these systems are implemented in SP). The logic behind the system that needs to be coded isn't very complicated, and your pseudo code works fine to explain it. Implementing it might be a whole other story. I've given you my initial thoughts on your plan, I don't intend to attempt this for you though. But maybe another coder will, and my input might be of use to them. I don't want to discourage anyone from attempting it, there is a good possibility that it will be straightforward to implement.

I can't give an accurate estimate without actually looking into it, but here's my thoughts: 1) Didn't know that they actually went through the player, but if that's the case it means it's missing some part of the collision system. This could be an easy fix if it's just about enabling it for the projectiles. Or it could be a big task if it's not there at all. 2) This is most likely going to be quite a bit of work. Might not be too hard, but you're talking about tweaking a major gameplay feature that has a lot of code involved. And you want it done with SP, so it has to be done through engine-hacks =p It could probably be done, but I certainly don't have the time to invest to help you with this, sorry.

Do you have a professional portfolio? (That means no hobby stuff, actual professional work.)

Did you make all of this yourself? All the artwork?

Hi and welcome to the forums. You forgot a newline in your print message. Do share more information about your programming background though. Programmers aren't exactly rare around here, but they're a minority, so explain your experience so we can judge you! =p

I forgot. Though I don't think there's much left. Mainly making an UI to control the different options. And some issues with 64 bit compatibility. I'll look into it again and try and get it ready for release.

I believe I've mentioned it at some point eez, but it's possible to make the second entitystate/playerstate allow people to connect even though they don't have the required mod. You have control of when the server writes the states to the client, so you can decide to not write it to the specific clients who don't have the required client mod. The issue will be synchronizing on the clients who have the mod when they should start reading the second entitystate/playerstate. Maybe use an userInt for that? And the serverside mod will have to be aware that some of the clients will not have the second entitystate and playerstate available, but they can still be used on server side. But I imagine that most mods that will benefit from the extra networking capabilities will already be heavy clientside dependent, so support for people playing without proper clientside modification might not be necessary. ( Only talking about compatibility for the network states, not the extra port stuff. I don't know what you have there that might cause base clients to not be able to connect =] )