MaceMadunusus

I'll see what I can do, it might be a while. I was specifically thinking of mapping from the perspective of MB though. Which has a lot of different things to consider in comparison to traditional level design in JKA and I think it would be interesting to have a look at that as a lot of people don't know what actually goes into it in comparison to most other levels made.

Yes, completely. Has nothing to do with the main instigator of all the drama regarding removal of the torso freeze not attending a test session for 2 months prior to release to even voice his concerns while he was on the beta team. 60% of beta testers thought the removal was needed, which is why it was removed. We listened to the majority. It has nothing to do with the fact that torso freeze is a BUG that allows you to bypass animations to instantly kata/grapple or do other things to players without their knowledge. Several of us have already stated and even voted on your threads saying that we would be okay with torso freeze returning as a gesture, or when we remove the ability to bypass animations with it. Several of us stated it was a TEMPORARY solution that you and the community are not listening to. We removed a bug that impacted gameplay NEGATIVELY, god for bid it impacted something considered time wasting and for the lulz that has no impact on actual gameplay as well. Were such nazis! There were other bugs for the recent patch that we had to focus on, like sabers lagging when in contact with another saber in idle. We didn't have time to fix the animation-bypass but keep hug before release of the patch. I am one of the ones that support bringing torso freeze back, without insta kata and other issues and I am now having a harder and harder time supporting that out of sheer annoyance. If you want to continue saying our arguments are flawed, then good luck getting us to actually listen to you. The amount of energy we are having to expel to just try and get you guys to have some patience, and understand our side, is taking development time away from fixing the issue. Saying that the majority of the community support keeping torso freeze as it was in V0 is absolute false and your own poll on the MB2 forums followed that, where most people supported keeping torso freeze once the other bugs with it were removed. The air support voice command served no purpose, which is why it was removed. Charge was too loud, so what? Is it really that big of a deal that you, Jango40, and others complain about an entire release for weeks causing drama everywhere over something completely minuscule? None of these things you complain about have anything to do with the core gameplay. They're things you spam to screw around and waste peoples time who are waiting in spectator after they died, and to murder their ears. We have already addressed this issue multiple times to you and others on the MB forums, and continuing it here will not help us fix the bug. So please, lets stop this here. Remember, we work on this for free in our free time. We aren't a paid team that works 24/7. For example, the past two weeks I have been trying to get back to school for the first time in 2 years and haven't touched a single things related to MB. We're busy, give us time.

We've never had a really solid spec for lightsabers. Hopefully we can get that to change and make them more exciting in the successor. It is the one area in MB2 I think needs the most improvement from a gameplay perspective. The code at this point in time, after years and years of manipulation makes it such a daunting task though, that it would be better if we scrapped it and started over. However, which ones are you specifically referencing on the opinions contradictory to actions part? This was a really nice interview, would be good to do some more in-depth ones for the sections of MB2 as well I believe. Like for example, getting old level designers like Plasma, Norman, Immenor, Frost, and Myself to all talk about how we made things, and how we worked together kind of thing. And yes, I still have contact with Norman and Immenor, that isn't an issue at all.

We will have them in some form. The style and such should remain the same, but the visuals and name will be different (still energy based and glowy).

As someone who develops Movie Battles... remember that while it is a mod, it is also a gamemode. Just because both the gamemode, and the name of the mod are the same, doesn't mean it doesnt apply here. In that sense, coop from OJP can be added as well. The Movie Battles mod name encompasses everything about movie battles, the UI, the effects, levels, models, community, etc. The game mode is the 5 minute objective based rounds similar to siege with limited respawns, using 7 standard classes and abilities per team that are not specific to any one map as well as a map design based around that, which are much smaller than siege levels and do not contain multiple-stages to the assault. Its much easier to call the gamemode "Movie Battles" than it is their "Open/Semi-Authentic/Full Authentic" counter parts. So, with that said, there is nothing wrong with adding other gamemodes from other mods such as Coop from OJP to this list. I can't think of any more of the top of my head, but no real reason not to include them if they are different enough from the base game (JA+ for example doesn't count).

Unknown at this time due to our forums being in an iffy state while in the conversion process from a very old version of vbulletin. I'm not a coder, so I wouldn't be the one dealing with it directly.

Thats no problem, already has to be done with Pugmod. Since this is more featured, we could just phase out pugmod entirely if they require essentially the same thing. Might be nice to PM us if there is updates though, or have an official thread on the forums once it is implemented to remind us of updates. We don't pay attention to JKHub or even the githubs of most jka mods as much as we probably should due to all of us having a limited amount of time.

Eez and Didz are both right. You can cheat and do all of those things without access to code. MBII source stuff isn't just about security, so remember that. That was just an example. Also, Owen was a massive douche. Ent, were in the process of upgrading the site slowly (only happens on weekdays) so the forums are slightly broken right now. So no internal discussion is going on atm regarding this due to that. I will say this though, while it doesnt guarantee anything, applying for the team directly to get jaMME working is likely the fastest way to go though certainly not the only route. We have had developers on before for short periods of time for short tasks. However, staying away from engine mods is likely the best thing from an inside point of view as it may mess with any OpenJK compatibility already existing. You would have to talk to Eez about that though, since he is the one who added that.

That one holocron gamemode from JKO is one you forgot of the base games: CTF, Siege, Holocron, and TFFA for actual gameplay. Didn't really care for dueling, ysalamari or JM that much. FFA was good for just hanging out tho. While I do love all those gamemodes, and I have a bias towards it, MBII was really the only thing that kept me in JKA so I've gotta say that.

It took me 2 days to convert all of the items from MB3's UDK, into UE4 including all entities, materials, levels, and rescaling of assets to the metric system. People have also already made conversion plugins in order to transfer items like light entities, cameras from matinee, and other things into UE4. Overall, it really isn't that daunting of a task as you make it sound. They had done a lot of work sure, and personally I agree with what you have said based on the amount of content I have personally seen of the project, but they can still benefit from it even after taking time for the conversion I believe. UE4 is a lot simpler in many respects, and might even allow them to do things they couldn't have prior thanks to blueprint being massively better than kismet and the editor functionality for level design being so much more fluid and standardized. It really is up to them though.

Lerv is a MB2 developer. It wasn't ignored. There are concerns internally about giving source code out to someone we don't know that well. That isn't to say the work you have done isn't adequate or done well or anything because this mod is amazing and I would love to use it. We just have trust issues. Plus the issue of updating what you have with releases, or what you do to upgrade jamme if it goes the opposite route. Would an API be better so that it didn't require rebuilding every time there is releases?

Did you directly port them over? Or are you starting from scratch and guessing values? I noticed a scale difference of about 3.06 when porting MB2 maps over for MB3 using an ASE compile.

Likely more useful for a map related shader, like a func_usable with a toggle based animmap change.

I always forced 4x MSAA in JKA since I had a Geforce 7800GS... of course I'm no longer on that, but my framerates were always fine, even on that old card when I had it. I wouldn't worry about it.

That's what happens when we're in feature lock. Least you don't have trailers to make XD

Hey guys, I wanted to give you an update on this. Release for MB2 is closing in, and there are still some issues with OpenJK working (There are some crashes while using it). Eezstreet isn't entirely sure what the cause could be (there could be a hook in cgame for all I know that what he did doesn't take care of, but I'm no coder). It is being looked into, slowly, but OpenJK support might have to come in a hotfix shortly after release to avoid delaying. Hopefully that won't be necessary, but if it is, please don't get too mad at us.

Okay, then the question is did you check what the others did? Defiant said he started code in the thread a few days ago but then got torn away, StormChaser said he also worked on it a little. There is no point having duplicate code across it. Either way, post in the OpenJK thread in dev, cause it doesn't seem like you posted to tell everyone . People stepping on eachothers toes is part of the issue why the code is so jumbled all over the place.

Thats when we switched to the HG. There is a backup hidden of previous versions. You might not specifically have access to it. The same happens for the map source as well in the beta SVN. Only certain people have access to that, it isn't a team permission.

There should be somewhere yes. The only part of MB2 we've had to remove from revision history is the physical SVN for all the assets (Code is separate) due to running out of disk space. So it should all be there. But there isn't much point in digging it up, doing that work, then testing to be sure its all proper when we want to hopefully release a new build this summer anyway. Easier to just do it on the current build to not take up limited time the beta testers have.

This is something that happens when people come on and off a project thats been going on so long. A lot of things are a mess in MB2's code related things. Even if something is simple for an outside project, it isn't quite the same for MB2 because of how much coding hands were traded off. I know you're just talking about some of the more basic things, but that still kinda applies. We start updating things to say a new version of VS, forget filters or whatever. Happens. MB2 isn't something any of us praise for having the most user friendly code base in the world. This stuff is something I'll be changing for the MB3 version. Rules and such so the code base will never get to a hard to manage state like MB2 is.

I'm not updating all of MB2s maps. That is just not gonna happen.