mrwonko

That's not how you change the playermodel. I'm not entirely sure how you do without causing any bugs though, especially not in JK2. The info_player_start in kejim_post targets a target_scriptrunner that executes scripts/kejim_post/kejim_start when the player spawns.

I take it that's a strange way of saying "added support for rendering demos to AVI as they're played"

textures/common/env_glass_security, I think. A quick look at the .bsp in a hexeditor helps.

No, thats in maps/t2_dpred.bsp - in the info_player_start, spawnflags 64 makes you start without weapons. Also, in scripts/t2_dpredicament/intro and intro_skip there's this: affect ( "player", /*@AFFECT_TYPE*/ FLUSH ) { set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_OBJECTIVE_SHOW", /*@OBJECTIVES*/ "T2_DPREDICAMENT_OBJ1" ); set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_WEAPON", /*@WEAPON_NAMES*/ "WP_NONE" ); }The second set() switches the weapon to none. That only makes you not have the saber selected at map start though.

The jetpack is removed via code in Multiplayer I believe. You can always do /give item_jetpack or whatever the cheat is to get one though. You could also rename the surface in the model.glm to prevent it from getting removed (the visuals, that is). Make sure to use a proper hex editor to not screw up the offsets though. (And make backups etc.)

You can't just change the .ibi files, but if you get the Jedi Academy SDK, that contains the source code and also the editor BehavED and the compiler IBIze which can create .ibi files.

You'll need Q3Map2. Then you can extract the entity list from the hoth2.bsp file, put that in a hoth2.map and use Q3Map2's -onlyents feature to update the BSP. Just changing the BSP directly will break it since the length will not be updated.

Although technically it was already possible via r_customheight/r_customwidth, you'd just need a widescreen hud mod...

You can't give the assets to other people for free for the same reason you can't upload that cool new Bioshock game for everybody to enjoy. It's not your property. Raven/Activision/Disney basically forfeited ownership of the source code, and only the source code. (And maybe the menu files and the stuff in ext_data.) There's always been a clause about mods somewhere - I can't find it right now - that states they may only run on the original game, which is why it was kinda okay-ish to upload modded game assets. If anything, this release makes all existing mods illegal.

No, that's a problem with 32 bit programs on Windows. You usally only get 2 GB of Ram, can trick your way to 3 GB and could in theory handle up to 4, anything above that is literally impossible. I've previously compiled a 64 bit version (provided you have a 64 bit operating system), though it's mostly untested. See here.

Yeah, this happens when you need more than 2GB of Ram for the compile. Sure -lomem crashed? It increases the compile time drastically.

They've been thinking about this for quite a while. In the chaos of the LucasArts firings they finally managed to get the green light. Utterly euphoric they quickly scooped up the first code they could find, zipped it up and uploaded it, glad to be making the community happy. Or that's how I picture it.

It works if the original is a misc_model_static or a model2 entry of an entity or something along those lines. You can't replace a misc_model, however, because they go straight to the .bsp. So yeah, the first step would be simply swapping it for another existing md3 to see if it can be changed at all.

Yeah, me too. Possibly for making legal double- and triple-check it to make sure there's nothing like Bink still in it before releasing it. This was a rather quick'n'dirty release.

It would help if you'd specify the modelling tool you're talking about.

My Blender plugin suite contains a GLM Importer and an MD3 Exporter. MD3View can do MD3 to GLM conversion if you don't need animations. https://jkhub.org/files/file/1413-blender-264-jedi-academy-plugin-suite/

It is redundant and thus discontinued.

Definitely back to EF, I already checked that. So if the worst happens we can probably count on the Free Software Foundation to back us up. Unless they actually had a different license for the code and just didn't change the files out of laziness (and lack of necessity, really). Still, let's wait for official word before taking action. For now, code away happily.

Okay, let me sum this up. You're saying a game has a hard time being profitable if you use an open source engine. I asked why, you started talking about piracy. I made the point that in that case DRM free games wouldn't make a profit either. You said yeah, they don't, unless you have an established following. I listed Super Meat Boy as an example of a DRM free game without a huge following (surely not everybody who played it played Meat Boy on Newgrounds?) that sold a lot. Now you're telling me you were never talking about DRM free games in the first place? So tell me, how is creating a new IP and selling it and being profitable using a GPL engine as Open Source any different from creating a new IP and selling it and being profitable using a closed source self-made engine without copy protection, as countless indies have done? Hell, I even have an example for you: Thirty Flights of Loving uses idTech 2 licensed under GPL and is subsequently open source, that still sells, right? So far, the only point you've made about why Open Source games specifically can't sell is ease of piracy, which applies just as much for DRM free games like Super Meat Boy or anything on gog.com. Your other arguments are just about selling games in general. Yes, selling a game is hard, but no harder if you use an open source engine, that's all I'm saying.

What, like Super Meat Boy? I'm telling you, piracy : purchase rates have nothing to do with the size of your fanbase. Yes, selling a new IP is often harder than an established one, but that's not because people are more likely to pirate it. That didn't work in the past on Linux? Yeah, it should work once we're done. That might happen in the future, yes. Personally, I'd like to investigate that further in a separate branch that abandons binary compatibility with old mods, but others have expressed interest in improving this in OpenJK.

Yeah, we're not quite sure what happened there yet. Raven is probably still figuring it out themselves. The main project, OpenJK, is here - that's basically the original code with various improvements. (Not quite ready yet, give it a couple of days.)

Copy protection is always hacked sooner or later anyway and from then on only hurts the paying customers. So your point is "don't make your game open source, it becomes too easy to pirate"? Then how come gog.com still exists if their DRM free games are so easily copied?

And right there you have one of the reasons you can sell GPL stuff. Assets. The main other one being support.

For the most part just like any other game. How is Doom 3 BFG marketed? It's open source after all.

Yes you can. This is GPL and that's all you need to know. And even ignoring that, the id Tech engine 3 is GPL as well, you're free to use that without licensing it as long as your code adheres to the GPL. No, if that were the case they would've removed it, like they removed the FeelIt and Bink stuff (eventually). You can create your own assets and sell the resulting game.