Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Alien Arena 2011 Game Released

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    That game just keeps getting better
    Although you now get no precomplied binary, the instructions make the whole thing a breeze.

    Comment


    • #17
      Alien Arena is legendary game. It has most heavy graphics from all opensource/freeware games at the moment. And its very beautiful, although too much alien )). On 4770/w opensource radeon driver, fullhd@32, Openarena gives me 60 fps. Alienarena with 15 is unplayable, so heavy it is. But when you use polished drivers(like proprietary nvidia, I had before, in gt9800 times) it was very fast and playable.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
        Alien Arena is legendary game. It has most heavy graphics from all opensource/freeware games at the moment. And its very beautiful, although too much alien )). On 4770/w opensource radeon driver, fullhd@32, Openarena gives me 60 fps. Alienarena with 15 is unplayable, so heavy it is. But when you use polished drivers(like proprietary nvidia, I had before, in gt9800 times) it was very fast and playable.
        Did you turn down graphic settings in the game?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by curaga View Post
          What's your preferred build system of the week?
          CMake's shaping up that way.

          Cmake - ya just time how long it takes to figure out how to set prefix and destdir
          -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=<foo>

          Not hard... This isn't to say that CMake's the answer for things- but it seems that it's a better one than many. And I'll challenge you to cobble together a CMake set over an autotools one for a new project. I've tried to do autotools setups- and fix them when they're broken. CMake actually seemed easier for my circumstances.

          Scons - impossible to pass custom PKG_CONFIG_PATH etc to the build. Also really hard to set prefix, destdir, etc. Also python, ewww.
          The python part's no different than m4/bash that autotools uses... I will give you the others, though- Scons is of somewhat limited usefulness if you're doing something "fancy". For that, CMake or autotools is better.

          Oh and if something breaks, it's a load harder to fix in the above two than in autotools.
          That's familiarity. autotools is a baroque answer to a problem that's just simply less screwy than imake was. More to the point, autotools is really only Linux/POSIX centric. It doesn't do well outside of that- and sadly, you DO have to deal with Windows for some things... (We won't get into the fact that autotools is two kludges on top of ./configure that were done to compensate for ./configure and Makefile deficiencies...)

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by curaga View Post
            Software doesn't come with an expiry date. The wheel, -9th century tech, still works great.
            Heh... But, the big deal is...you're not using that -9th century version of it, now are you? (Where's the stone or wooden wheels on your vehicle...hm?)

            CMake and Scons are not replacing/reinventing the wheel as your analogy implies, but more akin to the refinements we see with wheels such as you see on most cars or motorcycles.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
              CMake's shaping up that way.

              -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=<foo>

              Not hard... This isn't to say that CMake's the answer for things- but it seems that it's a better one than many. And I'll challenge you to cobble together a CMake set over an autotools one for a new project. I've tried to do autotools setups- and fix them when they're broken. CMake actually seemed easier for my circumstances.
              I was implying that CMake's documentation sucks
              It was rather hard for me to find those out when I built my first cmake-using package.

              Contrast this with ./configure --help, which is very clear to a newbie in comparison.

              Of course autotools has had a decade or two of refinement.


              FWIW, the easiest new-project setup for me has been qmake.

              That's familiarity. autotools is a baroque answer to a problem that's just simply less screwy than imake was. More to the point, autotools is really only Linux/POSIX centric. It doesn't do well outside of that- and sadly, you DO have to deal with Windows for some things... (We won't get into the fact that autotools is two kludges on top of ./configure that were done to compensate for ./configure and Makefile deficiencies...)
              Do you mean building on Windows? I'd rather avoid doing that, and just cross-compile from my linux box. So far I've managed to avoid it, and things have worked fairly well.

              Comment


              • #22
                Builds for me as-is, but doesn't start. Craps out with some media files not found, probably some path variables not set. That could really use some improvement.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                  It's almost 2011, would you please stop using autotools?
                  (and other autotools related posts)

                  For a detailed defense for using autotools, see Autotools, by John Calcote. But, briefly, from the preface, page xix: The primary purpose of the Autotools is to make life simpler for the end user (i.e. not the programmer.) For Alien Arena, a major goal was to improve our Linux builds for distro package maintainers (who, in my book, are unsung heroes.) It is no big news, I have discovered, that no developers really like Autotools all that much. It would be great for GNU and the rest of the Open Source Community to adopt easier to use build tools. But, I am pretty sure, Alien Arena is not going to be a leader in that cause.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by dfblogic View Post
                    a major goal was to improve our Linux builds for distro package maintainers (who, in my book, are unsung heroes.)
                    Package maintainers for deb and rpm can handle scons and cmake with very few problems. They usually know what they are doing.

                    It would be great for GNU and the rest of the Open Source Community to adopt easier to use build tools. But, I am pretty sure, Alien Arena is not going to be a leader in that cause.
                    Few non-gnu projects are using autotools, and for good reason. Who wants to learn five different archaic scripting languages that are poorly documented just to build something when one language works just fine?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Well the difficulty of implementing AutoTools in Alien Arena is a moot point - the work is done already.

                      So far the majority of our end users have felt that it has made life a lot easier for them to get the game running, which was the ultimate goal.

                      This is kind of getting a bit off topic anyway.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by curaga View Post
                        I was implying that CMake's documentation sucks
                        It was rather hard for me to find those out when I built my first cmake-using package.

                        Contrast this with ./configure --help, which is very clear to a newbie in comparison.

                        Of course autotools has had a decade or two of refinement.
                        Heh... If it's had a decade or two... Then why is it so convoluted to set up and when it breaks, why is it so convoluted to fix (seriously...it is...)


                        Do you mean building on Windows? I'd rather avoid doing that, and just cross-compile from my linux box. So far I've managed to avoid it, and things have worked fairly well.
                        Considering that autotools doesn't help you there either...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Irritant View Post
                          Well the difficulty of implementing AutoTools in Alien Arena is a moot point - the work is done already.

                          So far the majority of our end users have felt that it has made life a lot easier for them to get the game running, which was the ultimate goal.

                          This is kind of getting a bit off topic anyway.
                          You're a regular...you know some of these discussions go off into left field...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                            You're a regular...you know some of these discussions go off into left field...
                            Left field? That's a mild understatement.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              It's the offtopic threads that are the most interesting usually. :P

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Irritant View Post
                                This is kind of getting a bit off topic anyway.
                                Being honest about Autotools is never off topic.

                                Merry Christmas.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X