Is Creating custom client that hard?

I am so interested to figure this out because if i get the answers i am looking for i can challenge my self one day to start this project.

like to recreate to whole client, what is the top important things to be change?

i know that the engine can stay since its 2.5 d and if the information i have its c3 engine? and let me know if everyone is allow to use this.

but the whole items and everything need to be rebuild. same with maps and music monsters etc etc.

remove the conquer.exe and everything holds in it. and re wright it.

that's all i know that its important to change,

do you guys have anything else i should think to change?

You went a bit off topic with your question. You went from "how easy is it to create a custom client" to "what should I change". I do not think you are anywhere near creating a custom client, given your very limited experience with Conquer Online programming and anything related to game programming. If you think I'm incorrect, that's fine - you can try looking at the public Eudemons client source. It's written in VC++ 6 and DirectX 8.1. Hopefully you have experience with both (if you want to remake it perfectly, which I don't think is a good idea).

all i am trying to do atm is collect as much as information its possible.
Agree i am not ready to make custom client. it takes artists good programming and few other stuff.

my question is if i want to make a client is there anything in co i can keep?

for example you said the c3 engine is public engine does that mean i can use that?

i want answers like that.

Look into XNA/Monogame. Im writing a 2D RPG atm. Has nothing to do with conquer but yeaah... If you want my engine, i might be willing to share it.

sure if anyone point you think you can share it will be nice having something to learn from.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordGragen. all i am trying to do atm is collect as much as information its possible. Agree i am not ready to make custom client. it takes artists good programming and few other stuff. my question is if i want to make a client is there anything in co i can keep? for example you said the c3 engine is public engine does that mean i can use that? i want answers like that.

Well, sure. c3 is public - it's an old engine that is now available to download (if you know where to find it). The company that made it might have licensing for it, but that's fine because you should only use it as a reference. c3 uses DirectX. What you want to be using is OpenGL. If you really are serious about making a new client, you need to be able to understand VC++ and the DirectX 8.1 SDK, understand most things required for networking in the client, and be able to write a game in OpenGL (QT C++ MinGW / G++ would be best). I strongly recommend not attempting a project like this until you know how to make a game in OpenGL, and know how to write a server for Conquer Online using their cipher algorithms, packet structures, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y u k i Look into XNA/Monogame. Im writing a 2D RPG atm. Has nothing to do with conquer but yeaah... If you want my engine, i might be willing to share it.

No XNA. It's dead. No more. The industry doesn't use it, Microsoft doesn't use it, and neither should you. It is done as of 2 versions of Visual Studio ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spirited Fang Well, sure. c3 is public - it's an old engine that is now available to download (if you know where to find it). The company that made it might have licensing for it, but that's fine because you should only use it as a reference. c3 uses DirectX. What you want to be using is OpenGL. If you really are serious about making a new client, you need to be able to understand VC++ and the DirectX 8.1 SDK, understand most things required for networking in the client, and be able to write a game in OpenGL (QT C++ MinGW / G++ would be best). I strongly recommend not attempting a project like this until you know how to make a game in OpenGL, and know how to write a server for Conquer Online using their cipher algorithms, packet structures, etc. No XNA. It's dead. No more. The industry doesn't use it, Microsoft doesn't use it, and neither should you. It is done as of 2 versions of Visual Studio ago.

MONOGAME! READ!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y u k i MONOGAME! READ!

Open source 3rd party support for a dead engine is not much of an improvement.

I really liked XNA personally as it provided a really nice, easy to understand framework to simplify and standardize the process of creating a game (and cross platform compatibility was definitely nice!) but it's dead...

Not much reason to develop in it when you could either

A: Learn Unity which is becoming a huge driving force in game design, prototyping and even some professional development
B: Use a standard existing engine (such as UDK although they are quickly being replaced by unity)
C: Use a standard graphics library such as openGL or direct X and write your own engine for your game.


Again... I liked XNA but not much reason to bother anymore.

<edit>

to clarify... monogame is 'fine' but still pretty undervalued and isn't going to be all that useful if your goal is to gain experience in the industry nor is it all that valuable for rapid prototyping... which is pretty much the only reason someone would be writing their own game in the current marketplace.

It's just so massively outshined by the current unity 'flavor of the year'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pro4never Open source 3rd party support for a dead engine is not much of an improvement. I really liked XNA personally as it provided a really nice, easy to understand framework to simplify and standardize the process of creating a game (and cross platform compatibility was definitely nice!) but it's dead... Not much reason to develop in it when you could either A: Learn Unity which is becoming a huge driving force in game design, prototyping and even some professional development B: Use a standard existing engine (such as UDK although they are quickly being replaced by unity) C: Use a standard graphics library such as openGL or direct X and write your own engine for your game. Again... I liked XNA but not much reason to bother anymore. <edit> to clarify... monogame is 'fine' but still pretty undervalued and isn't going to be all that useful if your goal is to gain experience in the industry nor is it all that valuable for rapid prototyping... which is pretty much the only reason someone would be writing their own game in the current marketplace. It's just so massively outshined by the current unity 'flavor of the year'.

XNA is not a engine, its a framework as far as i know. Also, the licensing could get expensive if you are using udk/cryengine/unity XNA is free. I dont really like all those "editors", no offense. Monogame is far from dead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Y u k i XNA is not a engine, its a framework as far as i know. Also, the licensing could get expensive if you are using udk/cryengine/unity XNA is free. I dont really like all those "editors", no offense. Monogame is far from dead.

XNA is indeed a framework and monogame definitely has it's uses. I'm not trying to make the argument that no one should use it but in the current market there's two or three types of projects.

#1: Educational projects. These are used to gain 'on the job' experience and help yourself provide a portfolio. Usually casual games, mods or prototypes of games you want to design. In this case you generally go with commercial engines you'd use in the field (udk, unity, etc) or you'd use well established frameworks (opengl, directx, etc)

#2: Indie games/Game Prototypes. Taking an idea and making something marketable using it is a big thing right now and this is where Unity is currently king. You can rapidly prototype using plugins written by yourself, open source contributers or purchased on the unity marketplace. When done properly you can easily translate these into larger scale projects as I know a number of larger studios are starting to do.


Again, not saying 'you're wrong' but just pointing out that learning monogame currently just doesn't hold much use for the average student or entry level programmer. It's awesome and I love me some XNA but if you're viewing it from one of those two standpoints (which I'd argue that most people are) then there are usually better options.


Don't let anyone discourage you though! Do what you wish and make something really awesome. Just trying to give some extra info for the OP who might have further questions ^^

Quote:

Originally Posted by pro4never XNA is indeed a framework and monogame definitely has it's uses. I'm not trying to make the argument that no one should use it but in the current market there's two or three types of projects. #1: Educational projects. These are used to gain 'on the job' experience and help yourself provide a portfolio. Usually casual games, mods or prototypes of games you want to design. In this case you generally go with commercial engines you'd use in the field (udk, unity, etc) or you'd use well established frameworks (opengl, directx, etc) #2: Indie games/Game Prototypes. Taking an idea and making something marketable using it is a big thing right now and this is where Unity is currently king. You can rapidly prototype using plugins written by yourself, open source contributers or purchased on the unity marketplace. When done properly you can easily translate these into larger scale projects as I know a number of larger studios are starting to do. Again, not saying 'you're wrong' but just pointing out that learning monogame currently just doesn't hold much use for the average student or entry level programmer. It's awesome and I love me some XNA but if you're viewing it from one of those two standpoints (which I'd argue that most people are) then there are usually better options. Don't let anyone discourage you though! Do what you wish and make something really awesome. Just trying to give some extra info for the OP who might have further questions ^^

My apologies. I didnt see that aspect since it was of no concern to me. I posted a biased post indeed. I for myselfe dont want to work on stuff others created, I like to know everything inside my engine, not bothering with a 3rd party engine and writing plugins for that foreign environment. For me, that would take more work and in the end I could say Yes! I know how to work with unity, but I have no clue on how to acctually write a game engine.

That wouldnt be enough for me. I want to achieve the full goal. Starting with Monogame, then moving on to some direct managed DX/GL

ib4 learn c++...

I'm sorry to disagree, but I do discourage you from using XNA. Correct me if I'm wrong, but XNA does not help you gain any valuable work experience with game development. You're using a completely managed framework with a completely managed game engine and completely managed inputs, outputs, painting, updating, etc. All you're doing is adding on top of their design. It does everything for you - which is why it's easy and why some people use it at first. It does not give you experience designing the game engine because it is already predefined for you. If you're doing this just for fun and don't want to be a game developer, that's fine, but be aware that this is not experience. Talking with higher up game companies in the United States, they say that they won't even consider XNA as experience. They completely disregard it. UC Irvine's computer game science department and club on campus disallows students from using XNA. Again, I strongly discourage you from using XNA. It is dead for a reason. I do encourage you to look into OpenGL or another industry standard game library (one that will actually give you experience designing a game engine).

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]

assimp is good with c++ if you like to try it out

Seriously, Gragen asked for help I didnt.

I´m sorry but you cant change my mind about it.

"I do encourage you to look into OpenGL or another industry standard game library"

I said thats my next goal.

"UC Irvine's computer game science department and club on campus disallows students from using XNA"

That does apply to me because..?

"Talking with higher up game companies in the United States, they say that they won't even consider XNA as experience"

Again, how does that apply to me?

"If you're doing this just for fun and don't want to be a game developer, that's fine, but be aware that this is not experience"

Well If i manage to get a game released I´m technically a indie game developer. Also, you cant know if I can learn something from that or not, because I can assure you I could and still can.

"It does not give you experience designing the game engine because it is already predefined for you."

Yes it does, you still gotta write the engine. All thats here is the managed functions for hardware access and some predefined classes for lets say Rectangels and Vectors - Wow. you act like XNA contains everything you need for a game. But yeah, I agree that the hardware near programming would be the most challenging thing.

" It does everything for you - which is why it's easy and why some people use it at first."

No, not even near everything. But Its easy and you´re right, thats why I started using it.

" You're using a completely managed framework with a completely managed game engine and completely managed inputs, outputs, painting, updating, etc. All you're doing is adding on top of their design."

I give that to you, besides that Its not an engine. As I said, managed classes for hardware access.


"Correct me if I'm wrong, but XNA does not help you gain any valuable work experience with game development."

Depends on what you know. I never had the chance to go to a university. I know litterlay nothing about geometry wich is very very vital in game dev.
Learning everything you need and then applying it gives you, wait lets better say me or you will start another argument, expirience.


"I'm sorry to disagree, but I do strongly discourage you from using XNA."

You are not in the position to discourage anyone of anything.


--


This post really pissed me off fang. Its like the post of mine where I let out the things P4N mentioned. My opinion was biased based on my own mindset.

Im glad im not the only one who does that tho.

Yuki, nothing of what I said was directed at you in the slightest. I'm simply stating my experiences in the hopes of convincing others into using more standard game libraries. I highly doubt that me sharing the opinion of many high end game companies and universities is "biased based on my own mindset", but either way, it's just advice after all. You can use XNA if you truly want to, just don't expect to use it as game programming experience (that's all I was saying above).