Discussion L2J Projects: No source is a dead-end

[Trance]

2 hours ago, Dragic said:

Just let the people do whatever they want..

 

There is good projects out there without source which their authors update them and of course some people have the knowledge to work in compiled projects making an extensions or even modify the compiled jars.

Russian speakers in this community have a tendency to be sarcastic and egotistic. Does having hundreds of open tickets make a project good for you?

[Tryskell]

33 minutes ago, Trance said:

Russian speakers in this community have a tendency to be sarcastic and egotistic. Does having hundreds of open tickets make a project good for you?

 

aCis got ~150 opened tickets for 1025 archived (which is ~85 per year). Amount of tickets doesn't mean a lot, it's vastly influenced by the amount of reports you got, the team's dedication to filter reports (clones, invalid), etc.

 

It's sure if you got like 500+ tickets, you probably better should stop your project or recruit paid ppl.

 

The maximum aCis had was something like 350 - that was just after the release of the buggiest aCis revision, which is, in date, 389/390.

[Trance]

11 minutes ago, Tryskell said:

 

aCis got ~150 opened tickets for 1025 archived (which is ~85 per year). Amount of tickets doesn't mean a lot, it's vastly influenced by the amount of reports you got, the team's dedication to filter reports (clones, invalid), etc.

 

It's sure if you got like 500+ tickets, you probably better should stop your project or recruit paid ppl.

 

The maximum aCis had was something like 350 - that was just after the release of the buggiest aCis revision, which is, in date, 389/390.

Those are pretty good numbers. Now imagine the struggle of server developers using aCis if they had no source and you would be the only contributor.

[An4rchy]

There's not many choices of projects to choose from to be honest, therefore people will go for the most complete/playable project there is at the given time. Currently, that is lucera, that's why its being heard everywhere. Please note I'm only talking about Interlude versions, I don't know lucera's state of newer chronicles.

 

Lucera has been battle-tested in numerous servers with high population too and as far as I know there's no missing features in the pack. I'm not saying everything works as it should (according to retail Interlude), but it's a playable version.

 

I always have been and will be supporting aCis as the best choice for someone who has budget and developers, simply because of the community of the project and the amazing work Tryskell and contributors have done over the years, along with the pack's simplicity/customless model which is great to work on.

However there's still work in progress on aCis regarding some missing features like Fortress sieges or some AI scripts (which are being worked in privately as far as I'm aware), therefore, if you keep in mind that almost all community left on interlude is focused on mid rate or low rate servers, it's much harder to find testers for the pack simply because people won't choose it. The only servers that disregard such features are PvP/Faction or highly customized servers which are very rare nowadays to nonexistent, and the ones still opening use the files they've been using for the past 10 years and own't update to latest versions.

 

aCis will be top project pretty soon to be honest, once AI scripts are finished I'm pretty sure it's gonna be the first choice for most new projects.

[Tryskell]

4 hours ago, Trance said:

Those are pretty good numbers. Now imagine the struggle of server developers using aCis if they had no source and you would be the only contributor.

 

People wouldn't use aCis as much as they do, and there wouldn't have "that much" custom shares regarding aCis if that was the case.

 

I wouldn't recommend my own pack if sources weren't available, period. No source makes the customization ecosystem pretty much dead. Even if I personally never cared about customization, denying it from ppl is stupid.

 

Still, that's not to you to decide which is good or bad for people. As I already said, you have to promote packs doing good. People KNOW what they are paying for. It's not a "scam", it's just terrible practice, and that terrible practice is rewarded by people who buy and promote that behavior.

 

If you want it to stop, stop using those packs, drop related topics and stop speaking about them. In reverse, help packs "playing the game" as much as you can. It's as simple as that.

5 minutes ago, An4rchy said:

There's not many choices of projects to choose from to be honest, therefore people will go for the most complete/playable project there is at the given time. Currently, that is lucera, that's why its being heard everywhere. Please note I'm only talking about Interlude versions, I don't know lucera's state of newer chronicles.

 

Lucera has been battle-tested in numerous servers with high population too and as far as I know there's no missing features in the pack. I'm not saying everything works as it should (according to retail Interlude), but it's a playable version.

 

I always have been and will be supporting aCis as the best choice for someone who has budget and developers, simply because of the community of the project and the amazing work Tryskell and contributors have done over the years, along with the pack's simplicity/customless model which is great to work on.

However there's still work in progress on aCis regarding some missing features like Fortress sieges or some AI scripts (which are being worked in privately as far as I'm aware), therefore, if you keep in mind that almost all community left on interlude is focused on mid rate or low rate servers, it's much harder to find testers for the pack simply because people won't choose it. The only servers that disregard such features are PvP/Faction or highly customized servers which are very rare nowadays to nonexistent, and the ones still opening use the files they've been using for the past 10 years and own't update to latest versions.

 

aCis will be top project pretty soon to be honest, once AI scripts are finished I'm pretty sure it's gonna be the first choice for most new projects.

 

The main problem with that behavior is than you "wait" it becomes better.

 

If all of you "waiters" were actually picking a pack and helping the dude, I'm sure no matter the pack you choose, it would be already ended.

 

Getting a dirty Frintezza and getting no clue what is actually done core-side to make it working doesn't mean your pack is ok to be used. Copying-pasting L2Free 2007 scripts folder (and yes, there are a lot of those copy pastes) doesn't make your pack good, while you got strictly no clue how it's supposed to work.

 

If your point is only to get a playable server, picking such content and agglomerating it on aCis will still be a better pack.

 

There is no fortresses on IL, btw. If you saw it on an IL server, it's completely custom. If you speak about SCHs, 3/6 were perfectly working before AI rework, now they have to be redone.

 

[Trance]

55 minutes ago, Tryskell said:

 

People wouldn't use aCis as much as they do, and there wouldn't have "that much" custom shares regarding aCis if that was the case.

 

I wouldn't recommend my own pack if sources weren't available, period. No source makes the customization ecosystem pretty much dead. Even if I personally never cared about customization, denying it from ppl is stupid.

 

Still, that's not to you to decide which is good or bad for people. As I already said, you have to promote packs doing good. People KNOW what they are paying for. It's not a "scam", it's just terrible practice, and that terrible practice is rewarded by people who buy and promote that behavior.

 

If you want it to stop, stop using those packs, drop related topics and stop speaking about them. In reverse, help packs "playing the game" as much as you can. It's as simple as that.

 

The main problem with that behavior is than you "wait" it becomes better.

 

If all of you "waiters" were actually picking a pack and helping the dude, I'm sure no matter the pack you choose, it would be already ended.

 

Getting a dirty Frintezza and getting no clue what is actually done core-side to make it working doesn't mean your pack is ok to be used. Copying-pasting L2Free 2007 scripts folder (and yes, there are a lot of those copy pastes) doesn't make your pack good, while you got strictly no clue how it's supposed to work.

 

If your point is only to get a playable server, picking such content and agglomerating it on aCis will still be a better pack.

 

There is no fortresses on IL, btw. If you saw it on an IL server, it's completely custom. If you speak about SCHs, 3/6 were perfectly working before AI rework, now they have to be redone.

 

In my previous comment, I was talking about a situation where you don't give someone the source code. Hypothetically speaking.
 

Most people prefer using a finished product and don't like to help with its development. I also admit that I can be lazy when it comes to doing things that I find boring. But when it comes to aCis, developers enjoy using it, even if it's not yet complete. They like the way it's written and organized.

 

I'm worried that by the time aCis is ready to use, fewer people will be interested in it. Right now, everyone wants to use the Classic or Essence client.  You should think about making a new version of aCis that uses the Interlude data, so that people who like that version can still use it. This will attract even more people towards aCis.

[Tryskell]

2 hours ago, Trance said:

In my previous comment, I was talking about a situation where you don't give someone the source code. Hypothetically speaking.
 

Most people prefer using a finished product and don't like to help with its development. I also admit that I can be lazy when it comes to doing things that I find boring. But when it comes to aCis, developers enjoy using it, even if it's not yet complete. They like the way it's written and organized.

 

I'm worried that by the time aCis is ready to use, fewer people will be interested in it. Right now, everyone wants to use the Classic or Essence client.  You should think about making a new version of aCis that uses the Interlude data, so that people who like that version can still use it. This will attract even more people towards aCis.

 

You already know my position about it.

 

If I manage to end IL, I will eventually move to other chronicles. There is no use to split between chronicles for now, it's a waste of time and would lock me in eventual reworks (which I would have to reproduce X times per X maintained chronicles).

 

IL is my priority, it's my main chronicle. I don't care what players want, or even worst, server admins who "wait". The point of an emulator is to emulate, if you build a gameboy emulator, that's not to have a gameboy advance.

 

Moving to a chronicle is an easy cake, given the fact you got the data.  Downgrading to C1/C4 would be actually easy. Moreover if someone did the packet opcodes/structure for you. Some ppl moved aCis to HB, some others to Freya,... Really, it's not hard. Just time consuming, and probably far lesser than whatever I did so far.

 

Data is generally the annoying part.

[xZEUSx]

On 4/8/2023 at 5:26 AM, Dragic said:

Just let the people do whatever they want..

 

There is good projects out there without source which their authors update them and of course some people have the knowledge to work in compiled projects making an extensions or even modify the compiled jars.

This is stupid advice.

1. What if "author" dies?

2. What if "author" stops responding/updating your files? "Author" has no motivation to continue fixes/updates since he already has your money. Only more money will work. MAYBE...

3. Admin needs to rely on "author" for fixes and updates when "author" feels like doing them = Admin is a slave to "author".

Only a pack with source puts Admin in total control of his own server. Not what this fool is saying.

 

Edited April 9, 2023 by xZEUSx

[An4rchy]

On 4/8/2023 at 9:35 PM, Tryskell said:

The main problem with that behavior is than you "wait" it becomes better.

 

If all of you "waiters" were actually picking a pack and helping the dude, I'm sure no matter the pack you choose, it would be already ended.

Idk what you expect really, people to just login and start playing on a test server to test until the pack is done? It's just not possible. Most people are in the l2j business to open a server, and most of them really won't choose a project over another that has less issues.

 

I'm a 'waiter' because my time is limited and l2 is more of a hobby/side-job for me. Therefore the little time that I can spend on l2, I prefer to spend it working on my server's features. It's like having a bicycle with no pedals and asking people to ride it until it's complete. Unless you include the pedals, noone will ride it. Unless you include every feature (even if incomplete/wrong), how do you expect people to open servers with aCis and assist you by reporting/fixing themselves?

 

I support aCis and I've contributed in the past, even if my contributions were minimal. But that was back when I was in school and I could afford to work for the shake of learning. But if I were you the first priority would be to provide a public, playable version of the pack with known issues/missing features hot-fixed/added and work on refactoring/reworking in private. At least this way people would choose aCis to open a server and reports for you would be 2x or even 3x what they currently are. Noone wants to use lucera, trust me, but it's the only viable option currently.

 

Perhaps I'm mistaken though, not everyone thinks alike. Maybe you got a roadmap planned ahead that's more effective than the one I proposed. Either way I would be the first to use aCis if a playable state is released, as I've done in the past with L2Eola (was pvp server).

 

Sorry for off-topic btw.

Edited April 10, 2023 by An4rchy

[BruT]

no source is not dead-end because its not even an option for serious servers. I cant even imagine whats gonna happen if someone find a glitch or bug.

Edited April 10, 2023 by BruT

[Dragic]

On 4/9/2023 at 8:13 PM, xZEUSx said:

This is stupid advice.

1. What if "author" dies?

2. What if "author" stops responding/updating your files? "Author" has no motivation to continue fixes/updates since he already has your money. Only more money will work. MAYBE...

3. Admin needs to rely on "author" for fixes and updates when "author" feels like doing them = Admin is a slave to "author".

Only a pack with source puts Admin in total control of his own server. Not what this fool is saying.

 

 

Επειδη μαλλον εισαι τυφλος ξανα διαβασε τι γραφω, αν δεν βγαζεις νοημα καντο translate..

 

Αν εχεις της απαραιτητες γνωσεις γραφεις παντου ακομα και σε compiled projects τωρα τι ζορι τραβατε εσεις για το αν θα αγορασει ο κοσμος compiled project η source δεν το καταλαβαινω ο καθενας ας κανει οτι νομιζει..

 

Τωρα για το "stupid advice" δεν θα σου απαντησω δεν σε ξερω καν ποιος εισαι και ουτε με νοιαζει κιολας.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Dragic

[Tryskell]

10 hours ago, An4rchy said:

Idk what you expect really, people to just login and start playing on a test server to test until the pack is done? It's just not possible. Most people are in the l2j business to open a server, and most of them really won't choose a project over another that has less issues.

 

I'm a 'waiter' because my time is limited and l2 is more of a hobby/side-job for me. Therefore the little time that I can spend on l2, I prefer to spend it working on my server's features. It's like having a bicycle with no pedals and asking people to ride it until it's complete. Unless you include the pedals, noone will ride it. Unless you include every feature (even if incomplete/wrong), how do you expect people to open servers with aCis and assist you by reporting/fixing themselves?

 

I support aCis and I've contributed in the past, even if my contributions were minimal. But that was back when I was in school and I could afford to work for the shake of learning. But if I were you the first priority would be to provide a public, playable version of the pack with known issues/missing features hot-fixed/added and work on refactoring/reworking in private. At least this way people would choose aCis to open a server and reports for you would be 2x or even 3x what they currently are. Noone wants to use lucera, trust me, but it's the only viable option currently.

 

Perhaps I'm mistaken though, not everyone thinks alike. Maybe you got a roadmap planned ahead that's more effective than the one I proposed. Either way I would be the first to use aCis if a playable state is released, as I've done in the past with L2Eola (was pvp server).

 

Sorry for off-topic btw.

 

It's pointless to add pedals if the supposed "bicycle" isn't a bicycle to begin with. You can add as much pedals as you want, a plane with pedals won't do a lot. If you're fooled by dirty fixes, well, good for you. You're not my main target.

 

"Real" helpers are the one who followed aCis in its darkest moments and continued to support it afterwards :

• When skills were entirely deleted and replaced by GF and H5 version (2011)
• When quests were entirely deleted and replaced by Java self made version (2012)
• When 385-391 cycle was fully buggy, and people continued to report (90 related issues were fixed in 1 year)
• When I had the idea to implement Desire system, and one crazy dude jumped into the hellhole with me (and actually carry me)

I got my own inner roadmap on my head, and it follows its way. Each cycle got a general direction, btw.

 

Simply "wait" the princess being saved, and hope than in the end, the king is kind enough.

 

Also, explain me why I would make an open-source project if it's already playable ? What's the point, to begin with ? Make you rich while wasting my time ? I address myself to developers, not greedy admin servers.

[An4rchy]

12 hours ago, Tryskell said:

It's pointless to add pedals if the supposed "bicycle" isn't a bicycle to begin with. You can add as much pedals as you want, a plane with pedals won't do a lot. If you're fooled by dirty fixes, well, good for you. You're not my main target.

You're overexaggerating to prove a point, that's fine. But again, this all comes down to personal goals. I'm not here to complete Interlude, I'm here to make successful servers. I'll choose the easiest and best path towards this goal. You're here for the shake of aCis and not for the shake of a server you wanna open, therefore you can take your time to finish the project with people that share similar ideas. But you can't expect admins to jump on the 2-3-X year-long development wagon, not unless there's something in it for them (and it has to be in the short-term, L2 is already pretty much dead).

 

12 hours ago, Tryskell said:

"Real" helpers are the one who followed aCis in its darkest moments and continued to support it afterwards :

• When skills were entirely deleted and replaced by GF and H5 version (2011)
• When quests were entirely deleted and replaced by Java self made version (2012)
• When 385-391 cycle was fully buggy, and people continued to report (90 related issues were fixed in 1 year)
• When I had the idea to implement Desire system, and one crazy dude jumped into the hellhole with me (and actually carry me)

I don't understand the point you wanna make here, if you said this because I mentioned that I've made small contributions in the past, you misunderstood the point I wanted to make. I never said I'm a 'real' helper. I said I support aCis because I like the roadmap and the general idea, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'll use it. I'll still help with whatever I can whenever I can though because I'd like to see it complete, but I just don't find interest/can't afford to work on a project for the shake of working on a project, it's not my goal.

 

12 hours ago, Tryskell said:

Also, explain me why I would make an open-source project if it's already playable ? What's the point, to begin with ? Make you rich while wasting my time ? I address myself to developers, not greedy admin servers.

The problem is that any released open-source project/software is never released in an unplayable/unusable version. Unreal Engine is open-source, but did you see them release half the engine and expecting people to test this half in order to complete the other? Please don't misinterpret this, I'm not trying to be aggressive towards you as I understand the work you've done and will do is already too much for 1 person to manage and it's impressive. But you can't expect admins/players to test for the shake of development, it just doesn't work like that. If you ever want to attract actual play-testers you need to provide some incentive, that being a playable/complete version for a low-rate server on aCis.

 

Also I wouldn't call aCis an open-source project. The model you have (which isn't really open-source) is even better than open-source. An admin that wants to use the project has to pay for the latest revision (if he's serious) and to receive support and updates from you. That means you get some income to uphold the project's site and maybe pay its developers / yourself from time to time. On top of that, you release older versions for free which means there will be more people using it aka testing. But it's not called open-source.

[Tryskell]

The public sources are open source, it's not because there is a private, more advanced version it makes the first statement wrong. Public sources are shared without any specific rules - except the basic one to don't be a faggot.

 

As I already told you, I don't need testers at this point - and testers is the easiest things to get.

 

You complain about slow dev, I tell you I need devs - you tell me it needs to be ended to get some help/report, I tell you it then has to be slow. You tell me I will miss an opportunity with Classic, I tell you it's a waste of time to split between 2 projects (and so, get 2 very slow projects instead of 1 slow project).

 

It's a neverending circle - let's stop from here ;).

Edited April 13, 2023 by Tryskell

[An4rchy]

14 hours ago, Tryskell said:

The public sources are open source, it's not because there is a private, more advanced version it makes the first statement wrong. Public sources are shared without any specific rules - except the basic one to don't be a faggot.

As I said, anyone serious will never consider an outdated version, unless you say it's stable and more preferable than the latest version.

 

14 hours ago, Tryskell said:

You complain about slow dev, I tell you I need devs - you tell me it needs to be ended to get some help/report, I tell you it then has to be slow.

I never complained about anything. This conversation started after I replied because you said:

  

On 4/8/2023 at 3:30 PM, Tryskell said:

Instead, try to promote/endorse packs which go the correct way.

 

Which I found false, not because aCis is not going the correct way, but because like I said you can't promote or endorse something that's not suitable for a live server. I'm sure that it will get there, but in the meantime you can't expect devs/admins to use it for the shake of completing it. (Basically repeating what I said on last post)

 

Regarding Classic, I don't mean you should implement Classic gameplay, what I meant was to edit the packets so that aCis server is playable on a newer client, since most admins (maybe all nowadays) that open servers will choose classic client with interlude server, but 1/10 of them can actually do it themselves.

 

Anyways, I understand your PoV since you've spent years on aCis. So I'll stop here, have a good one