UTPG email

[Rawplayer]

I have emailed with utpg and i asked them what the status of the utpg patch is.
I also got a reply back. So i thought lets share it with the rest of the ut freaks.

Originally Posted by UTPG

Believe it or not, yes... It's just a very slow process and several of the guys are split doing work on other projects as well. We are still looking though.

[Graffix]

I have emailed with utpg and i asked them what the status of the utpg patch is.
I also got a reply back. So i thought lets share it with the rest of the ut freaks.

[SOCAMX]

Forget that Linux patch, Mac users need the most help here. I really hopy Ryan Gordon pulls through with a nice Mac OS X patch. This beta stuff is getting annoying fast.

[SixtSense]

Originally Posted by SOCAMX

Forget that Linux patch, Mac users need the most help here. I really hopy Ryan Gordon pulls through with a nice Mac OS X patch. This beta stuff is getting annoying fast.

LoL Linux is the future not MAC

[heavyboots]

Actually, isn't Ryan doing work on both linux and mac versions? I know he's responsible for the UT2k4 commercial linux version as well as the mac one anyway.

If you go to icculus.org, he updates his finger file a couple times a month usually. Apparently he's having fun trying to deal with UT's rather ancient engine this week. This is from this Tues 18th, no less:

UTPG:
(It was a driver bug. An Apple engineer squashed that mofo in a heartbeat.)

I spent some time fighting with vertex_array_range. We don't cache static data at all in UT99 at this point, so I figured the brute force method would be worth a try. Allocate a big-ass buffer, point glVertexPointer() at it, and treat it as a sort of push buffer...instead of using a small range and pushing various bits of it to card, we do our work in that range and memcpy the relevant bits to the next bit of available VAR space, which is feed to the card. When we hit the end of the VAR, we start at the front again, assuming that that bit was used many many frames ago. If we were really smart, we'd flush the range when wrapping around, but that could only result in a slowdown, and is totally worthless, as long as you have enough VAR space to stay ahead of the GL.

In practice, this actually resulted in a slight (less than 1fps) slowdown in my benchmarks. Which frustrates me to no end. I guess there are no magic bullet GL extensions without significant work, although I really feel like I spent a lot of time on this for no benefit.

I think for now I'll just disable the VAR path and focus on CPU optimizations ala Shark before returning to this again. I'm really not relishing the idea of diving into 5-year-old code to figure out how to seperate out the static geometry and redesign the rendering abstraction to support this.

[elmuerte]

afaik the old Mac port of UT was lost, so Ryan had to fork the linux code to MacOSX (since it's also a Posix system it's not that much extra work) and that any mac gamer still uses MacOS 9
Apperently there where quite some bugs in the client side for the linux\macosx that where not so critical for linux, but where critical for macosx.
anyway, to my knowledge the linux\macosx client+server is holding back the new UTPG patch. And they need those ports (or at least the linux port) because the new server isn't network compatible with old clients (because of the MD5 checks ofcourse).

[Azura]

Originally Posted by SixtSense

LoL Linux is the future not MAC

MacOS X is Linux, or rather it's BSD Unix so it should be less of a hassle to port UT to OS X than OS 9 or the "yellow" compatibility box.

[AnthraX]

I don't really understand why they just keep working on that mac patch. The amount of UT players with a mac is minimal + I think they all have decent pc's too. Besides, a mac isn't made for gaming. A linux patch is required but a mac patch is not imo. Anyway, I hope they keep working on it cause there's quite some stuff to fix

[Rush]

I just hope that they're working in reducing Linux version's CPU usage ....

[elmuerte]

Originally Posted by AnthraX

I don't really understand why they just keep working on that mac patch. The amount of UT players with a mac is minimal + I think they all have decent pc's too. Besides, a mac isn't made for gaming. A linux patch is required but a mac patch is not imo. Anyway, I hope they keep working on it cause there's quite some stuff to fix

Because the extra work for MacOSX support is rather minimal. And like I said, the MacOSX port showed some issues that also existed on the linux port but wheren't visible.

Also, a PC wasn't made for gaming either. And there are not a lot of linux gamers. That doesn't mean you should port your game. That way we'll never get support for additional platforms. (and get back some freedom)

[AnthraX]

oh, last I heard was that they were building a new mac client from scratch :/

[Azura]

Plus, if companies continue making games for Windows, you'll be stuck with DirectX. Just imagine what will become of all the games you have if M$ decides to break downwards compatibility or switches to a new standard. I prefer open standards because they mean a game (or any other software for that matter) will last much longer .

[elmuerte]

Mean like what they did a couple of weeks ago?
DirectX is already dead, no new DirectX.

[DarkMantle]

Originally Posted by AnthraX

I don't really understand why they just keep working on that mac patch. The amount of UT players with a mac is minimal + I think they all have decent pc's too. Besides, a mac isn't made for gaming. A linux patch is required but a mac patch is not imo. Anyway, I hope they keep working on it cause there's quite some stuff to fix

You mean that This computer isn't designed for games? It can also ship with a PCI-x nVidia 6800 graphics card or ATI x800.

How is that not built for games?

[AnthraX]

There are two ways to make your platform good for gaming. Either you make sure that there is an enormous amount of users or you make it open source. MacOS doesn't fit any of those requirements.

[pLaYa]

Its not that its not built for games... its not built for THIS game... when they ported the game to macs.... they didn't do a very good job... otherwise games that are ported correctly for macs work great...

[Azura]

Originally Posted by AnthraX

There are two ways to make your platform good for gaming. Either you make sure that there is an enormous amount of users or you make it open source. MacOS doesn't fit any of those requirements.

I'm not sure what you mean there. Both of the criteria you've cited could also be used to simply define those respective operating systems. If you consider userbase, a striking counter example would be a new games console. You don't know it will succesful (you can only hope...) but such a platform can jump from 0 users to thousands and even millions. Plus, consoles are the most proprietary platform you can think of. Yet, Unreal engine games are being adapted to consoles.

Anyway, saying that Macintoshes aren't gaming machines is slight ignorance. These machines were graphical from day 1 and the only reason that gaming hasn't taken off in a big way is because dad and mom want to buy a PC because they have some at work and their neighbours also have one. Macs also introduced the precursor of DirectX. You'll find some interesting articles about something called game sprockets on the net. Sure, Macs aren't open source (some of the source has been released in fact) but I'm certain that someone at Apple would be more than happy to help out developping or porting a game. The only reason companies don't do that is because they generate enough profit from the PC platform and can't justify porting code when the returns are smaller.

[BLTicklemonster]

what they need to do is make an unmoddable version of ut. they could take the mods/mutators most commonly used (oh, Zark comes to mind), and write them and release them, also. I mean really, skins and voice packs are silly. Weapon mods are different. Call it Unreal Tournament Tournament version, I guess. If you want a mod/mute, submit it.

They also need to realize that it's not just a game, it's THE game they are dilly dallying with, and either quit "other projecting" around, or let someone who has time work on it.

[BLTicklemonster]

Originally Posted by DarkMantle

You mean that This computer isn't designed for games? It can also ship with a PCI-x nVidia 6800 graphics card or ATI x800.

How is that not built for games?

Ummm, weren't Yugos designed for driving?


LOL sorry, that just popped in meh head. shoot it down all you want, I deserve it.

[Graffix]

Originally Posted by Rush

I just hope that they're working in reducing Linux version's CPU usage ....

Idd the CPU usage is mega. Hoping for a quick decend release soon