Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Red Eclipse 1.2 Racks Up Many Changes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,658

    Default Red Eclipse 1.2 Racks Up Many Changes

    Phoronix: Red Eclipse 1.2 Racks Up Many Changes

    Red Eclipse, a total conversion mod of the "Cube 2" engine, is now at version 1.2 after racking up many changes to this open-source game...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTAzODM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    579

    Default

    I'm sorry to say this but there are plenty of 2002-2006 commercial FPS games that are 100 times better than this and they cost less than 10Euros. This includes: graphics, sound, physics, cutscenes, plot.

    I'm still convinced the open source community should stop creating these FPS as they tend to be all the same (fast and mad). Of course though, everyone is free to do what they prefer.

    My only hope is Valve bringing some serious FPS gaming to Linux.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    48

    Default

    I don't agree. This game has a very high fun factor and I find the replay value a lot higher than lots of commercial games. These projects should be encouraged and can use all help offered by the community. It supersedes the original Sauerbraten in many ways imo, which shows the ambition and talent of the people working on it. Besides, it is being developed in parallel with Sauerbraten, whose developer is helping the Red Eclipse team as well.

    Keep up the good work Red Eclipse devs!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    519

    Default

    I've found Red Eclipse to have quite a few interesting tricks actually. Worth checking out.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    .ca
    Posts
    406

    Default

    Interesting that they explicitly advertise "agile gameplay". That might appeal to the Nexuiz crowd.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    I would like to see at least one FOSS team try a tactical shooter, a la Gears, Mass Effect, Rainbow Six, etc. The take more work (this is probably why FOSS doesn't have a them; Quake-clones are ridiculously simple to implement compared to most other genres, as they require very very little in the way of gameplay logic, architecture, physics, AI, level design, or weaponry to pull off) but they tend to be a lot more rewarding. If not that, at least a fast-paced shooter that is something other than Death Match gameplay; even a simple L4D clone would be an amazing leap forward for FOSS.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    23

    Default

    I don't want to seem like too transparent advertiser, but you should check my cross-plaform shooter project at http://www.perilouspenguin.com/glfps. Although it is not open source, at least for now, it is developed independently, for free and for Linux. It is a tactical shooter with which I try to fill the void that was pointed out by elanthis.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elanthis View Post
    I would like to see at least one FOSS team try a tactical shooter, a la Gears, Mass Effect, Rainbow Six, etc. The take more work (this is probably why FOSS doesn't have a them; Quake-clones are ridiculously simple to implement compared to most other genres, as they require very very little in the way of gameplay logic, architecture, physics, AI, level design, or weaponry to pull off) but they tend to be a lot more rewarding. If not that, at least a fast-paced shooter that is something other than Death Match gameplay; even a simple L4D clone would be an amazing leap forward for FOSS.
    How come tactical shooter require more difficult physics than quake clone? I would even say opposite - most of tactical shooters today is basic in physics - even weapons mostly are hit scan while quake clones has projectiles and red eclipse has ricocheting bullets. As for others "require very very little in the way of gameplay logic" ok.. lets say true, " architecture" maybe, "physics" no, "AI" depends (make bots play Q3 like pro gamers play without giving them 100% accuracy with railgun), "level design" no, most of tactical game maps are quite basic just with 100% more CHEST HIGH WALLS... , "weaponry" no, you can make tactical shooter with Q3 weaponry and it would still be awesome. "even a simple L4D clone would be an amazing leap forward for FOSS" Less replayability than Q-clone, not worth making.

    I wish they made more Quake clones. Just better quality.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arkani View Post
    How come tactical shooter require more difficult physics than quake clone? I would even say opposite - most of tactical shooters today is basic in physics - even weapons mostly are hit scan while quake clones has projectiles and red eclipse has ricocheting bullets.
    You are correct here. Tactical shooters are no more difficult to implement, just different.

    As much as people say that the "quake clones" are all the same, there is far more variety among them than tactical shooters, which all tend to be EXACTLY the same game.

    Also, there are plenty of modes in the current fast paced shooters that are NOT deathmatch. For example, Warsow has Bombing Run and Race mode. Alien Arena has Team Core Assault, Deathball, and Cattle Prod. Xonotic has a Keyhunt and Racemode. World of Padman has all kinds of weird modes. It's pure ignorance to suggest that these games are deathmatch only.
    Last edited by Irritant; 08-05-2012 at 07:16 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arkani View Post
    "even a simple L4D clone would be an amazing leap forward for FOSS" Less replayability than Q-clone, not worth making..
    .... what?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •