hmm but won't this work against qw's general honesty about your connection. ie. if it's laggy you lag and have to lead your shots, if you have a good connection your movement and firing is extremely crisp and responsive.
in many newer games like tf2 you never reach that same level of responsiveness because their netcode has grown too complex.

just reposting my comment from earlier

the difference between quakeworld and most other games is that quakeworld predicts other players, while every other game interpolates other players.
Other games have 50-100 msec extra (hidden) latency.
This doesn't change that at all. The only difference is that you have to aim where they are, rather than where they will be.
It should make hitscan weapons more responsive than before even at normal pings.
shotgun puffs/explosions/etc may visually appear to miss more often, but think of it the other way, impacts are instant - its everyone else who is lagged, they're just predicted well (and any impact-induced velocity changes apply to the predicted(actually current) position, rather than the lagged position).

On the other hand, if someone hits you, you still go flying, even if you were too lagged to see it yet.

Might I suggest a lower minping on that server? Most people who will benefit from this feature are on 50-90ms, and the lack of weapon accuracy stats makes it virtually impossible for me to tell if I'm hittin anyone with it on 150ms until they spontaneously die.

Good work!

thanks for the explanation Spike.
i'm still a bit sceptic though, because it seems like this will take some time to get adjusted to even if it's 'for the better'.

The relatively high minping was set to show that you can still hit fine even on a high ping.

I've set up another server on port nodvd.morphos.net:27501 where you can then manage your own lag through Qizmo or whichever method you prefer.

Good game, Quakeworld.nu.

Let's try #6 again.

Deus, I am by no means a fan of this bug myself. However, if it has to be done, it is better that it is done in a technically proper way. That's what this is here to show, that the better way is not all that hard at all.

bigfoot, I just should admit, this news organazed as insulting mock, and its on the FRONT face of the qw.nu, you just can't overcome personal hate(or disrespect or whatever)?
Not like it touching me, but you involve other ppl in this, just new wave of negative.

May be its not literally break qw.nu rules, but quite not polite. Is this accepted by qw.nu admins?

Spike, I do not see commit in FTE svn, as I understand because its experimental code, I whould be glad take a look, and if you (or bigfoot) have nothing against it I can port it to mvdsv(sure if it works, and probably as usual I will do some changes which may fuck up it :E).

Tested it, let's not change the quakeworld gameplay by allowing this please.

Speaking as someone who dodges using the visual representation of my enemy's beam, it's unsettling to play against someone on high ping, regardless of my own. Is a workaround for this possible? It seems like it would be pretty difficult.

qq, yeah, more cos I suck. I made the changes in my local version which has far too many code changes all over the place. The server might be stable, but the client is a minefield. I keep trying to get it stable but then breaking more stuff. Bah.
Poke me on IRC if you actually need it.

I'm surprised this kind of compromise would be endorsed. In some respects this feature will give the advantage to the player with the HIGHER latency, consider you as a latent client have an erroneous view of the other players' movements (set of positions) your client makes a best guess about how other players move and in doing so simplifies their actual movement, so the onus is on the lower latency player to consider the HPB's erroneous, simplified perspective, incurring hits which are not possible and being perturbed in drastically more unpredictable ways than ever before.

Consensual perversity is not a solution to latency, keep it real.

I think this feature is far from endorsed. I'm sure most of us have the same concerns as you.

Well put Runamok.foe!

Way to go children!

No one cares if you wanna show off bigfoot, it will just make you look dumb.
Go do something good instead of wasting time on trying to make other people look bad.

Dear qqshka,



If the previous news item has news value, this certainly does as well. Agreed that it is combined with satire, but well...

As for the personal hate, you still enjoy shooting the messenger. Stop up, breathe, take a fresh look at it. There are very few people in this world I dislike, much less hate, and you certainly aren't one of them.



Aww. But well, as long as you only mess up your own things, I don't really care. I already received bug reports because of the previous news item. Please avoid that for the future.

Stev,

No, there's not really any way you can avoid that. There's no magic behind this. It's just trading one set of problems for another.

Foe,

100% correct and I agree that it's a big problem.

Dear Fog,

Don't fall into the same trap as qqshka and shoot the messenger.

Read the news item. Let me quote it:


Thus it's not exactly me showing off, is it?

About the last part of your comment, don't you think you directed it at the wrong person? I'm the one whose time is being wasted, and other people manage to make themselves look bad just fine.

You did write the über-sarcastic "news post" right? The problem ain't Spike's feature, or that qqhska's feature could be done better some other way, the problem is your attitude.

My point: What are you trying to achieve with this? Just 100% uneccessary.

To the author of the news item: do not ever copy-paste (even if with edits) news posts I have written on this page or any other my text on any other web unless I give you explicit personal permission.

Dear Fog,




While you of course have a point, allow me to show it from my point of view:
1) The previous news post is dishonest at best. Until I see a headline in my local newspaper that says 'Qqshka invents time machine, earns Nobel prize', calling it 'anti-lag' IS dishonest. Pro-lag would be a much better name.
2) Similarly, the news item is dishonest in a different way: It makes absolutely no mention of what problem set has been traded for 'lag', while it is full well known. Furthermore Renzo just writes 'works great!'.
3) Problems with the theory behind it were not being taken seriously.
4) Problems with the code in practice was not being taken seriously.
5) With years of personal insults and shooting the messenger in mind, a repeat of that in the news item didn't give it much credit.
6) The implementation of it gives extra work to me (and others) in two ways:
6a) I would, if this wasn't so braindead that it will die anyway, have to implement a seriously shitty design in at least 1 QW client. This is wasting my time.
6b) I'm already receiving bug reports, not unlike the ones I got when the Ezquake guys broke their download code, that people are getting disconnected from FFA. From the error message I got quoted, I can only guess that Ezquake manages to flood itself off the server. I have to handle the Ezquake bugs, explain to a few persistent users that the problem is indeed in Ezquake, suggest remedies and redirect them to where they can report bugs in the client. This is wasting my time.
6c) The implementation can in the worst case scenario cause 1.6MB/s extra traffic to the server. This is just wasting my bandwidth (and time, if it came to the point where I had to make sure that such broken clients would have to be banned).
7) Some people are, maybe due to point 1 an 2, refusing to acknowledge any problems there are or might be with pro-lag.

With all of the above in mind, I really don't think that a single satirical post, while at the same time having at least as much news value than the previous news item, is too much in any way. It is in fact quite a moderate response to all the bullshit that has been going on.

So, dear Fog, what am I trying to achieve? Well, of course, awareness of the aforementioned problems and of course no less than reporting this great development in FTE. I hope this reply satisfies all your curiosities, otherwise you're of course free to reply again.

Dear Johnny,

The day I respect the proposed license for your comments is the day you respect the license the Quakeworld source code was released under.

Can't really see how problems with this feature or some users reporting bugs in the wrong place would warrant acting like a total dick. It's so obvious you were picking a fight from the get-go, that trying to excuse yourself at this point seems like a wasted effort. Fog is right, try to correct your attitude for the next time.

wait! i´ll go get some more popcorn

I hope by the time this poop-throwing competition between different developers are done. The community has realized that this is a feature that's better off left undone, by anyone.

1) This feature has in past games and will always lead to some strange situations when you're getting hit/hitting enemies when you shouldn't, which instead of boosting the experience for HPB lowers the experience for people with normal connections.

1b) Runamok.foe: "In some respects this feature will give the advantage to the player with the HIGHER latency, consider you as a latent client have an erroneous view of the other players' movements (set of positions) your client makes a best guess about how other players move and in doing so simplifies their actual movement, so the onus is on the lower latency player to consider the HPB's erroneous, simplified perspective, incurring hits which are not possible and being perturbed in drastically more unpredictable ways than ever before."

Yes it was only "one" reason, and that's the only one needed to see that this is not a good idea.

So, now that we've implemented the "hold down your mouse-button and win"-mode, what's next?
Skipping tournaments and just declaring me the winner?

Also, are you planning on doing client-side corrections ( to account for latency ) for tournaments?
That would be incredibly retarded.

Finally, experimental features are meant to be improved, isn't that exactly what bigfoot has done here?
He made it in a better way, while still telling you it's going to be useless and actually downright harmful for QW in general.

I'd say kudos, but it's not really needed.

#28: why leave undone? It can be there, disallowed in typical leagues, but available for any occasional USA - EU or RU-PT matches or similar, where both sides will play with high ping to be "crippled equally", but both being able to actually use the LG. Why to remove such possibility?
#29: Spike is the author

#30: Indeed a valid point, sorry if I misunderstood the intentions of the feature, but to me it sounded that it would be implemented more or less as "standard"

I was thinking that this would be a fairly nice feature more for more common latencies, say, 39-52, where there'd be far less opportunity for 'weird' things to happen but still level the playing field somewhat. Perhaps there could be some sort of latency/frame limit involved in correction? Boomsticking/shafting on 13ms vs 39ms feels very different but need it necessarily be so without someone with a 'bad' 39ms connection negatively influencing someone on 13ms?

#29 Even if bigfoot did code a better implementation of a feature (he didn't), it still wouldn't warrant acting like a dick. Stop trying to find excuses for idiotic behaviour, because there really are none. Surely any issue can be discussed in a civil manner.

While agreeing that all this energy and time could be put to better use, I can't but laugh at loud seeing blAze giving lectures here about how to behave.

I've been on the opposite side of many debates to blAze and I've never had a problem with his behaviour.

Indeed, with such LOW pings negative issues will be unnoticeable or almost unnoticeable(well, in worse case acceptable? :E) but positive will rather quite noticeable, but ppl just CAN'T realize that, instead they do posts about light speed from elementary school or adding what speed vary in different medium (university).

With high pings (>100) feature you can start argue how it affect normal gameplay but still players affected by such ping in so HIGH disadvantage compared tolow pingers so antilag will not make they equally good players, there is so much issues with high ping which antilag is not even tried to fix.

And yes, antilag may allow better experience for 4x4 with high pings, for example US vs EURO, but I kinda late with that(few years).

Similar lag compensation exist in alot of modern games, they have less ping issues(13 vs 40 is not considered as OMG I AM IN GREAT DISADVANTAGE LETS FIND ANOTHER SERVER OR FIX YOUR PING OR I CALL ADMIN!!! laughtable, no?), less whine etc, but we are special, we are orthodox ostrichs! And most ppl not even tested it, just mind guessing and bla bla bla.

Dear Blaze,



I don't think anyone is trying to excuse anything.





And it just goes on. Blaze, do you find the above constructive and civil?

And whoops, I fucked up the a quote close tag

Why are there no previews for comments to news item?

-the... Sigh

#24 Sure looked like an excuse made into a long list by rehashing essentially the same thing over and over.

"Blaze, do you find the above constructive and civil?"

No, but then you started with a link to an "aimbot" demo (which was relevant how?) and a long list of accusations, so one can only wonder what kind of responses did you expect?

I'm sure you can give us the facts about this feature without all that overblown drama. And if the fault really lies on the opposing side, then why sink to their level.

#36 All modern games feel like shit compared to QW though. Games like BF and CoD feel totally "numb" in the lack of better word.

Ok, it's time for me to clear things up once and for all.


This text is from one of the qw.nu content admins.

Basically, at first I was surprised seeing bigfoot posting a news on the site, since he is not qw.nu staff or writer of any kind. After reading the news and determining that it wasn't made in proper way, I made a mistake by not deleting the article (actually removing from sight to have proper conversation about how it was done) but instead of just mentioning it on our administration forum.

The first thing about this post is obvious. It is a direct copy/paste from my news, but made as a mockup and with high personal bias towards certain projects. It is also highly abusive and insulting against the people working on those projects. This is not something official front page news should be made of, not to mention the people writing this text does not know how the news are written on qw.nu - how could he, he is not even our staff like mentioned before.

The person giving bigfoot rights to write just this one news made a judgement error, as he should have posted the news by himself, but only after modifying the content the be more appropriate. I'm sure that person will have the guts to admit his mistake, like I already admitted my mistake for not acting like a proper administrator.

In short, the news posted is against qw.nu news writing standard, and should have never been published as news.


The following text is from one of the KTX project admins.

The feature I made news, is like I said in the news item, an experimental feature. It clearly asks players "what if this could be done". The news doesn't specifically state that the feature is perfect, more like me (as a player) stating it seems to work properly. On top of that I ask other players to test it, and report the findings (this is clearly noticeable in the last sentence of that news). I made sure that I put it in there that way, because there is absolutely no way something works ok from the first possible public revision, unless you are really talented coder.

I also stated that there are only two servers that have the feature enabled (out of my four), an intentional choice not to make all the servers compliant, since I knew it can't be that easy. The feature needed (or needs) two things, and both conditions have to be met or it doesn't work. The usage of this feature requires UNSTABLE TEST VERSIONS of the KTX and ezQuake, they do NOT represent the final code seen in stable releases. I didn't mention this but it's quite obvious.

Now, what do you do when you encounter a bug with something? You report it to the proper people, usually in their project site and on its tracker, or alternatively you can talk to the persons responsible using chat, or in the last place bring up the thing on the news item, since the developers tend to read those in order to make things work better.

When you find a command in ezQuake, that was left behind by a mistake, and that allows high abuse, what do you do? You report it to the proper people allowing them to know that they made a mistake by forgetting that particular command in there unprotected. What happened here was a demo, that proves what, people make mistakes?


And the final part will be me talking as a person.

For a long time I have watched from the side how you, bigfoot, have had an issue with ezQuake guys for some reason. Also I've noticed how you seem to have an issue with MVDSV guys too. It's not that long time ago when you wrote "yo mvdsv breakers" thread on qw.nu forum, where you basically attacked arrogantly against MVDSV project people for a bug that was in the MVDSV code, breaking .MVD compliance with older clients.

What the..? Why didn't you talk to MVDSV project people in person, or didn't file a bug-report on MVDSV issues tracker? It was MY mistake as a server admin to run the untested code and not noticing the bug faster than anyone else, but I'm only a human after all. And yes, that is what I actually do with our projects, bugtesting on top of other things. And I have to mention it again, this happened with testing version and not with stable release, and the previous stable release or the next stable release doesn't have this particular bug, thanks for someone noticing it.

Also, you claimed I was attacking you in the news post comments of the KTX feature, while I did no such thing. My sarcastic comment is another thing though, anyone should have seen that. I can't and won't mention as whom I am writing at the moment I post comments, like I have done in this reply. But I guess it's hard to differentiate that properly anyway.

Oh, common! You write a news post and ask for comments and when you actually get them you complain that the reporter did not use the "proper" upstream channels? Of course you get the replies in the comment section of the news post.

driz/qqshka: that's a good point (#32) and i can also understand the frustration in #36 as there was more than enough off topic whine here.
but in regard to 'there are more games where ping 13 vs 40 isn't an issue'. this is true but these games pay for that by never achieving the responsiveness and accuracy. everyone pays the price for latency in these games, even the ow pinging player. i was pointing that out in the original thread but it was never responded to.

still driz is making a good point i think about *some* circumstances in which the feature could be useful. it's a matter of implementation i guess but i would be very careful about it for the given reasons.

no proofreading-
"... responsiveness and accuracy OF QW"
"... even the Low pinging player."

[quote=dEus]
this is true but these games pay for that by never achieving the responsiveness and accuracy
[/quite] I dunno about SUCH games, but QW will not suffer(NO WAY) in responsiveness with antilag, just GAINS accuracy.

maybe not suffer in responsiveness but what abut accuracy? i mean accuracy for all players and how can this not suffer if you try to accomodate bit high and low pinging players? if there is lag different players have different 'point of views' (different 'times' of views). if you try to interpolate or whatever you do, you try to merge these points of views. games like tf2 do this. accuracy suffers and i don't see how this can be avoided. it's a principal problem with latency, it's not about implementation.

..accommodate BOTH...

dEus, I see trouble with understanding how feature working from you, just belive me with LOW pings (say around 50) you will get same responsiviness and better accuracy and I am quite sure without noticeable negative effects. But instead of beliving you can just go and check it and made own PRACTICAL point of view, it will worth much more. This way we can talk on other level, not like "I guess and think it is..." but rather "I tested with different pings and found it is...". Well, and you better check my antilag (tm)
and not Spike's since I don't know how he did it and expects some issues(no offence).

I just think what gameplay issues basically overrated or extremely overrated, at least on LOW pings, so feature just made some pings more playable, at least this is clear IMO, you hardly can argue against this!

Also, I seen they use server side minping, it feels pretty shitty(plain wrong) at least on mvdsv but no idea about FTE, that why I did client side packet delay, so you hardly can check anything from they server.

Also it sad what we mix Spike's and my solution discussion in one place, it total mess now!

omfg, renzo is human!


I almost totally agree with renzo, this shouldn't be in the frontpage as this is sarcastic and contains flamewar. therefore it should be on the forum. I suggest closing this for comments and continue the discussion at the forum.
the technical guys: qqshka, spike, even bigfoot, guys, this isnt the place to discuss. I'm sad to realize that there isn't enough communication between you guys, and the proof is right here. For qw's sake,get each other's msn/icq/gtalk and bring boil to qw's features!

edit: i think this will be a great feature. this won't be a change for most qw players. the others will be quite happy with it (myself included).

Edited by mushi on 05 Nov 09 @ 23:35CET

Edited by mushi on 05 Nov 09 @ 23:41CET

no wonder a 70ms player believes this is a good feature...

That doesn't make his opinion any less important than others. BTW in his country, you are the 70 ms player.

But the bulk of players and played games are not in his country are they Johnny? In the map vote issue strong emphasis was put on the majority rule, I presume same holds true for this matter too?

I don't grasp how that or where bulk of players resides is relevant here, please enlighten me. Do you propose the discussion should have a title "if you ping 60+ to Sweden or Finland, don't bother posting your opinion, we don't give a fuck"?

No, I'm saying your comment about how a north european (and thus 90% of the active scene) pings bad in portugal is completely irrelevant. The games are where the players are and if this feature would handicap lpbs (the majority of the scene), it probably isn't going to be accepted by the majority.

Please explain :E

#52
i dont think his opinion is less important.

oh god damn, blAze, seems I got you wrong, full quote should be like "if this feature would handicap lpbs", I missed IF and WHOULD words :E And can't edit my post :<

#55: Not sure where you are going. In typical scenario, match between .pt and .fi would be done on a server with equal pings + antilag - both sides suffer the same side-effects, both can somehow use LG. It does not matter where majority of the games is played. But maybe I got it wrong and this is not the intended purpose for this feature?
BTW fi+se+no+dk take only 57% of the signed up players in EQL, really don't want to be picky, but it's pretty far from your 90% estimate

qqshka, I really don't understand how exactly this feature works to make any comments on that. Someone needs to explain it in enough detail. Personally I'm worried about situations where in server reality you have already moved to safety but in lagged client reality you still get killed, for example. Or that fast evasive movement becomes simplified or slowed down somehow on the lagged client making it easier to hit. But it's quite possible I just don't understand how it works.

#59 In a typical scenario there is no match between pt and fi. In a typical scenario there is a whole bunch of players from fi swe no dk ru nl de who have a very good ping and a random dude from somewhere else with a bad ping. Now, the guys with good pings probably don't want that the random dude with bad ping is able to do things that shouldn't be possible, or that he somehow benefits from his lagged viewpoint...

In a rare scenario where everyone is playing with bad ping, I guess you could use this feature, but then you would just trade a set of problems for another set of problems I suppose?

People from nl, ru and even germany ping quite well on nordic servers so it's not just the 57% of the nordic countries.

denmark is a very good place for a qw server and many games are also played there. i dont know but i guess over 80% atleast ping below 50 to wargamez?

Another way to put it might be that vast majority of played games are such, where the majority of the players have a good ping. In a typical mix on wg, most people ping under 40ms.

Ah ok, makes sense now. I was talking from my duel POV, you from your 4on4 POV.

it makes sense. since most of the players won't miss/take advantage of such feature, it isnt needed. hence, i dont care about a couple of players who might be happy with the feature, because they represent 1% of the players i use to play.
/sarcasm

yes, it makes sense. for a dictatorshit!
it hurts. sometimes i'm glad that qw isn't just the community. most of the times, i don't. qw is more than that, and one's opinion is worth just about it.

more seriously, i understand blaze's point. he doesnt want a lagged player to have advantage while he shouldn't from a theoretical pov. i agree. but it's different: one thing is to have that feature available and enable it when its needed, and other thing is to have it "always on". ofc, as i consider myself a reasonable person, in my understanding this feature would only be active when voted/needed (specific circumstances).

there arent much high skilled hpb anymore, (guess why) but still there are some. in a clanwar, statistically speaking, maybe less than 1. still, imho, that 1 is worth considering in a game called qw. a special game. we all agree in that, right? considering that qw is a special game for all of us, if qw can give any1 of us a "gift", sure we hpb's would be more than happy to take advantage of it (much like qizmo's data compression/ qw fwd).

love *

BTW "how far can I escape within 100 ms?" Easy answer, run a demo with demo_setspeed 0.1 - then real 1 second = 1 millisecond in the game. Measure 100 seconds on your clock and watch how far the player has moved.

320*(100/1000) = 32 quake units. the width of a player.
more if they're bunnyhopping.
(there's still some overlap due to the square, axial/non-rotational nature of bounding boxes).
obviously, playing with a client packet rate of 10/sec is a really spiteful way to play...

#66 Yeah I don't mind having it as an option for jff style games and some random situations. The difference is that data compression and qw fwd doesn't let you do things that you couldn't do with a better ping, like killing an enemy that actually already rocket jumped to safety, but is still killable on your screen for a crucial split second.

Stop fighting.

No U stop.

OK, so that's you talking.



Oh, hey, look. It's you talking again!



Nooo, really. Is that you talking again, Renzo?

OK, enough of the mockery of the overly silly style of writing, on to the contents:



That's how you usually handle anyone who doesn't agree with you. I am also surprised you made this mistake!



The original post was insulting towards the intelligent reader and anyone who doesn't happen to be on the 'one client, one server, one mod'-boat.



Yup, going against the mighty post-deleter Renzo is surely a lapse of judgement.



Yes, it states "what if the impossible was possible" in other, more confusing words, and then goes on to say "OMG, OMG, OMG, IT IS POSSIBLE!!!11 (but only if you agree to lock out any software that's not mine)"



And no matter which way you choose, you can be 100% sure to be ignored! Woo! However, only one of these methods also lets other people know of the problems so they can at least judge for themselves.



And get ignored again? Sounds like a waste of time. Qqshka already stated that he doesn't consider it a bug and he doesn't give a flying fuck.



Oh, hey, stop, stop. If you would take of your Ezglasses for a minute, you might realise that it is the Ezguys who have a problem with every other client, server or mod. The Ezguys have a long history of trying to make it impossible for me and other people, who don't want to or can't use Ezquake, to play Quakeworld, and that it is not exactly a recent thing.

In summary:
1) The Mvdsv developers have on more than one occasion made sure to break all mods that are not KT*. Intentionally. With no regrets. And with insults when bugs were reported..
2) The Ezquake developers have on more than one occasion made sure to break all servers that are not Mvdsv. Intentionally. With no regrets. And with insults when bugs were reported.

Both of those things have of course affected me and wasted a lot of my time. Tell me again, considering the attitude of the developers of the above, why exactly should I be forthcoming?



Hardly a surprise considering it is the same people. Next you'll say I have a problem with the KTX guys too, and then the guys who manage the Wargamez.dk servers, right?



Ah, so you do remember that one. You do realise that that was the third (or fourth, not sure anymore) time I reported a problem in Mvdsv, and that the two other bug reports were just laughed off, right? If you want to quote history, get your facts right.



The LEAST you could do would be to Google the thread in question. No, that was an entirely different bug. You'd notice the following if you had your facts straight:
1) The bug was in a public release of Mvdsv, causing problems for all, how should I put it, clients that were not 'older'. As in, clients that were not Ezquake and actually supported other download methods than the original QW one. The bug was first noted on a UK server running a release version.
2) The bug you're referring to made demos unplayable, 'older'(hahaha) client or not. I really love it how you refer to all non-Ezquake clients as 'older'. Shows your attitude.
3) The thread also contains criticism towards you.
4) That being arrogant is certainly nothing I have a monopoly on. I was pretty annoyed at that moment because the usual 'I don't care about breaking shit for other people' developers went and made it impossible for me to download demos. Go read the thread here and judge for yourselves.



I've told you before. I've tried several times before, all with the same arrogant type of reply as shown in the thread above. Do you suggest that I should somehow be an idiot and act against experience?



A human who intentionally runs untested software on production servers. That's not a simple 'mistake', it's something you do intentionally and vigorously defend.



Again, Renzo, please get your facts straight. This is getting boring.



If you had bothered to read, you'd have noticed that I had already apologised for that - I mixed yours and Qqshka's comments up. Both being associated with Ezquake/Mvdsv/KTX, it happens.



That's OK, Renzo. None of your personalities can get facts straight, so it doesn't matter anyway.

My facts straight? Oh boy.

I'm actually talking about this thread, which seems to be a result of rewriting the MVDSV demo recording and the bug was caused by that (not the "yo mvdsv breakers", which is in fact, yet another hate-thread). It's pretty obvious how the thread goes, as anyone can see. Not to mention a great place for getting your "facts" too.

Then, dear Renzo, you should say you're talking about that thread, and not start talking about another thread.

Lemme quote you again:



And again, here's the link for the thread you're talking about.

See? Title is 'Yo, MVDSV breakers' like you mentioned. The contents are far from what you mentioned, though.



Well, in the thread you link to, it's the Ezquake/MVDSV/KTX developer who constantly pumps out false information and tries to derail the thread.

So, besides these two things where you have no idea what you're talking about, I take you agree with everything else. Have a good day!

Can I just point out, that some time after the 'mvdsv breakers' topic had died, fte clients ended up getting corrupted packets from mvdsv servers, which basically kicked them.
Even after implementing a workaround (basically ignoring those corrupt packets), there's still a fuckton of spam.
Seriously, if you're gonna implement an extension, please implement it in a compatible way that will not frikkin kick the clients that frikkin designed the frikkin extension. k? Yes, it annoys me enough that I'll only apologise for any offense taken by me swearing, rather than for swearing in the first place.
Oh, and there's nothing mature about laughing about insults, so why *that* nickname?

Regarding Renzo's choice of topic, bigfoot posted an application to fix mvds that were unplayable in non-ezquake-svn clients. Thus allowing people to actually view those demos, which is after all the whole point about mvdsv, hence its name.
Oldman claimed that not supporting fuhquake, mqwcl, and even old ezquake builds was intentional, despite admitting that he does not work on mvdsv, in an apparent attempt to discourage bigfoot from helping other people from using the latest ezquake (which due to bad gl drivers is not always possible anyway).
Meanwhile, Tuna asked for help with some other demos which had been corrupted by bad mvdsv builds. Bigfoot attempted to assist with this, noone else tried. Tuna's pair of cats are particuarly cute, by the way.
I contributed a post to explain the background that I knew regarding the bug and why actually fixing these demos was benefitial to some people. Oldman claimed that they were still useful if they served a purpose in a different medium, which of course would mean only wasting the spectator's time or breaking clients other than ezquake.
An entire month after the first post, Renzo says that 'they will be fixed at some point', thus demonstrating that the util was useful in the first place, which is kinda what oldman's entire argument was against.

Seriously, thread was started midnight 29th/30th Oct, midnight 1/2 Nov code is fixed, servers updated. Another bug is reported in the thread 30 Dec after midnight, the same day fix is promised.
So is it because oldman is labeled "ezQuake developer" on the forum and qqshka also used to code for ezQuake, for next 100 years we will see nothing but hatred and furious anger from you two regarding anything with qqshka or anyone else from ezQuake involved?
I seriously want to end this flamewars once and for all, but I think sooner hunger in Africa will get solved.