Concept Phase Oct09-May12

[smallfly]

will be 3d-isometric in future:

iso_preview.png (196.05 KiB) Viewed 40120 times

but first of all a 2d top-down view will be realized:

gui_a_v3_preview.png (75.24 KiB) Viewed 40083 times

(larger version attached)

[CommanderZ]

So you are going to write a game like OTTD (but of course better) from scratch? Wouldn't it be better to do an OTTD fork (anyone can do that thanks to the GPL license)?

[CommanderZ]

The games are to different. They share some graphics. That was it. It would take many years to make a fork of ottd so that it will work like the concept i decribed.

It will be much easier to write it from scratch.

I don't think so, most of the features shouldn't be that hard to do (I mean hard as writing such game from scratch), if you wouldn't mind dropping backwards save compatibility and GRF support and maybe some performance (which would be weaker with the new game anyways), because the map array would require some extensions.

EDIT: OpenTTD has 200 000 lines of code, IMO you surely wouldn't need to change more than tenth of it.

[smallfly]

if you wouldn't mind dropping backwards save compatibility and GRF support and maybe some performance (which would be weaker with the new game anyways), because the map array would require some extensions.

The game i want to program will be compatible with the current GRF system. You will be able to use the ottd graphics. That will fasten the programming process. I can stick to the code and others (hopefully) provide the needed graphics.

There are so many concepts for new transport games. I want to reuse many features, stick to 2D and available libraries etc. so that the game has a chance to be playable in some years.

[smallfly]

OpenTTD has 200 000 lines of code, IMO you surely wouldn't need to change more than tenth of it.

But that "tenth" (which still makes 20.000 lines of code) will be very very hard to change. I dont think the game I make has enough parallels with openttd except graphics and those get managed by SDL.

[SwissFan91]

This looks great, although I think the problems outlined by CommanderZ are pretty valid, as writing a game from scratch will be tremendously time consuming and difficult.

[CommanderZ]

The game i want to program will be compatible with the current GRF system. You will be able to use the ottd graphics. That will fasten the programming process. I can stick to the code and others (hopefully) provide the needed graphics.

There are so many concepts for new transport games. I want to reuse many features, stick to 2D and available libraries etc. so that the game has a chance to be playable in some years.

Sorry, I was a little unspecific, I meant NewGRF.

But that "tenth" (which still makes 20.000 lines of code) will be very very hard to change. I dont think the game I make has enough parallels with openttd except graphics and those get managed by SDL.

Not enough parallels? OTTD would provide you with GUI, controller support (mosue and keyboard), multi-player, signalling, graphics support, pathfinders,...

All you are describing revolves around one concept which is not in OTTD - multi-tile rail and road elements. That's not that much.

EDIT: Don't think I want to bash your idea! It sounds great and I would love to see these ideas in OTTD. But it would mean to diverge too much from the TTD-spirit, so it will nevr happen in OTTD.

[smallfly]

Not enough parallels? OTTD would provide you with GUI, controller support (mosue and keyboard), multi-player, signalling, graphics support, pathfinders,...

All you are describing revolves around one concept which is not in OTTD - multi-tile rail and road elements. That's not that much.

In the next days, I will add more pictures and more features to this post. Then you will see that there are more differences than it looks like at the moment.

For now: I dont want to use the GUI of OTTD since it not intuitive enough for the programmer of a patch.

But: I will stick to the existing ottd code whenever it seems to be possible. We all have the same target: We want to develop and play logistics games that are fun to play

Don't think I want to bash your idea!

I dont think that. And even if you wanted to bash my idea, i would like it. Cause if you tell me why, i have a chance to rethink my concept and recognize unlogic, bad, unrealistic etc. things

It sounds great and I would love to see these ideas in OTTD. But it would mean to diverge too much from the TTD-spirit, so it will nevr happen in OTTD.

Yeah. If I would realize a patch to manage that (a 20.000 lines long patch by the way ) it would be very likely that it will never get into trunk ...

[Rubidium]

The game i want to program will be compatible with the current GRF system

This bites with lots of things you're suggesting, unless you only mean the base graphics and ditch NewGRF... but OpenTTD requires NewGRF support for quite some graphics and such. This would then mean you'd need to keep (some) parts of NewGRF, making the whole thing a mess in the process. Although, it also depends on what you call compatible; if replacing half of the road/rail graphics while leaving the others (on smooth slopes/curves) unchanged is seen as compatible then yes, otherwise not.

Besides that those corners/switches will require massive work to both the code that makes the trains move and as well the three pathfinders; probably even the map array. Then you're also breaking many of the assumptions AIs can be making based on OpenTTD's tracks, which would likely result in ditching the AI.

For now: I dont want to use the GUI of OTTD since it not intuitive enough for the programmer of a patch.

So you're going to develop a new GUI system and rewrite all windows? For what it's worth, OpenTTD's windows (excluding blitting, viewports, string system etc) consists of about 40.000 lines (~20%). The actual game business logic (moving cargo around, station ratings, etc) takes like 5% of the total.

Basically the real question is that with all that you want to scratch or radically change is using OpenTTD with all it's TTD-backward-compatability oddities such a good choice? Heck, is OpenTTD's (network) design really wanted in this day and age of < 1GHz netbooks running Windows and quad/hex-core 3GHz CPUs; wouldn't you want the game to scale nicely when having lots of cores?

Ah well... all I'm saying is that you shouldn't assume that forking OpenTTD and modifying it that much is going to be easier/quicker than starting from scratch.

[Gremnon]

This seems more to me like another attempt to bring Locomotion rail and similar features to OpenTTD. While they'd be nice, I'm happy the way it is, thank you.

[cmoiromain]

Interesting projet. I wish you good luck, it looks like a lot of work.

[Dante123]

sounds very interesting, but only 1 line i put my "???" to:

"Features of OTTD that P1 will not have:
- new vehices being introduced over the years"

isn't this 1 of the things that makes OTTD good ?
if nothing new will be introduced over the years i think (for me) it gets boring after some playing time?
building the same trains/vehicles every time, without the foresight to new/better ones sounds like a whole less variability in the game.

[smallfly]

sounds very interesting, but only 1 line i put my "???" to:

"Features of OTTD that P1 will not have:
- new vehices being introduced over the years"

isn't this 1 of the things that makes OTTD good ?
if nothing new will be introduced over the years i think (for me) it gets boring after some playing time?
building the same trains/vehicles every time, without the foresight to new/better ones sounds like a whole less variability in the game.

It is a nice features, but:
1.) monorail and maglev dont look better than standard railways
2.) monorail and maglev do not make a difference between technologies (like steam, diesel und e-engines on standard railways)
3.) there is a lot of work to make additional cars, trains, planes, houses being introduced over the years and i dont think that this work is worth for having this small feature

i want to create a game that makes fun because of complex transport systems, not because of a view of historic engines as well as a view into future. i want to make a game, where not everybody wins, but only the best constructors do

Interesting projet. I wish you good luck, it looks like a lot of work.

I wouldnt bet a cent that this project will get finished anytime (But of course I really wish, that it gets finished)

This bites with lots of things you're suggesting, unless you only mean the base graphics and ditch NewGRF... but OpenTTD requires NewGRF support for quite some graphics and such. This would then mean you'd need to keep (some) parts of NewGRF, making the whole thing a mess in the process. Although, it also depends on what you call compatible; if replacing half of the road/rail graphics while leaving the others (on smooth slopes/curves) unchanged is seen as compatible then yes, otherwise not.

I just want my game to be able to extract the graphics out the newgrf, not the other data.

wouldn't you want the game to scale nicely when having lots of cores?

yeah, thats why i will make it from scratch.

This seems more to me like another attempt to bring Locomotion rail and similar features to OpenTTD. While they'd be nice, I'm happy the way it is, thank you.

I would never refer to locomotion. I dont like that game (ok, I never played it, but I read reviews and saw videos of it)

// EDIT: I want to make a new GUI system, but mine will not be 40.000 lines of code long. And if it does. The lines will be userfriendly coded [/quote]

[lawton27]

I just want my game to be able to extract the graphics out the newgrf, not the other data.

I presume this is so that existing sets made for ottd would be compatible, that wouldn't really work, your proposed tile size would be 4 time smaller than in ottd and I'm shire you'd come across scaling issues, you have drawn sketches of smooth turns, you'll need more than 8 different angles for every vehicle, of course you could go into 3d but that would also remove any possibility of using grfs.

I recommend you ditch the GRF and use a file type that's even easier to edit, for your sake and potential modders.

[Alberth]

I want to make a new GUI system, but mine will not be 40.000 lines of code long. And if it does. The lines will be userfriendly coded

Could you elaborate on this? I don't understand your phrase 'userfriendly coded'. What does that mean?
How is our code not?

Albert

[Dante123]

sounds very interesting, but only 1 line i put my "???" to:

"Features of OTTD that P1 will not have:
- new vehices being introduced over the years"

isn't this 1 of the things that makes OTTD good ?
if nothing new will be introduced over the years i think (for me) it gets boring after some playing time?
building the same trains/vehicles every time, without the foresight to new/better ones sounds like a whole less variability in the game.

It is a nice features, but:
1.) monorail and maglev dont look better than standard railways
2.) monorail and maglev do not make a difference between technologies (like steam, diesel und e-engines on standard railways)
3.) there is a lot of work to make additional cars, trains, planes, houses being introduced over the years and i dont think that this work is worth for having this small feature

i want to create a game that makes fun because of complex transport systems, not because of a view of historic engines as well as a view into future. i want to make a game, where not everybody wins, but only the best constructors do

for the magirail and mono rail, i totally agree.

me, i personally prefer the period from the steam till the electrical ages. these are the most realistic ones.
but what i think is an important part, is the improvement you will need to make at your rails during time. this will bring the more realistic aspect of the game to life. you refer to: "the complex transport systems" that will make the game fun.
but the image i get in my head now, once a rail track is layed, and the train is running, you never have to look at it again.
thats maybe why the idea of introductions of new types of trains during the years is a important part withing the complex transport network building.
but maybe in the P1 you can take it to a next level where OTTD lacks. for example, upgrading rail from steam to electrical should take more time (and money) think of how you can start road constructions within OTTD. maybe some way like this could be a good idea to implant.
resulting in more careful consideration when, how, and what tracks to upgrade to get the new benefits. ( so you dont get the idea from ottd, once you make more money than you can spent, the fun is mostly gone).

maybe even more to this realistic aspect could be: faster trains, need bigger curves when they need to make a turn. maybe this could also be a aspect to take in consideration.

just 1 more thought on the whole introduction of the new trains and vehicles. maybe it is possible to approach it in a different way.
to quote you "i want to make a game, where not everybody wins, but only the best constructors do" what if, the trains don't get introduced over the years, but only once you start investing some money into the development of technologies. i see in my head several paths on this one. but have no clue on if and how it can be possible, but if possible i can try write down some if the ideas.


i need to say, i totally love the idea of a new road system like in your first drafing !

i dont know in what ways, or if it its possible at all the ideas i tryed writing down above, but im just sharing my thoughts as you asked ur your post
Really like the idea of the P1 project, and sure will follow the development on this one!

[smallfly]

for the magirail and mono rail, i totally agree.

me, i personally prefer the period from the steam till the electrical ages. these are the most realistic ones.
but what i think is an important part, is the improvement you will need to make at your rails during time. this will bring the more realistic aspect of the game to life. you refer to: "the complex transport systems" that will make the game fun.
but the image i get in my head now, once a rail track is layed, and the train is running, you never have to look at it again.
thats maybe why the idea of introductions of new types of trains during the years is a important part withing the complex transport network building.
but maybe in the P1 you can take it to a next level where OTTD lacks. for example, upgrading rail from steam to electrical should take more time (and money) think of how you can start road constructions within OTTD. maybe some way like this could be a good idea to implant.
resulting in more careful consideration when, how, and what tracks to upgrade to get the new benefits. ( so you dont get the idea from ottd, once you make more money than you can spent, the fun is mostly gone).

maybe even more to this realistic aspect could be: faster trains, need bigger curves when they need to make a turn. maybe this could also be a aspect to take in consideration.

just 1 more thought on the whole introduction of the new trains and vehicles. maybe it is possible to approach it in a different way.
to quote you "i want to make a game, where not everybody wins, but only the best constructors do" what if, the trains don't get introduced over the years, but only once you start investing some money into the development of technologies. i see in my head several paths on this one. but have no clue on if and how it can be possible, but if possible i can try write down some if the ideas.


i need to say, i totally love the idea of a new road system like in your first drafing !

i dont know in what ways, or if it its possible at all the ideas i tryed writing down above, but im just sharing my thoughts as you asked ur your post
Really like the idea of the P1 project, and sure will follow the development on this one!

It looks like you could look into my head Thats nearly the same I'm planning to do.

BUT: There will be no development of new things. BUT: This will not lead to the concept of "building something then you never have to look at this again" like it is in ottd. The biggest problem of ottd is, that when you have a reached a point of earning millions, you can never lose again. You can do whatever you like, but your company value gets higher and higher and higher even if you are the most stupid person on earth. and this cant be stopped by having-to-replace-steam-by-diesel-over-time.

BUT: The game I'm planning WILL have Diesel and E-Engines (Im sorry, there will be no steam cause this doesnt fit into the current era (21st century), the game will base on) The game will show the state of the art, concerning track systems. In OTTD you can connect everything by e-rails and you still make profit. I P1 you will need two think twice before building e-rail-systems (compared to diesel). P1 will get harder than OTTD or to describe it more expressive: P1 will be a challenge compared to OTTD. BUT: (sorry for saying "but" all the time ) The challenge will not be like in ottd that you have not enough money in the first years. You will have much money and you can build whatever you like even in the beginning (your investors will pay for it). BUT: if you build stupid things like loss-bringing connections etc. your investors will say goodbye and you are bankrupt

[smallfly]

I presume this is so that existing sets made for ottd would be compatible, that wouldn't really work, your proposed tile size would be 4 time smaller than in ottd and I'm shire you'd come across scaling issues, you have drawn sketches of smooth turns, you'll need more than 8 different angles for every vehicle, of course you could go into 3d but that would also remove any possibility of using grfs.

I recommend you ditch the GRF and use a file type that's even easier to edit, for your sake and potential modders.

Of course you wont be able to import ottd's street/track/airport graphics. They are too small (or have no curves). But you will be able to import (correct sized) houses, trees, stones, light towers, signals, etc.

The needed angles of the vehicles are a problem. Im not able to create many angles of the available vehicles. My plan: A small built-in 3D-renderer that takes 3D-models of trains and renders all trains in 360 different angles. These renderer pictures are saved in a cache png file. Tricky

P1 will not be based on the NewGRF system of OTTD, but there will be a ingame-editor to load NewGRF and transform them the file system of P1. That will probably a collection of *.png files and corresponding *.txt files, so that everyone can easily edit the files without the need of any additional tools like a NewGRF reader or whatever you have to use for that purpose if you want to modify ottd data.

I want to make a new GUI system, but mine will not be 40.000 lines of code long. And if it does. The lines will be userfriendly coded

Could you elaborate on this? I don't understand your phrase 'userfriendly coded'. What does that mean?
How is our code not?

To be honest. I didnt even have a close look at the GUI code. I just looked trough all the source code files of ottd and i dont feel very comfortable with it. I dont want to discuss about that. I have no arguments to provide. So whatever you will reply, i will say: You are right.

(I dont want to make ottd bad. Its the best game available and it is less likely that P1 will ever get finished. I just want to point out the things of ottd another game could realize a better way)

[Dante123]

well i am very curious to some first consepts.

just be carefull you dont end up like many, many of those other (in my opinion) failed transportation games. (to name some: Sid meier railroads, transport gigant, and so on)
i tryed almost all of them, but only ottd was a real keeper.

1 of the key point is the complex connecting like the ECS vectors pick up superb, is the idea of raw materials to industry plant. industry plan can than supply some other industry. this industry will produce for example machinery to make the first product in line, produce more and thus will make the line more profiteble. same if it go's to a city, city will grow faster, generating more mail/passengers/...

well, if you ever need some help with graphic stuff or just generating ideas, you can sure contact me. if possible i would like to contribute =) i'm 3D cad engineer, so i thing i can sure help with some of that kind. but about coding, i know nothing

[smallfly]

just be carefull you dont end up like many, many of those other (in my opinion) failed transportation games. (to name some: Sid meier railroads, transport gigant, and so on) i tryed almost all of them, but only ottd was a real keeper.

I'm studying business economics and engineering and already worked in many industrial companies. Trust me: I will not make a game that is as primitive as the ones you mentioned

well, if you ever need some help with graphic stuff or just generating ideas, you can sure contact me. if possible i would like to contribute =) i'm 3D cad engineer, so i thing i can sure help with some of that kind. but about coding, i know nothing

I'm not very good at making graphics. I just like to good complex things. Object oriented but still bit-based. Easy to extend, but good in performance. You WILL surely be able to help me.

To fasten the process of generating new graphics for the game, I will build in a 3D-renderer that generates 2D-graphics of the provided models. So that your 3D-knowledge will be very useful.