Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
I mostly meant from an internal programming point of view, though those sorts of inconsistencies contribute to that. Since originally there wasn’t really any planning for what EE would become in the long term (originally it was basically just a demo of what PlayerIO could do, don’t think it was ever planned to become a long running thing) so many things have had to be messily bolted on, barely working. E.g. ice, half blocks, global switches, curse/zombie, boosts, etc. There are also many long-running bugs even with things like portals which have been there since nearly the beginning that you couldn’t fix without breaking any world with precise portal physics.
On top of that even making simple changes to the game had become a huge pain, adding even a cosmetic block required inserting a 16x16 image to some giant 10k wide png, working out the 16x16 tile you added it to, modifying code in 5-10 different places, making two new releases, and doing a full release countdown in game. One of my goals for EEU was to trim this down to 0 code changes, just adding an image and modifying a data file, possibly not even needing to restart the server or kick players out of worlds.
I still think the correct course of action is to build something new from the ground up, taking things slowly rather than rushing so you have time to plan out these sorts of things to prevent them from happening again. Bringing worlds across I don’t have a strong opinion on but at a minimum breaking a significant number of old worlds is probably required to fix EE’s problems.
Yeah if the goal was to make a 1:1 HTML5 port of EE then yeah that’d be pretty easy and could be done relatively quickly (and is something many people have got pretty close to doing in the past).
The problem is that EE has become a mess, and if you just made a 1:1 copy of it you’d also copy over a lot of the problems it had. You’re left with basically what you had before, just without the one problem of using Flash.
What the larger projects that have yet to succeed have been is attempts to create something more easily maintainable, less buggy, more performant, etc. If you wanted to create a viable EE alternative this is what you should aim for.
Update!
Seb has complained about some more worlds which were missing, I've fixed some of the issues causing this and will upload a new archive (and actually release it this time) Soon™!
(approx 626k new worlds, almost entirely spam, but with around 3000 which might be nice to have)
Details for nerds: Previously I had to filter out all these spam worlds since it tripled the size of the archive, but since I've added world de-duplication (which is what allowed me to include home and empty worlds) this no longer matters as much, so might as well just include all of them.
Send me or Seb a message on discord I guess if you want an early sneak peek at the new worlds (and look for any issues / more missing worlds / etc so I don't have to!)
Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!
N1KF wrote:Joeyjoey65 wrote:world portals are still not fixed, epic fail by luke
As far as I can tell, LukeM wasn't directly involved in either EEO or the EE Web Archive. He was responsible for ArchivEE, but ArchivEE has an option to group worlds together with world portals intact.
So, the blame would either be with EEO for its barebones implementation of world portals, or the EE Web Archive for not having the advanced functionality to group worlds into a single file yet.
EE Web Archive internally uses a C# library maintained by Luke to interact with the ArchivEE database.
I might make a pull request to that library if I find some free time.
The world portal problem is just because EEO doesn’t really have a way to index world files by world ID rather than a problem with the library, if you want world portals to work you need to bundle all the worlds you need into an EELVLS file instead, I believe the EELVL C# library provides functionality to do this.
And about the update to ArchivEE, I’ll be doing that at some point soon, I’ve just been busy and had a couple last-minute feature requests I’ve been working on before I update the official version.
Edit:
One of the additional features for my ArchivEE Search tool is doing something similar to this automatically, so you can use that as a reference once I release it if that’d be helpful.
Also oops, seems like the forums channel of the discord stopped picking up replies here again for some reason?
Do any C# programmers want to try compiling and distributing the new ArchivEE reader executables? I'd rather not do this myself because IDEs tend to cost me hours of troubleshooting just to get everything working correctly. This is the perfect chance to give N1KF malware, people!
Done! I'll upload the new reader (should be compatible with both the old and new databases) individually if you don't want to wait for the full download when I update the main post.
Triple posting because I finally got these 16 inaccessible worlds after spending way longer than I should have fiddling with SQLite databases. Here they are:
https://download857.mediafire.com/4602a … dNames.zip (73 KB)
The more popular worlds include )))))... by eeisfullofnoobs (a 25x25 key race), -->BLIND MAZE LEVEL UP<-- by Terence22205, Musicart 2 by Mathy & Sensei1, *Weird As Hell / Easy* By:ExPl, and Loonely Noob Boss. The remaining eleven? They're all named "only nazis" and some have multiline ASCII swastikas in the title. Fortunately they just look like basic EE worlds.
I believe these should all be fixed in the new archive, let me know if not.
Hello, I wanted to have a look at my older worlds but then I realised that my computer inst compatible with this program, i know its a little late, but if possible, could you release a version of that program compatible with 32bit windows 7 computers? Would be a huge help for a lot of people with the same problema as mine.
A lot of the dependencies used to make this work only run on 64 bit windows sorry, if I have time I might see if I can get them to compile for an older version, but I'm not sure if it will work and I don't have access to a 32 bit computer to test it on, so it'll be difficult to debug.
Changelog:
- Fixed gravity effects
- Fixed world portal spawn points
- Fixed time trial times (can't remember what this meant but I had it ticked off so I guess it's fixed?)
- Fixed crashes during world exports
- Split the world table in two, one part for metadata and one part for world contents, allowing for de-duplication of worlds with the same contents
- Improved world compression using zstd rather than lzma, allowing for better compression of small files using a common dictionary
- Improved query result loading, allowing the results to be streamed in rather than loading the entire result to memory before beginning processing
- Added roughly 45k worlds to the archive which were previously missed
- Added roughly 720k empty and home worlds
- Probably more that I've forgotten
- All this in an only 15MB larger download!
I'll leave this here for a short while so people can try it out and report any bugs, then once I'm reasonably sure everything is working I'll update the main post, along with uploading a version of the database using the previous format for compatability reasons, and possibly Linux and MacOS versions if I can manage to get these to work.
Plz let me know if you find any bugs, missing worlds, etc and I'll make sure to fix them some time in the next 2 years!
One of the issues with EEU, might I remind the readers, was that the developers, surprisingly, weren't truly motivated with receiving just the amount of coins needed to wash their cloths in which they were sweating in while coding, as remuneration.
And, yet, apparently that design document covers everything about the game but monetization.
I’ll have you know the money I made from EE covered not only all of my washing from the date I started up until a couple months ago, but also a few other small purchases which only accepted PayPal!
More seriously, for me the money was never a problem. I was a full time student in the UK where all tuition, accommodation, and living costs are funded entirely by the government by a very fair student loan which you never need to pay back unless you earn above the national average and can afford to pay it. The reasons I didn’t spend more time working on EEU were partly that I was a full time student so was very busy, and partly that the constant drama around Xeno, the way Xeno treated us, the data breaches, the hacking incidents, etc made it unenjoyable.
This time is different since they’re paying people to do it as a job rather than having it be a collective hobby, so monetisation is more important, but for the reasons I stated above I don’t think putting monetisation as the #1 priority is a smart idea.
Intentionally deceiving us? They’ve said hardly anything, I’m not sure how they’d be deceiving us lol
Are you just talking about those two quotes about not prioritising monetisation and having at least one rendering bug? If so extrapolating from that to not having any plan for the user experience, retaining players, a vision, etc is a massive stretch.
As you seem to be focusing a lot on monetisation I’ll touch in that directly:
Prioritising monetisation over gameplay is what results in a pay-to-win game completely stuffed full of micro-transactions, and isn’t something that is good for the player. I’d say it’s a very good thing that their #1 priority is creating a good game. Counter-intuitively, focusing on monetisation first is actually generally a bad business decision, since it leads to a worse game, which leads to fewer players and less potential for monetisation. If you have a really good game with a dedicated community, you can generally find ways to monetise it, a lot of games survive on voluntary donations only.
It sounds like you’re assuming that because you haven’t been told about their plans, there aren’t any.
The new team are taking a different approach of carrying out all this planning internally, rather than including the community in the discussions. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it’s how most games are developed, it’s just different.
Because of this we’ll just have to wait and see, right now it’s understandable that not much is happening since a world superpower is at war with the home country of many of their devs. Once this is over and they share more info we’ll have a better idea of how things are going. Until then anything is just wild speculation.
Word from Fixel.
One dev uses MacOS for development. Two devs are using Linux for development. One uses Windows 10 for development. WebGL client will run pretty much on a potato, and if that's not enough, native client is written on .net with such a minimum requirement that it runs mono framework and on all of those OSes. Mono executable is compiled as a fat binary so it is compatible with both 32 bit and 64 bit OSes. And if that's not enough, you're not our target demographic.
And keep in mind, game engine doesn't run on client. The client just acts as a remote IO (front-end). The engine runs on a Linux server written in highly optimised C++ code.
This is fairly unrelated to the performance issue, but I’m wondering a couple things:
Does this mean that things like the physics engine need to be duplicated between the two versions of the client? Or are you doing something similar to maybe Realm of the Mad God where a few times a second the server sends a list of new movements and the client just replays them?
Also on the .net front, is there a reason you’re not using .net core (or its successors .net 5 and 6), since those are natively cross-platform without the need for mono. I believe you can also compile in the .net runtime if running without any setup is a requirement, or you can bundle an installer with the executable like some popular games that use .net do.
I guess until fairly recently (possibly after you already started the .net port) they haven’t had a great way to create GUI applications, but with .net 6 there’s MAUI which I’ve heard good things about.
I'd echo what people have said above.
EEU was built on custom physics/graphics engines and it performed very well. I was able to play it at 60fps on a phone released over a decade ago.
The web is excellent in allowing you to support a huge array of old hardware with very little effort, you can write one version of your app and the browser-makers will ensure that it supports Windows, MacOS, Linus, 32 bit, 64 bit, AMD GPUs, Nvidia GPUs, Intel GPUs, both integrated graphics and discrete, etc etc etc.
There *is* a small performance penalty for this, but the majority of the problem with the web is badly written code rather than an inherent problem with the technology. If you take care to write efficient code you can do surprisingly well.
WebAssembly and WebGL add to this by providing close to native performance, though as you say a very small minority of setups don't support these. To solve this some people write two versions of their app, one which supports these modern features and runs very efficiently, and one which uses older technology and runs slower, though since the percentage of people unable to use them is becoming increasingly tiny, and since this can usually be fixed with a simple software update on the user's part, this isn't always worth it.
Someone on their team can probably fill in the exact details about these things once they've decided on them, but until then it's probably a safe bet that it'll run pretty efficiently on almost all hardware.
LukeM wrote:I've just finished uni!
Congrats Luke!!
Can this be modified to respect visible false worlds?
Thanks!
To do this either all visible false worlds would have to be removed from the archive, which generally people don't really want (since this would prevent the owner from downloading their hidden worlds), or there would need to be some system to verify ownership of EE accounts.
From the ArchivEE side this would technically be possible if I encrypted private worlds then hosted a server to connect to the EE servers to verify ownership of accounts, then give out the encryption keys only to verified owners, but this would be a whole lot of efford I don't really want to put in.
So as ArchivEE contains all worlds no matter what there probably isn't too much of a point in 0176 implementing it just for the Web Archive, and it would still be a reasonable amount of effort to do safely. Either the user would have to send their password to 0176's server so that it could log in to their account, which would be bad for security, or 0176 would have to create a system to prove ownership of accounts by joining an EE world or modifying the database or something (which I'm not entirely sure is still possible).
So technically possible in a couple of different ways, but probably not worth doing.
the gravity effect is wrong, it killed my ctm 3, please fix
also, i reach last purple mini in ctm 4, and that mini is too hard for me
Yes sorry, this is my fault, I made a couple mistakes when converting from my full database download to the compressed version I released for ArchivEE.
I've been super busy and haven't had time to fix it, but might do soon since I've just finished uni!
This really sucks for everyone affected, I wish them all the best and hope they and their families are safe.
Take all the time you need. Even without half your staff needing to flee from a global superpower declaring an unlawful war, things like this always take longer than people expect. EE took roughly a decade to get to where it was when it shut down, and even after all that it was a mess, performing terribly with half of the features barely working.
I’d personally prefer more open development so we can all come along for the ride, but I can see how often this just attracts a lot of non-constructive criticism, so how you develop the game is up to you, the way you’re doing things is fairly standard for the games industry.
So stay safe, take all the time you need to make sure your staff are safe, then even after the war comes to a (hopefully swift) end, take all the time you need to get things right.
▼chzandham wrote:I'm not on the forums religiously, you guys are a little stuck up. That server cost is extremely inflated as well, it would definitely be easier to host it elsewhere or to fine a better plan. I'm still completely willing to do it.
Putting the game back online anywhere would just take an unreasonable amount of effort.
Firstly the client uses Flash, which has been discontinued for security reasons, so it would be unsafe to connect it to the internet without a complete rewrite of the client to some other technology like HTML5.
Secondly the server uses PlayerIO's libraries and services, so either you pay the $2.5k/month or also rewrite the entire server to use something that isn't PlayerIO.
And all this for maybe a handful of concurrent players if you're lucky. And once EE! comes out you'd just be splitting an already tiny community in half, which probably isn't the best idea. It's just not really worth it.
You still there, LukeM?
Hi
I've made most of the bugfixes but ran into a few weird ones I didn't manage to get fixed before something else came up over the summer.
I was looking through a bunch of worlds with Kirby to try and work out which ones are missing, so that I could try and work out how to fix them. A good number of them are fixed (and I've sent Kirby a half-finished version of the archive to look through), but there are still some I'm pretty sure can be fixed where I haven't worked out what's wrong yet.
EE didn’t need player-run servers because it already provided private servers for free for everyone.
It’s cheap enough to run a server for a game like EE that it could just run servers for free for everyone so that they don’t need to run their own. With games like Minecraft and Terraria, the worlds are much larger, and there’s complex AI that needs to be run, which together make running a server require a significant amount of performance, much more than EE, so they just leave running a server up to the players.
The same is true for EEU, even in the unoptimised state it is in, and assuming something doesn’t go terribly wrong will almost definitely be true for EE! too.
The one exception is EEO, which doesn’t have official servers provided for a variety of reasons as discussed many times before, and doesn’t have player-run servers partly because it would take a significant amount of work (which at the end of the day would have been work taken away from EEU), and partly because now flash is no longer getting security updates it would be irresponsible to recommend connecting it to the internet.
LukeM wrote:From what I've heard the minimum specs listed on that site are only for new windows devices coming with Windows 11 preinstalled, there are lower requirements for upgrading to Windows 11 that almost all semi-recent devices should meet. (The TPM 2.0 requirement is replaced with TPM 1.2, among other things)
The lower requirements that you mentioned are only for insider releases, and when the official release comes out, they will have to return to Windows 10. Windows 11 will continue having the minimum requirements from their site.
Sources:
https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insid … indows-11/
https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insid … uirements/There's this other site from Microsoft documentation specifying the Windows 11 requirements: Compatibility for Windows 11
Anyway, my laptop has no Secure Boot, no DirectX 12 support, no TPM at all... Yeah, I'm screwed.
There's a bit of contradictiory information about this...
So originally they published both "recommended" and "minimum" specifications lists, the recommended including things like TPM 2.0, and minimum only needing 1.2.
This has since been changed to only list the previous recommended specifications, so removing all mention of TPM 1.2, etc.
The second link you sent does however mention that they will test certain devices with Ryzen 1000 CPUs (with TPM 1.2) to see if they "meet their principles", which suggests that TPM 1.2 will be supported long-term.
What makes most sense to me is that the specs they list are what is required for a manufacturer to ship their devices with Windows 11 preinstalled (which would be why they are talking about manually testing devices that do not meet the requirements but may still perform well), but they will still allow you to install Windows 11 on any device which meets some lesser minimum requirements, even if it doesn't have official support.
Basically "we guarantee that Windows 11 will run well on devices which meet these requirements, and it may also run on some devices which meet these lesser requirements, though we don't take responsibility if it doesn't"
I must have been browsing the wrong section of the Microsoft store before, my bad. Plenty of these do support Windows 11. Plenty of machines that are certainly still top-of-the-line are excluded, though, just based solely on the processor whitelist. Even if they support TPM 2.0, although I still have no idea why TPM is a deal-breaker at all, 1.2 or 2.0 or 0.0.
From what I've heard the minimum specs listed on that site are only for new windows devices coming with Windows 11 preinstalled, there are lower requirements for upgrading to Windows 11 that almost all semi-recent devices should meet. (The TPM 2.0 requirement is replaced with TPM 1.2, among other things)
An EELVL file is a raw Deflate stream, not a full gzip file. A gzip file expects a bunch of metadata that isn’t provided by default by Flash.
I’m not sure how you’d handle this in Python, but a quick Google comes up with this, which seems like it might work:
Oh oops, since EE shut down I’ve been keeping up with the forums through GregBot in the EE discord, and it seems like it hasn’t been picking up replies here for some reason?
Yes I still intend to do a big bugfix update, but I’ve had some university stuff I’ve needed to do and we’re about to start exam season, so it might be a month or two before I get around to it.
In the meantime I’ve got the raw EE worlds database saved so no data was lost, it’s just too big to share for people to download so any bugs in my compression code mean that data isn’t saved correctly in the archive. I’ll add all the bugs people find to a list of things to fix and release a new copy of the archive when I have time.
Until then it sounds like the EE database is still up, so if you do run into one of the worlds that were corrupted, other people have released tools to download them directly.
^ Pretty sure it's 90% less risk of serious health complications. We still don't know if the vaccines really stop you from spreading it. etc etc
I'll happily be corrected, but I could've sworn that it's generally international policy to try and address domestic demand before sending it elsewhere like so
Though I think it would also be good to verify. How would you have the vaccines distributed? The US buys vaccines from international suppliers and then gives them away? The international suppliers limit their shares given to the US? Pretty sure this last one has happened a bit as well.
But I'm not sure.
Data for pfizer-biontech:
The trial:
- 95% effective against symptomatic disease
Real world data:
- 97% effective against symptomatic disease, severe/critical disease, and death
- 94% effective against asymptomatic disease
With the vaccine distribution it's a bit of a catch 22, on the one hand the best thing to do to combat the disease is to share doses fairly between all countries, but on the other hand most of the vaccine doses were pre-ordered to fund their development, so without these large pre-orders from richer countries we might not even have them.
One of the biggest examples is probably the UK vs the EU. The UK from the start pretty much threw money at every vaccine they could to speed up development, while the EU treated it more like a normal purchase of resources so spent more time trying to get a good deal and things. This means that the UK's vaccine supply chain is now several months ahead of the EU's. This is leading to a fairly big disagreement where the EU is arguing that it was irresponsible for the UK to hog so many doses of the vaccine (we purchased significantly more doses than we need), and the UK is arguing that if they hadn't pre-ordered these doses they wouldn't exist right now in the first place.
Honestly I don't really know what's best. Sharing vaccines will lead to fewer deaths overall, but allowing a country first access to the vaccines they funded gives an incentive for everyone to contribute as much as they possibly can to vaccine development. If instead of developing vaccines ourselves we all put money in a shared pot that was used to develop vaccines for everyone, I doubt the richer countries would have contributed as much money as they have now, so we probably would have less vaccine supply overall.
It makes sense, random.org's main feature is that they use real noise (which they collect using radios or something from the real world), rather than generating it whenever people ask for it, so they only have a certain amount of supply they need to share between everyone. When you have a limited resource like that you have to have a way of limiting how much people can use so that you don't run out.
[ Started around 1732667915.6702 - Generated in 0.724 seconds, 10 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.86 MiB (Peak: 2.25 MiB) ]