Ammako Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Yeah download client is unlikely for the beta since it'd take a fair bit of work to make and based on prior betas they don't bother.It was possible to play the EoC Beta on the downloadable client. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunokiller Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNzDOMx01WA My blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambler Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 Awesome. ^^My blog of EoC PvM, lols and Therapy.^^My livestream- Currently: Offline :(Offical Harpy Therapist of the Mad[hide=Lewtations]Barrows drops: Dharok's helm x2, Guthan's helm, Ahrim's top, Hood and skirt, Torag's hammers, Karils skirt, Karil's top, Torag's helm, Verac's skirt, Verac's Flail, Dharok's Platebody.Dag kings drops: Lost count! :wall:4k+ Glacors, 7 Ragefires, 4 Steadfasts, 4 Glaivens, 400+ shards![/hide] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sy_Accursed Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I don't care if I can still use the java client. Those who can't run an HTML5 client should still be able to experience the benefits of a rewrite. If they just did it in C++, all computers could run it well and it would outperform HTML5 on all machines. As Mercifull said, the only reason to use HTML5 is pretty much moot.And C++ can be compiled into a HTML5 (JavaScript) application. See BananaBread for an example (https://developer.mo...ail/bananabread). Whilst I see people's point with C++ I disagree with it being a good move.Unless I am mistaken C++ would make Runescape become an actual program (like lol or wow) opposed to a web-based applet and one of the biggest selling points RS has always had is being no major download web-based play anywhere. It wouldn't make sense to make a move that would ditch that entire legacy and selling point, it'd be like Xbox suddenly deciding instead of making a new console it's a subscription TV channel that runs games in the cloud; it'd alter the whole premise of the brand. Operation Gold Sparkles :: Chompy Kills ::  Full Profound :: Champions :: Barbarian Notes :: Champions Tackle Box :: MA RewardsDragonkin Journals :: Ports Stories :: Elder Chronicles :: Boss Slayer :: Penance King :: Kal'gerion Titles :: Gold Statue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I don't care if I can still use the java client. Those who can't run an HTML5 client should still be able to experience the benefits of a rewrite. If they just did it in C++, all computers could run it well and it would outperform HTML5 on all machines. As Mercifull said, the only reason to use HTML5 is pretty much moot.And C++ can be compiled into a HTML5 (JavaScript) application. See BananaBread for an example (https://developer.mo...ail/bananabread).That just allows people to write js in C++ afaik. It doesn't really give the benefits that c++ gives. I can't research it well atm so I may be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randox Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 There can't really be a downloadable client for this, at least not like the one for the Java client. That one is a standalone program that is entirely self contained, so that it doesn't require Java to run, and it also cuts out the deadweight of running thorugh a browser. You can't do that for the new client, you need a full fledged browser to run the HTML and Javascript code anyway (because they can't compile into a standalone program, not being programming languages), so if Jagex did a downloadable client they would essentially be creating a feature light web browser. Might as well use the real deal since the people developing Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari, etc all have a better idea what they are doing than Jagex would. For C++, I don't see it being feasible. Even if Jagex are magic and they can simply compile the C++ client into a windows, max, and linux version without needing to change a single thing between them (my observation is that for games, this never happens), that's an additional client that needs to be developed and maintained. Jagex seem to be aiming strongly for the most platforms with the least amount of work, which are currently Java and WebGL, as both work cross platform with exactly zero effort. I did forget mercifulls point about HTML5 being moot though, and I can't find it, if someone could point me to it. This is not really an area of expertise for me so I'm sure I'm missing something. Also, a question I just thought of. What is the standalone Java client written in? Anyone know? Just hit me that it can't be written in Java, or it would require Java to run (wouldn't it?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leon S Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 At what time will the beta open? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 The stand alone client is written in C++. The source is available for free on their downloads page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veiva Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 For C++, I don't see it being feasible. Even if Jagex are magic and they can simply compile the C++ client into a windows, max, and linux version without needing to change a single thing between them (my observation is that for games, this never happens), that's an additional client that needs to be developed and maintained. Jagex seem to be aiming strongly for the most platforms with the least amount of work, which are currently Java and WebGL, as both work cross platform with exactly zero effort. The sad bit is they have custom C/C++ interop code for their current Java client. RuneScape has not been "100%" Java for a long time now. It would not be but a step further to write the client in C++. Honestly, it's not as difficult for a large organization to do as they want you to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum_Myr Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 There can't really be a downloadable client for this, at least not like the one for the Java client. That one is a standalone program that is entirely self contained, so that it doesn't require Java to run, and it also cuts out the deadweight of running thorugh a browser. You can't do that for the new client, you need a full fledged browser to run the HTML and Javascript code anyway (because they can't compile into a standalone program, not being programming languages), so if Jagex did a downloadable client they would essentially be creating a feature light web browser. Might as well use the real deal since the people developing Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari, etc all have a better idea what they are doing than Jagex would. For C++, I don't see it being feasible. Even if Jagex are magic and they can simply compile the C++ client into a windows, max, and linux version without needing to change a single thing between them (my observation is that for games, this never happens), that's an additional client that needs to be developed and maintained. Jagex seem to be aiming strongly for the most platforms with the least amount of work, which are currently Java and WebGL, as both work cross platform with exactly zero effort. I did forget mercifulls point about HTML5 being moot though, and I can't find it, if someone could point me to it. This is not really an area of expertise for me so I'm sure I'm missing something. Also, a question I just thought of. What is the standalone Java client written in? Anyone know? Just hit me that it can't be written in Java, or it would require Java to run (wouldn't it?). This is somewhat correct. First of all, a programming language doesn't have to be compiled. (though javascript is actually compiled using what is known as a "Just-in-Time" compiler, it is semi-interpreted). A programming language is a language which describes to a computer how to perform a given task. C++ happens to be a compiled programming language. Python happens to (usually) be an interpreted language. For these languages you could write interpreters or compilers (though some language features become really difficult to compile) But just because it's not a compiled language does not mean it is not a programming language. I believe you are right in why they picked HTML5, as it allowed much better cross platform support, for less work (rely on browsers to get this right). As for speed, it may be possible that the java applet cannot access the OpenGL libraries as easily and has limitations built into the plugin system, which HTML5 lets them get around. An applet is a lot different from a stand-alone java application. The stand alone client is written in C++. The source is available for free on their downloads page. Wrong. The stand-alone client is written in java with a light-weight wrapper which contains the java engine instead of relying on the java engine built into Windows. However, it is entirely possible to extract the client java part and run it directly (there are instructions written for linux which explain how to do this, so that linux users can use the client.) While part of this is written in C++, it is absolutely nothing like a fully-fledged game written in C++. Those things being said... It has to be taken looking from an effort vs value proposition. How much effort would it be to properly write a game client in C++ which works flawlessly on all the OS's that they currently support? And keeping it maintained, and updated, and maintaining a single source for this client? These things are all very difficult, and not at all cross-platform. (Each OS has its own hooks, and expects things to hook correctly into their software differently) It is much simpler to write in HTML5 and let browser writers work on the cross platform issues. HTML5 has advantages over Java, because the Java has to be an applet which might create limitations, as it has to work within the browser's java plugin. They aren't running stand-alone on the machine. As long as they want to stay in the browser, I do believe HTML5 is better than the java applet would be. Staying in the browser is a rather big requirement for Runescape. Besides, whether they could technically do better with a java applet than with HTML5, isn't relevant, considering what we really care about is how well it actually works. Maxed since Sunday, January 9th, 2014Completionist since Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veiva Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 It has to be taken looking from an effort vs value proposition. How much effort would it be to properly write a game client in C++ which works flawlessly on all the OS's that they currently support? And keeping it maintained, and updated, and maintaining a single source for this client? These things are all very difficult, and not at all cross-platform. (Each OS has its own hooks, and expects things to hook correctly into their software differently) It's not as difficult as you make it out to be. There's utility libraries out there that alleviate nearly all the cross platform headaches (e.g., SDL, Allegro5, and SFML are three big ones). Furthermore, if they stuck to one standard (OpenGL) there would be no need to write much cross platform code because of cross-platform support libraries. Take for example my C# game engine that I'm developing. I am one person, but have managed to put together a rendering engine far more advanced than RuneScape's current one. And guess what? It runs on Linux and Windows (and surely Mac OS X but I don't have a Mac to check it on). I reiterate: with proper coding practices, cross platform games are not nearly as difficult to develop. The hard part is catering to all kinds of hardware, and driver bugs--but that's something that you have to do anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum_Myr Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Using cross platform libraries has issues because that requires the library to be installed, which you can't always guarantee will be installed, there for creating a new dependency. And again, Jagex wants to deliver an in-browser experience. That practically eliminates a client written in C++ or C#, or what have you. As for being for more advanced, that is easy to say and difficult to prove (seeing as we don't have the code for their client) And, it may be far more awesome on your machine(s) but that doesn't necessarily mean it will run everywhere that Jagex wants/requires. But at any rate, the main reason for picking HTML5 is browser-game + mobile platforms. Maxed since Sunday, January 9th, 2014Completionist since Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ammako Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Would they be able to have a standalone game client in C#/C++ that people could download in order to have the best performance, along with the current in-browser version that people can play on-the-go? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veiva Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Using cross platform libraries has issues because that requires the library to be installed, which you can't always guarantee will be installed, there for creating a new dependency. And again, Jagex wants to deliver an in-browser experience. That practically eliminates a client written in C++ or C#, or what have you. As for being for more advanced, that is easy to say and difficult to prove (seeing as we don't have the code for their client) And, it may be far more awesome on your machine(s) but that doesn't necessarily mean it will run everywhere that Jagex wants/requires. But at any rate, the main reason for picking HTML5 is browser-game + mobile platforms. I don't need code to analyze the stream of OpenGL/DirectX API calls. Their rendering system is a beast (not in a positive way). The sad part about my game engine is that in a poorly optimized version of it from a half a year ago it still ran better than RuneScape did on my netbook (Atom / ION combo). To clarify, my rendering engine makes extensive use of resolution independent 2D graphics in a 3D space and that involves a lot of optimization to make it run nicely. Even if you exclude this feature, my engine makes extensive use of modern OpenGL methods (I'm currently adding support for OpenGL 4.3, to give an indication), something RuneScape does not. Also, I don't know what you mean that the target machine must have the dependencies installed. Need I say static linking (if their target is C++) or bundling the libraries with the game (if their target is Java or C# or some other language)? In fact, they already use native code on all platforms via JNI interop. That's the only way to support OpenGL and DirectX in a reasonable fashion on each platform. As it stands now they are alienating a large user base, potential and current, by using WebGL. Internet Explorer does not support WebGL for valid reasons, and Microsoft has no plans of implementing it. They are supporting both Java and WebGL, so why can't they scrap one (preferably WebGL) and offer a much more streamlined experience for their customers? Jagex just wants to be able to say "our MMO can run as-is on Android tablets!" and that's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejollyroger Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 However, it is entirely possible to extract the client java part and run it directly (there are instructions written for linux which explain how to do this, so that linux users can use the client.) Just a quick clarification: HikariKnight maintains the unofficial Linux port of the client, so most of us don't have to pick apart the code. Otherwise, yes, this is what's done every time we use the updater module he's included: we have options to extract this either from the Windows version, or the Mac version. I haven't tried extracting from the Mac client-- I usually just opt to extract the Windows one, which is an .msi file. By default, the ported client uses OpenJDK, that is, the open source version of the Java development kit. I think this is the same as the main Windows client. HK has set it up to allow it to use Oracle's version, but since Oracle hasn't sufficiently patched v7 against security vulnerabilities, I don't personally recommend anyone do that (Windows, Mac, *or* Linux, for that matter). As far as I know HK is working on HTML5 issues, mostly within the context of the Bestiary beta and the RS3 beta (soon, not 100% sure right now). If anything, if you're curious, the Linux thread is very much worth a read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum_Myr Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 thejollyroger, that port is simply calling a different java to run it. And yea, the linux thread is definitely worth it. All you are doing from the updater is extracting the new java portion of the client. The Mac/Windows wrapper part is simply there to static link a java version for Mac/Windows. Maxed since Sunday, January 9th, 2014Completionist since Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunokiller Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Please be careful. My blog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randox Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Administrator Note:Â Going to be working on doing up an announcement for this, but compliments of the Beta Test Code of Conduct, found at [qfc]333-334-0-64870853[/qfc], Jagex has prohibited the posting of information gained from the beta outside their own forums under their NDA, and Tip.It will be enforcing this until further notice, under rule 1.1 of our own code of conduct which outlines our commitment to uphold their rules. My sincere apologies for the frustration this is going to cause, but at least for the time being this is going to be how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwreeTak Posted April 17, 2013 Author Share Posted April 17, 2013 Administrator Note: Going to be working on doing up an announcement for this, but compliments of the Beta Test Code of Conduct, found at [qfc]333-334-0-64870853[/qfc], Jagex has prohibited the posting of information gained from the beta outside their own forums under their NDA, and Tip.It will be enforcing this until further notice, under rule 1.1 of our own code of conduct which outlines our commitment to uphold their rules. My sincere apologies for the frustration this is going to cause, but at least for the time being this is going to be how it works. With the big risk of sounding like a rager; This sucks. I wish to discuss BETA stuff here...:/ EDIT: I'll of course follow this rule though.  Add me if you so wish: SwreeTak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alg Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Please be careful.I don't remember signing anything... :twss: In all seriousness, I'm pretty sure NDAs don't work that way (Yay, lawyer friend and her rants ~5 years back). Still not planning on breaking it, of course. I painted some stuff and put it on tumblr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Den Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Sucks. :/ Was planning on livestreaming it. Guess I'll have to post an announcement later today once it opens saying I cant. ........::::: Rainy's YouTube Channel - Rainy's Twitter - Rainy's Facebook - Rainy's DeviantArt - Rainy's Tumblr - Rainy's Tip.It Profile :::::......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tansuo Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 How come they didn't do this for EoC beta...? | | Â | Â A Blog to Bathtubs for BeginnersQuest Cape | 99 Defence Achieved 11-Jul-2011 17:41 | 99 Prayer 11-Jul-2012 | 99 Constitution 02-Aug-201299 Attack 31/10/2012 | 99 Dungeoneering 31/10/2012 | 99 Strength 31/10/2012 | 99 Magic 2/12/201299 Range 16/12/2012 | 99 Herblore 25/12/2012 | 99 Summoning 4/1/2013 | 99 Firemaking 6/3/201399 Farming 10/4/2013 | 99 Slayer 11/7/2013 | 99 Fletching 21/8/2013 Â | Â 99 Smithing 22/8/2013Â 99 Crafting 19/12/2013 Â | Â 99 Cooking 15/1/2014 Â | Â 99 Agility 25/1/2014 Â | Â 99 Thieving 01/02/201499 Construction 21/04/2014 Â | Â 99 Woodcutting 04/03/2014 Â | Â 99 Fishing 17/04/2014 Â | Â 99 Mining 23/07/201599 Divination 27/07/2015 Â | Â 99 Runecrafting 20/08/2015 Â | Â 99 Hunter 20/08/2015 Â | Maxed 20/08/2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urza285 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 How come they didn't do this for EoC beta...?An oversight obviously. Almost probably use to realizing that after the first quarterly newsletter leaks that they would need to ramp up their protection of premier membership "content." I feel its necessary and submit to their demands. Maxed [February 14, 2012] | Completionist [October 25, 2012] | Trimmed Completionist [in Progress]Visit my Blog! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoko Kurama Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Interesting that they are doing a NDA for this beta, which is mostly graphics and interface, while they did no such thing for the EoC beta, where people used the knowledge gained in the beta to make huge amounts of money and influence the live market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randox Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Ranting about the NDA can now be directed here, where I fully expect every person here to agree with you (you can also do it in rants I suppose). And yes, this is not how NDA's usually work. Usually you have to agree to it before being added to a beta, not retroactively bound by it. I expect this is an effort to try and contain the rumor mill or some such (lessons learned from the EOC beta, whatever they may be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now