Author Topic: Epsilon Eridani  (Read 16721 times)

Offline Lukc

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
    • http://lukc.upyum.com
Epsilon Eridani
« on: December 16, 2012, 12:28:29 PM »
WARNING: Beware, as the Epsilon Eridani project is currently unplayable. Of course, if you’re not hoping to play or consider clicking on the same “new turn” button for a few minutes is what you consider playing, then you may read the rest of this message without fear of disappointment.

Hi, folks.

Long overdue, I am presenting the Epsilon Eridani project. \o/

The project itself is an attempt to make an Open Source Outpost1-like game in Lua and C.

The code is available with git at git://upyum.com/ee and can be seen at http://devel.upyum.com/cgit.cgi/ee . We also have a fossil wiki at http://fossil.upyum.com/ee/wiki . A bug tracker is also hosted here, though you’d have to mention you put something in it if you want us to notice it. :P

We tried to have a clean separation between the game’s engine, calculating the differences from one turn to another, and the UI. The UI itself is at the time of this writing totally unusable (don’t bother trying to play :P) and the engine is… well, more incomplete than complete. However, we hope to make the project as community-driven, open, clean and documented as possible to reduce the likelihood of it dying of lack of maintenance.

We want the project to be portable. We currently develop only on CRUX Linux and NetBSD, but all components of the game being written in Lua or in C depending only on the SDL would make any port to another OS trivial.

We are very very open to contributions or comments about the quality of the code or of its documentation. The engine is currently fully written in Lua. So is the UI, but it is using custom bindings to the C API of the SDL. Our code isn’t that clean right now, but we often work on that. And if you find something isn’t the way it should be, is stupid, is not documented or has any other kind of problem, just tell us, we’ll fix it.* :)

A roadmap and a todo (to be merged in the roadmap) are also present in the git repository. At the time of this writing, the game engine is capable of making robots move to an adjacent tile, some digging/dozing/mining operations are supported, tube connections are implemented and each structure can produce or consume resources if colonists are available (and the structure is connected to its colony, of course). Other features are partly implemented but still a bit buggy or overly simplistic, such as population growth or food consumption.

If you have any question, do not hesitate to ask. We also have a XMPP channel at epsilon@muc.upyum.com if you want to chat (the XMPP server on outpost2.net is buggy and may not allow you to connect to that channel, however :|). I am also (sometimes) present on the official OPU XMPP channel. :)

Screenshot of what we currently have: http://lukc.upyum.com/surface.png
The 3D models used to make the sprites of the buildings on this screenshot were contributions of Ferinsul. :)

[size=8]* Does not include “Feature whatever isn’t implemented”.[/size]
« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 03:16:23 PM by Lukc »

Offline TH300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
    • http://op3game.net
Epsilon Eridani
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2012, 03:33:15 PM »
I never came around to play Outpost 1. I guess, I didn't want to play a game that's said to be annoyingly buggy. But Epsilon Eridani looks promising and I like the fact that its being developed on Linux.

So, yea, I'll certainly give it a try once its finish. As for help / useful comments, I may contribute one ore two things, but nothing big.


One quick question: Did you ever consider not using Outpost 2 structures? Imo they just look wrong (the scale is wrong and the style doesn't really seem to fit).
« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 03:37:46 PM by TH300 »

Offline Lukc

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
    • http://lukc.upyum.com
Epsilon Eridani
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2012, 03:50:58 PM »
Yes, we did consider that. Before considering using OP2’s structures, actually. But, as Ferinsul’s models already exist and he is contributing, I guess we’ll at least use them temporarily. We’re 100 % dependent on the community for the graphics. I suppose we could discuss it with Ferinsul and see if he’s in the mood of making new models. :P

Offline Fenrisul

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
Epsilon Eridani
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2013, 01:35:40 AM »
Has this gone anywhere yet?

Offline Lukc

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
    • http://lukc.upyum.com
Epsilon Eridani
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2013, 01:41:05 PM »
No. We’re pretty slow, actually. :D

EDIT: I implemented technological prerequisites, minor internal stuff and a beginning of event system (to do stuff like catastrophes, accidents, remembering when a structure has been damaged, etc.). The UI hasn’t progressed on the repository because our UI guy is a Mr. Proper kind of nazi and wants to have some near-perfect code before committing it to the repository. :P

But if you still want to contribute, we should maybe make a list of planned structures on the wiki or something. (I guess my last list got lost? :P)
 
« Last Edit: January 18, 2013, 01:57:15 PM by Lukc »

Offline leeor_net

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2352
  • OPHD Lead Developer
    • LairWorks Entertainment
Re: Epsilon Eridani
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2015, 05:18:54 PM »
Hate to bring up another old topic from the grave but I too am curious if this has gone anywhere. The links are dead (naturally)... I think link rot has to be the most annoying problem with the web to date.

Anyway, I'd like to see your progress on this project, especially now that I've my own second attempt at an OP1 remake.

Offline Jefferson17

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Epsilon Eridani
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2017, 01:55:18 PM »
I never came around to play Outpost 1. I guess, I didn't want to play a game that's said to be annoyingly buggy.

Well I just replayed Outpost and it was just fine.  The only annoying thing (minor) is the terraforming took longer than it "should have" (said X years to go but it took much much longer).