Author Topic: Won/sigs Server Images (Read 4885 times)

leeor_net · « **on:** May 19, 2005, 10:43:35 PM »

I'm looking for screenshots of the original OP2 WON/SIGS server from OP2 In-Game.

Can anyone help me?

:op2: Leeor Dicker

Hooman · « **Reply #1 on:** May 20, 2005, 02:07:19 AM »

Yes.

I'll post some images once I have a web folder to stick them in. ZigZagJoe was setting one up for me.

I think I've figured out some big parts to the network protocol used by SIGS, but I'm currently stuck on one part. I seem to be slowly making some progress, but it'll be a while. The struture of the code leaves a lot to be analysed before I can be sure about what each message does. There are currently too many possiblities to reasonaly guess at things, but I'm systematically reducing that. Eventually it'll yield.

Leviathan · « **Reply #2 on:** May 20, 2005, 12:50:25 PM »

I got a pic on WON somewhere, but cant find it

Hawk · « **Reply #3 on:** May 20, 2005, 02:40:46 PM »

I have a pic Falcon sent me when the WON server was unplugged. Unfortunatly, it's on one of my computers in the states. I'll be happy to share it when I come back. I would have been on at that time, but my company was in the field.

Hooman · « **Reply #4 on:** May 20, 2005, 08:32:53 PM »

Ok, here are some images of SIGS and what I've got sorta working so far. (Working as in, I can get to these menus/screens, but they don't necessarily do anything for me.) I hope this is what you were looking for.

And that's currently about where I'm stuck. I can do a bit of mem hacking to view a few more of the menus, but so far not by sending back valid messages.

Btw, if anyone knows anything about how the system worked, I wouldn't mind hearing about it. I've never got a chance to use the system myself. I never got internet until after SIGS was shut down.

leeor_net · « **Reply #5 on:** May 20, 2005, 09:57:14 PM »

That last image was the one I was most interested in. Thank you!

Are there any other images anyone has? I'm looking mostly for the look/layout of the SIGS gaming rooms.

HOOMAN:
======================
I'm looking forward to hearing all the information you have on the SIGS interface. This is a DLL, correct?

If that's the case, interfacing with the DLL will make things really easy to emulate the SIGS/WON server. Plus, I can also write a server program to run on a host computer that can begin to function as the new SIGS server (we'll need to rename that, won't we?)

After the OPUTool's IRC engine is completed and functioning, the SIGS emulation will be next...

:op2: Leeor Dicker

EDIT - P.S.:
=========
HOOMAN, Could you get me a copy of whatever it is you're using to create those images so that I can make an exact replica that I can very simply plug in the emulation? That would be realy great! :-)

Leeor

Hooman · « **Reply #6 on:** May 21, 2005, 12:33:28 AM »

The SIGS system consists of two DLLs. I haven't modified either to do that. I'm just writing a server to talk with OP2 using the existing protocol. It would however be possible to replace those DLLs with your own and use your own custom protocol. I have a fair bit of info on the DLL interface, so replacing them would be somewhat possible, and I have a fair bit of info on the existing protocol so we can write a server for what already exists. I think I'd prefer going with what already exists. That way no changes to the client are necessary.

If you want to see those menus yourself in OP2, I can tell you how to connect to my test server (when it's actually running). It's just a simple one line edit to an .ini file. Really though, I don't feel my test server is anywhere all that close to open testing. Although I am hoping to take a big step forward in the next few days with the room joining and what not. I've got about 13 messages whose processing code I have to inspect. One of which I believe is the one I'm looking for.

leeor_net · « **Reply #7 on:** May 22, 2005, 02:41:35 AM »

Well, I wasn't really thinking of writting a new DLL file(s). I was planning really on using the original(s).

I wanted to get a test running simply so that I could imitate the look/feel of the original program. That way, once you had all the good information ready so that I could link the program to the DLL(s), it would be a matter of simply supplying API/DLL/Function calls to all of the various fields/forms/controls, etc.

See, my thought is, and for the most part always was, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. So, I'm not trying to fix anything... :lol: I just want to get a program running that I could later plug into OPUTool.

Also, whoever is working on the OP2 hacking (op2hacker presumably... and maybe yourself?), the multiplayer interface could get a small modification that onvokes OPUTool with a SIGS connection or something like that. I guess that's all to be left open to discussion?

Anyways, so if you could get me a bunch of screenshots of the menu's and various dialog's, that'd be great. It'd probably be easiest to stick them all in a ZIP/RAR, upload the file to some place and than send me a link.

Thanks again!

:op2: Leeor Dicker

Sephiron · « **Reply #8 on:** May 22, 2005, 08:48:04 AM »

You will get the feel of the orginal program but it doesnt look the same for some reason. The sign in part even looks funny. Maybe Im just a vet trying to remeber the glory days and they are slowly slipping away from me who knows lol. BUT I do susport all the work you are doing Hooman. Anything away from IRC would be a good thing in my opinion.

leeor_net · « **Reply #9 on:** May 22, 2005, 12:37:19 PM »

With OPUTool, I eventually want to have the IRC client available, but I want to turn it into another kind of IM program (maybe using the SIGS protocalls?). Of course, we'd need some sort of a dedicated server... :lol:

Thanks for your support!

:op2: Leeor Dicker

Leviathan · « **Reply #10 on:** May 22, 2005, 12:39:47 PM »

I think custom skins for a irc client would be good, like Seph says, he dosent like the look of IRC, hes used to WON, which does look like Sigs. A WON look on OPU Tool irc look could be great.

Sephiron · « **Reply #11 on:** May 22, 2005, 06:45:22 PM »

First off levi sigs is won. WON was a subcompany of Sierra, if memory serves me correct. Any game that WON offically did before it was bought out went back to Sierra. Namely ARC OP2 and others. There are numerous reasons why I liked the sigs client better than irc. For one you can create any name with any character which you can not on irc. 2 you could simply click create game and you would start a game and then you just click the game to join. No ips giveing out verbally. 3rd its just better, in my opinion irc sucks, and has always sucked. Even a custom skin would not help in my opinion. As long as I only have to run the chatroom and not the games themselves I could run the server myself. Depending on the number of people the games themselves would be a hassle for any connection below a T1 lol. I do have 5mb cable but I also like to dl crap too lol.

leeor_net · « **Reply #12 on:** May 22, 2005, 08:52:14 PM »

Agreed on all 'counts, Seph.

One of the ultimate goals for my developing OPUTool was to have a built-in IRC client until I could get a dedicated server running a proper SIGS/WON Emulation program. However, I have every intention of expanding the SIGS emulation to support IM's. Ultimately, I wanted OPUTool to work like SIGS++. Maybe I'll rename it to that once it all happens? Who knows.

Of course, all of the 'changes/improvments' will need to be integrated with OP2. Heh... I guess you could say that this is one hell of a project, eh?

:op2: Leeor Dicker

Leviathan · « **Reply #13 on:** May 23, 2005, 06:17:12 AM »

I think OPU Tool being able to create and join games is all it realy needs on top of a IRC client.

Great work as allways Hooman.

leeor_net · « **Reply #14 on:** May 23, 2005, 11:54:35 AM »

Yeah, but that's your vision. When I started OPUTool, that was the way I wanted it to eventually develop.

It will develop as it does. Hopefully it will be something more widely used and can replace the SIGS component of OP2. I guess we'll just have to see how things go, right?

:op2: Leeor Dicker

BlackBox · « **Reply #15 on:** May 23, 2005, 03:29:53 PM »

I think what should happen, is make a user friendly interface but still use IRC as the underlying system.

For example making it easy to change your nick etc.

That way people who dont want to use the client can still communicate with people on it since they are on the exact same chat system.
It's easier too because if you don't want to switch, you don't have to, just go on using the same irc client and you can talk to the users on the OPU tool.

Just because it is IRC underneath doesn't mean it has to look or act at all like IRC. (IRC being used just as the means to transmit messages and other commands, but the client looks like the WON chat client). You can recode the SIGS/WON dlls to use irc as their method of transport, it doesn't *have* to be a proprietary protocol. All you have to do is "fake" WON/SIGS on the OP2 side.

As far as game notification support, etc, I can code the Bot to send and receive notifications about games via CTCP's, notices, msgs, or some other type of IRC notification. The "sigs" client could then use the data returned in the CTCP/notice/msg/etc to indicate a game on its own system.
For the users that are using a normal irc client, we can code a script for them to use so the 'games' interface would work for them too.

It doesn't have to look at all like irc, just the program backend is using irc for chat and sync stuff.

This way stuff is compatible (IRC, the client program), we wouldn't need a server (IRC is being used as the transport).

Also, another point. Quakenet is an irc network full of gamers. If there are other people using quakenet who might be interested in op2, all they do is join the channel and everyone can talk together. (Since many people who already are accustomed to IRC won't want to take the time to download/use a special client AND irc at the same time, they can do it all in one).

Btw, if you want screenshots from the newest WON client, open a new copy of SierraNW.dll in a resource editor. All the dialogs are there.

Hooman · « **Reply #16 on:** May 23, 2005, 03:54:11 PM »

Yes, SIGS and WON are the same thing and they use the same protocol. They seem to have just renamed it at some point to WON. Anyways, I was able to get a login going for WON using my SIGS emulation, but there seems to be a lot more information required and I haven't been able to get as far. (More error, which is why I'm sticking with the older SIGS system for now).

It would be entirely possible to create a chat client that used the SIGS protocol to communicate, or any other that is built into the server, but I haven't even gotten the native SIGS chat part to work. I think any planning for a seperate client, or a link in with IRC is quite far away. Also, I don't see how you can properly link with IRC unless the server software had built in IRC software. I really don't like the idea of wrapping things in script after script and end up having people talk through a bot or something. That just strikes me as way too spamy, and much too hacked of a system. But, I guess we'll see when the time comes where we can start seriously planning something about this.

leeor_net: That interface you see is implemented in the DLL. If you were to link to those DLLs and use them, you'd get the same interface, and of course, the same protocol. Of course, not all the options would then make sense. Like Create Game and Join Game. If you wanted to use the same protocol with a different interface, or a remade interface, you'd be writing all the protocol handing. Of course, the way the protocol is implemented in the original DLLs makes it somewhat easy to reuse code between the client and the server, and I'm developing my code along the same lines. Hopefully it'll be somewhat easy to encapsulate it nicely into a library.

Oh, and if someone remembers a different interface for SIGS/WON, that's highly possible. The interface was implemented by the DLLs, so each new version of the DLLs could mean a new interface. The WON DLLs even appeared somewhat skinable. (I haven't really looked into using them though.)

Btw, for people trying to write a SIGS client using the existing DLLs/interface, I've obtained some info on how the DLL interface is supposed to work and the sort of calls you'd need to make to it. (Granted, the informations is a bit outdated as it was for an early beta, but it's still fairly accurate and potentially quite useful.)

Anyways, as far as a server idea goes, I'm strongly for using the existing protocol. I wouldn't really want to rewrite a custom DLL from scratch with the same interface as the old one.

Oh, and I should ask. What other games used the SIGS/WON system? It might help if I could get various versions of SNWValid.DLL and SierraNW.DLL. Some versions might have more info in the code than others. (Increased error checking is a big plus here).

leeor_net · « **Reply #17 on:** May 23, 2005, 05:04:02 PM »

For OPUTool, I planned on leaving the IRC Client seperate from SIGS. It would be, as you said, too hacked and just simply wouldn't make any sense.

Eventaully I wanted to remove the IRC Client. Of course, that's probably way down the line when a proper SIGS server has been established. A room could be created that would be for chatting. Of course, more than one room could be created.

See, the problem I'm having right now is that I don't have those DLL's. And of course, I'm not really sure how to link them in a VB project. Have you got suggestions?

:op2: Leeor Dicker

Hooman · « **Reply #18 on:** May 23, 2005, 06:09:17 PM »

I don't see any problem with a client that uses two underlying protocols. It'd be possible to do that so the user never knows. But to make the server implement two protocols seems like a lot of work. Of course there are potential problems with using more than one protocol. Like how each protocol can allow a different set of characters in names. Or if a name is in use on IRC, but not on a SIGS server.

Anyways, I don't really see SIGS being a viable replacement for IRC. It would be useful for finding and playing games, but it rather limited as a chat client. I woulnd't want to have to load up OP2 just to connect to a chat room. A standalone client that uses the protocol would be nice though. But still, I imagine IRC is in no real danger of being replaced. Plus, there are many IRC clients for many platforms. Switching to one custom client that only runs on one paltform seems a bit restrictive.

As for the SIGS DLLs. Those are stored in the Windows\System folder I believe. It should copy them there from the CD on install. I'm not sure how well they can be linked to from VB. I'm not sure if the calling convention used is compatible. Although, it probably is. In which case, you'd use the DLLs just like any other DLL. Have you used Windows API calls from VB before? That's pretty much how it'd be done.

Leviathan · « **Reply #19 on:** May 23, 2005, 06:38:51 PM »

The IRC client will allways be part of it as were allways be on IRC for meeting to play and chat, like hacker said other gamers are on QuakeNet, and its not just that, QuakeNet is the bigist gamers IRC network, and also IRC is realy well known and used for years, and many gamers and people use it. Many clients for it on all OS's etc, its just perfect and ideal. And its great that we can create our own custom client for it which we can add stuff to.

leeor_net · « **Reply #20 on:** May 23, 2005, 10:27:10 PM »

While IRC is tremendously usefull right now (as well as Hamachi, apparantly), I eventually want to replace it with the SIGS protocal (as it does indeed work better... it's more userfriendly). But again, that's down the road after the SIGS emulation has been completed.

This is simply to make things easier for players to join/create games and to interact with eachother. This will also hopefully allow for users unaware of the OPU to connect to the OP2 SIGS server that I eventually want to create and host.

But, for the time being, IRC will work perfectly fine as it has for awhile now. So fear not. IRC will be a built-in feature of the OPUtool.

Hooman, have you been able to come up with anything?

:op2: Leeor Dicker

leeor_net · « **Reply #21 on:** May 23, 2005, 10:45:44 PM »

HOOMAN:

Ok. I now have a list of every internal function of both DLL's. However, I'm wondering if you know what the prototypes are for them?

That would be tremendously helpful!

:op2: Leeor Dicker

plymoth45 · « **Reply #22 on:** May 24, 2005, 10:52:51 PM »

Holy freakin crap SIGS looked boring. Please tell me any multi systems we come up with will look better then that.

leeor_net · « **Reply #23 on:** May 25, 2005, 05:09:48 PM »

That was the idea... :-) the SIGS GUI, while efficient, was horribly boring. Not to mention, there was a whole lot of useless information.

Anyway, after much discussion with Hooman, I've determined that attempting to use the DLL functions and retrieve the values returned from them would be utterly useless. We're stuck with SIGS for now.

HOWEVER, Hooman is trying to write a server application. Here's my ideas/thoughts:

Once hooman is able to run server software, he'll know exactly what information is expected from the client software. Knowing that information, I can write a new client that provides the same data... (thumbsup)

Poof, new SIGS interface! Hehe... of course, it'll definatly be more complex than that and will require a great deal of time to develop properly and to make sure it's stable.

Then, later on, it can be incorporated into OPUTool.

:op2: Leeor Dicker

P.S.
I know what you're thinking, Hooman, but I still stick with the fact that software is simply 1's and 0's. :whistle:

Hooman · « **Reply #24 on:** May 25, 2005, 06:19:24 PM »

Quote

P.S.
I know what you're thinking, Hooman, but I still stick with the fact that software is simply 1's and 0's.

Err, wow. I don't even know what I'm thinking. Would you care to inform me? :huh:

I think I may have gotten things to not quite work without crashing now. (As opposed to not quite working AND crashing). Progress. (thumbsup)

As for the interface, that's just the version of the SIGS DLLs I'm working with. Different versions had different looking interfaces. Plus, you could always rewrite those DLLs and make the interface look nicer. But then, that's a lot of work and I really plan to avoid that. At least for the time being.

News:

Author Topic: Won/sigs Server Images (Read 4885 times)