GAE and MegaGlest: Friends, not rivals

[Omega]

I'm sick of seeing people get hostile when GAE and MegaGlest are compared. They both stem from the same roots, they have their differences. One engine might do one thing better, while the other does another. The two engines have even worked together in the past; GAE members have added content to MegaGlest, and Tomreyn did a rash of bug testing for GAE. I don't see why this has to be some petty rivalry, when they can work together and cooperatively. Yes, everyone is welcome to have a preference, but it doesn't matter if you prefer GAE or MegaGlest if you care about both maxing out their potential.

For example, if someone requests a feature on MegaGlest, let's say they want a method of transports (storing a unit inside another unit). Someone might mention that GAE has this feature, and then might explain (or link to an explanation) of how it works there. This isn't meant to be in any way an attempt to fuel rivalry between the two engines. It's meant to ensure that should the feature be implemented in the lacking engine, it can use the same (or similar) syntax. If there's one thing I'm sure we can all agree on, it's that when it comes to modding options, doing the same thing different ways hurts modders.

As well, does it matter if someone immensely prefers one engine? Should they be banned from commenting on the other engine? There's no reason that just because someone prefers one thing over another, that they don't still approve of the other. For example, I prefer sour cream and onion chips over all dressed, but I still like all dressed chips. I can still eat them. I might not like them as much as sour cream and onion, but I still like them.

The bottom line to this message, is that lately people have been getting tense whenever someone mentions the other engine on their specific boards (such as in a feature request). I don't see GAE and MegaGlest as rivals. They share much of the same fan base, and are very alike, stemming from the same source. I see them as friends. When GAE is mentioned on the MegaGlest boards, people shouldn't be groaning. They should be noting the differences the engines have, so that both can be improved better. It's not just about GAE, nor is it just about MegaGlest. It's about both MegaGlest and GAE. Friends, not rivals.

[Psychedelic_hands]

Massive  .

Surely everyone here is mature enough to compare the engines without being offended. Of course if someone is obviously tring to start an debate over which is better, I say simply ignore them. I'm pretty sure no one here hates the other engine, but if you do..... For shame, glest community member.... For shame.

I can see that a merge is no longer feasible, because of even my own bias....  so I need to learn to respect others peoples bias as well... And hopefully that will at least lead to mutual  benefits though cooperation, sharing and friendliness.

[Perplesso]

In my opinion, the main problem with GAE and MG is their dofferent "core". For example, some features (cloaking, transport, multiple animations, and so on) can be considered "plugins" of a same core. And it's OK: a modder should make a choice between two different "plugin packs" of a same "core".
But the main problem resides here, in the core... because it's different. For example, some mods for MG must be modified to run on GAE. Not only extras will not work (and it would be an expected consequence of not having the same "plugins")... but also basic features: for example, as stated in other threads,
- MG supports textures and icons whose size is not a power of two, GAE does not
- pathfinding algorithm, if I remember well, is better in one engine (I do not remember which)
- some XML tags are different even if they have exactly the same purpose
- projectile emission rate is float in MG and int in GAE
It's only a problem of base conventions: if these are fixed, EVERY mod designed for engine X would work seamlessly in engine Y. Or, more radically, Glest core could be separated from "customized" features and become common between GAE and MG. So, at least a "core merge" would be done, but the two projects could keep their (legitimate!) identity.

[Coldfusionstorm]

While modular things in general is nice im having trouble seeing this implemented, because typically plugins run on something the core understand (Lua,Perl,Html,) This is most often acomplised with a API.

But as omega said, the engines are trying to be as compatible with each other as possible,and ive seen changes ported.

Besides its great as it now, GAE does features and MG does Network, and if stuff is good it gets ported to the other core.

In my optimistic opinion.

[Omega]

In my opinion, the main problem with GAE and MG is their dofferent "core". For example, some features (cloaking, transport, multiple animations, and so on) can be considered "plugins" of a same core. And it's OK: a modder should make a choice between two different "plugin packs" of a same "core".
But the main problem resides here, in the core... because it's different. For example, some mods for MG must be modified to run on GAE. Not only extras will not work (and it would be an expected consequence of not having the same "plugins")...

That is true, they do have their differences, though it's worth noting that the point of this thread is not to show how they differ or how they similar, just to point out that they shouldn't be considering each other rivals, but as partners that can help each other grow.

Nevertheless:

- MG supports textures and icons whose size is not a power of two, GAE does not

Technically, GAE supports power of two images, but the problem is that power of two images can crash many older graphics cards, so GAE prohibits their use by force. This ensures that even if they work on the modder's computer, the modder will have to take into aspect the fact that it may not on others. It's the same way with how scenarios require all but console text to be passed through a language file: it ensures that modders won't try and "hardcode" the output text, preventing it from being translated in the future. One could say that's a feature.

- pathfinding algorithm, if I remember well, is better in one engine (I do not remember which)

That's a tricky one. Technically, GAE was the first to change the pathfinding drastically, and that algorithm was attempted to merge into MegaGlest, but it did not work out properly. However, MegaGlest has changes to allow better pathfinding with groups of units, so both engines have an advantage over the other in some way.

- some XML tags are different even if they have exactly the same purpose

Fortunately not too many. For techtrees/factions, only the way loading screen images work is different, and both the MegaGlest and GAE method can be combined for that, to ensure support for both. Scenarios have a few more differences, however, as well as the particle emission rate as you mentioned below.

- projectile emission rate is float in MG and int in GAE

Dunno why this one's still not fixed in GAE. I'll bring it up again in the mailing list.

[tomreyn]

While I agree your observation of people getting annoyed by you when you post things in the MegaGlest forums is correct, you are missing the point about the underlying reason: it is not because you mention GAE, not at all. I think it's healthy that there are two projects and that there is a little bit of competition. The real reason you are not making friends is that whenever you post on the MegaGlest forums you point out how GAE has, as you say, already solved some problem, and in a much better way. You are clearly subjective, and you state things as if they were facts. This can support the impression that your long term goal, whether unconsciously or not, is to draw people away from MegaGlest towards GAE, using subjective arguments.

Maybe that's not the case, it's hard to tell, but clearly you're subjective enough in the wrong place. You would not go to a marriage and tell the bride groom how cute the girl next door is, would you? I'm sure you're welcome to praise GAE over the top in the GAE forums. You are also welcome to mention GAE in the MegaGlest forums (if maybe not at the same frequency, after all these are the MegaGlest forums so the focus should be on this), and, if you can make it to compare both projects objectively, you're also welcome to compare the features which are already a topic of discussion, just please don't overdo it. Thank you.

Finally, to not cause a bad impression: I am happy there is GAE, and I like some of its features better than MegaGlests'. And if it is going to have a working cross platform network gaming support then, for me personally, it can become a real competition to MegaGlest in the area of multi-player online games (which matter most to me). I wish the GAE guys all the best and hope the project will continue to refine.