Folks, PLEASE... slow, deep breaths.
Slow, deep breaths...
Slow, deep breaths...
Slow, deep breaths...
Calm down. I'm 100% confident that we'll be seeing a login server in the near future. In the meantime, there are lots of other things we could direct our energies toward:
- building content DBs. This task can and should be partitioned into different areas: spawn types, actual spawns, quests, etc. Also, should we exactly mirror the live servers (IMHO this is boring), or partition our efforts into "legacy" and "original, add-on" content? How do we accomplish this in practice?
- deciphering .WLD files to make our own zones (I can help in this regard by releasing my enhanced version of ZoneConverter, even though it isn't 100% perfect--it's only 97% perfect
)
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the dev team is looking at the suggestions we made JUST LAST NIGHT about what we want in a login server and are polishing it and making enhancements. Not to say that they ARE, I haven't spoken to the dev team, but that's what I very strongly suspect. Just relax. I'm sure it's coming.
Remember the thread just a few weeks ago about encryption? Well, that most definitely IS an issue in releasing the source code to a login server. That's also why ShowEQ doesn't include the ENTIRE source, only the non-encryption parts. Because distributing that would:
- be illegal, according to the DMCA
- cause VI to totally freak out and change their encryption, thus breaking ShowEQ, Sins, AND the loginserver.
Remember, the login server depends on its ability to understand encrypted packets from the client. If VI changes this, BOOM, the login server breaks and has to be updated. It might even cause everyone who has updated their client to have to get a new version of the emu. Not angering VI enough to take (programmatic, not legal) action would be a good reason not to release the source. As to releasing a binary, well, a localhost version would be a LOT easier to crank out and get out the door quickly to everyone. I can certainly see why they might want to hold off on releasing a full-blown version until it's polished and has been thoroughly checked for security holes (which are BAD, BAD, BAD...)
A "lite" localhost version will satisfy 90% of our concerns for the time being. If and when they release a full-blown version, believe me, we want one that both works, is secure from hacking, and, ABOVE ALL, protects both the privacy of the server operator and its users.
Windcatcher
Edit: typos