Most stable Rogue-sourcecode?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Hi.
A simple question for you all: What, in your opinion, is the most stable
Rogue sourcecode avaible?

I'm simply looking for the most stable (most finished and balanced)
version of Rogue there is to find.

Ps. Programming language doesn't matter.

Any suggestions or thoughts are welcome.

Regards,
Jocke The Beast





--
Sent via Gamer Newsgroups
http://www.gamernewsgroups.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

At Tue, 13 Sep 2005 15:57:44 GMT,
JockeTheBeast wrote:

> Hi.
> A simple question for you all: What, in your opinion, is the most stable
> Rogue sourcecode avaible?
>
> I'm simply looking for the most stable (most finished and balanced)
> version of Rogue there is to find.
>
> Ps. Programming language doesn't matter.
>
> Any suggestions or thoughts are welcome.

Well, most of them ar pretty stable... In fact, Rogue have never
crashed on me undless there was an operation system or hardware failure.

For the sources of sources of Rogue you might want to check:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010124091500/http://www.win.tue.nl/games/roguelike/rogue/
<-- Various sources
http://home.wanadoo.nl/loche/rogue/ <-- PC Rogue
http://ksi.ii.uj.edu.pl/krogue/ <-- KRogue
http://www.prankster.com/winrogue/ <-- WinRogue

But probably the most stable and polished version is here:
http://roguelike.sourceforge.net/



--
Radomir `The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_
(*+) 3 Sparkle
. . . ..v.vVvVVvVvv.v.. .

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

Contrary to the down-thread post, most rogue
and rogue clone sources aren't stable. They
may not crash out, but nearly all I've looked
through are rife with bugs large and small.

Most can be found through here:

http://dmoz.org/Games/Video_Games/Roleplaying/Rogue-like/Rogue/

Rogue Clone IV used to be actively developed
and less free from bugs than most, but seems
to have become dormant lately -

http://rogueclone.sourceforge.net/

One I'd recommend staying away from is
linuxrogue. It's stable, but pretty buggy. I
have been working on-and-off to free it of
bugs, but I haven't released any files as of
yet. Maybe next month...

I'm not sure if I'd recommend files from the
Roguelike Restoration Project so highly
(again, see downthread). My understanding
is that they're just original sources quickly
refurbed for modern systems. As far as I
know, the licensing on anything off that site
is highly questionable. Several aren't very
well balanced.

Usually, people are looking for those that are
most "true" to the original versions (typically
3.6 and 5.2) that saw wide distribution. Should
you have the time, the best bet is to obtain the
sources to either and work from there. I think
you can undo the RRPs progress to get back
to the originals, but it would be nice for that
group (person?) or someone else to make the
untainted (and somewhat archaic) sources
available to provide a proper baseline.

-don
(posting off GoogleGroups, as I'm lazy)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

And of course, by 'downthread', I meant 'upthread'.

-don

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

I guess I should have been clear, I meant for all the
originals ... you only have 3.6. I was thinking more of
the other "significant" original rogue releases
(4.2/5.2 and 5.3, at the least). But yes, I recall your
site from a long time back. Useful.

It pains me to think that the RRP may have started
tinkering before archiving the original sources, as I
think they're the only ones who ever got a handle on
srogue. I haven't checked to see if the cvs commits
revert back to pristine source, anyone know?

-don

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

> Whatever happened to rogue.coredumpcentral.org.

Aw, crud. Thanks for bringing this to my attention ...
the site appears to have evaporated, and the last
known URL isn't even in archive.org. Time to change
the DMOZ listing, I guess.

What a shame. I wonder if I managed to mirror off
its files? Regardless, most all the links at that site
are listed at DMOZ still, and the files that were in
its archive were mostly gathered in from the 'Net,
with only a few deep scrounges (nothing unique
to the site, just 'Net accumulation).

The older versions of rogue at coredump were
mostly just executables, useful only for strings
manipulation to verify they were the version claimed.

I have a pretty large collection of files of roguelikes
past I keep meaning to post to the 'Net, but it always
seems to take a backseat to life. The legal implications
in most cases are nil. The only ones where it is murky
are the scavenged original sources to rogue that have
been more or less appropriated without licensure. As
far as I can tell, it really isn't all that legal to distribute
them, but people do because "who cares after all this
time?" Poor reasoning, lack of respect, but I would have
to say I'm partly grateful most of those locked-up versions
have been able to circulate.

I can't think of any other older roguelikes licensed under
any terms that would bar distribution for free. In many, many
cases, the problem more likely to be encountered is the
format. For example, executable-only programs for deadish
platforms, or source in languages no longer in common usage,
or (in the case of ports to VAXen), strange archiving methods.

-don

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

"great.throwdini" <googlegroups@brodale.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1126659587.239195.301700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
> Usually, people are looking for those that are
> most "true" to the original versions (typically
> 3.6 and 5.2) that saw wide distribution. Should
> you have the time, the best bet is to obtain the
> sources to either and work from there. I think
> you can undo the RRPs progress to get back
> to the originals, but it would be nice for that
> group (person?) or someone else to make the
> untainted (and somewhat archaic) sources
> available to provide a proper baseline.

http://www.geocities.com/crpg12/source.html


HTH,
copx

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

> It's just that it is tedious and hard to find all
> these files again. I'll try to get in touch with
> coredump to get my hands on the files.

In all seriousness, when I last checked, there
were only a small handful (3 or 4) archived files
on the site that weren't easy to locate on the
Web. They were also the least useful (ancient
BSD executables, for example). Anything that
was tied to an identifiable website was linked
to on DMOZ, as I cross-checked coredump
and passed the site owner files and sites he
didn't have ... I can probably trawl for his email
address from past correspondence, though
given that coredump itself moved around about
four times, I wouldn't assume it to be valid still.

> How large is the collection? Maybe I could put
> it up on roguelikedevelopment.org?

Large, as these things go (we're not talking TBs
of data, but for a while there, I was collecting as
many files as I could locate), but in disarry, and
mostly confined on a desktop system no longer in
regular use. I'm moving, so this isn't something
that I can address in the next week or two, but
remind me again later on, and I'll see what can
be done. There's a smaller subset of files on my
daily use computer (also in disarray), but I can
sort through them to see if any coredump mirroring
is on this computer or the other.


-don

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

great.throwdini wrote:
> I guess I should have been clear, I meant for all the
> originals ... you only have 3.6. I was thinking more of
> the other "significant" original rogue releases
> (4.2/5.2 and 5.3, at the least). But yes, I recall your
> site from a long time back. Useful.
>
> It pains me to think that the RRP may have started
> tinkering before archiving the original sources, as I
> think they're the only ones who ever got a handle on
> srogue. I haven't checked to see if the cvs commits
> revert back to pristine source, anyone know?
>
> -don
>

Whatever happened to rogue.coredumpcentral.org... As I recall it there
were quite a lot of different versions of Rogue available (dunno if
there was both code and executables). Can anyone remember who maintained
the site?

I'd be more than happy to archive and make available source code and
executables for Rogue and other ancient RLs. What are the legal
implications of something like that?

If anyone has old versions of Rogue, Hack and say Larn (anything else
that should be preserved for the future?), then please send them to me
and I'll make them available.

BR,
Björn - roguelikedevelopment.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

JockeTheBeast wrote:
> Ps. Programming language doesn't matter.

Are you planning to extract the rules from the game and create a
new version, possibly OOP'ed? I was thinking it could be something..
But there must be some legal problems in that?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

great.throwdini wrote:
>>Whatever happened to rogue.coredumpcentral.org.
>
>
> Aw, crud. Thanks for bringing this to my attention ...
> the site appears to have evaporated, and the last
> known URL isn't even in archive.org. Time to change
> the DMOZ listing, I guess.
>
> What a shame. I wonder if I managed to mirror off
> its files? Regardless, most all the links at that site
> are listed at DMOZ still, and the files that were in
> its archive were mostly gathered in from the 'Net,
> with only a few deep scrounges (nothing unique
> to the site, just 'Net accumulation).

It's just that it is tedious and hard to find all these files again.
I'll try to get in touch with coredump to get my hands on the files.

> The older versions of rogue at coredump were
> mostly just executables, useful only for strings
> manipulation to verify they were the version claimed.
>
> I have a pretty large collection of files of roguelikes
> past I keep meaning to post to the 'Net, but it always
> seems to take a backseat to life. The legal implications

How large is the collection? Maybe I could put it up on
roguelikedevelopment.org?

> in most cases are nil. The only ones where it is murky
> are the scavenged original sources to rogue that have
> been more or less appropriated without licensure. As
> far as I can tell, it really isn't all that legal to distribute
> them, but people do because "who cares after all this
> time?" Poor reasoning, lack of respect, but I would have
> to say I'm partly grateful most of those locked-up versions
> have been able to circulate.

Agreed.

[snip]>
> -don
>

BR,
Björn

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

You can actually glean 75% of the gameplay
from "A Guide To The Dungeons of Doom"
and "The Rogue Vade-Mecum". Apart from
a few internals/intricacies, the remaining 25%
can be had by observing a few games.

There's very little for which you actually need
to view the source if you're aiming to mimic the
game in a broad sense.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)

great.throwdini wrote:
> You can actually glean 75% of the gameplay
> from "A Guide To The Dungeons of Doom"
> and "The Rogue Vade-Mecum". Apart from
> a few internals/intricacies, the remaining 25%
> can be had by observing a few games.

The Vade-Mecum seems to be well detailed. It could be interesting to
see how easy or hard it is to turn those rules into object-oriented
source code..