Question about servers

[njr1489]

My question isn't going to get answered on the other thread, so i'll ask here. Why didn't you think about letting people customize their servers using ini files like VC-MP does? If this was done back in 0.2, it would have been a lot more fun seeing that you could change where the pickups where, what the classes spawn with, change the classes themselves, etc. Also most importantly, it would have saved people whining about the 0.3 spaz, bad changes in weapons and vehicles after 0.3, the 0.4 stubby complaints, and 0.5 ending up as crap.

I don't want this ending up as a flame thread or anything negative, I just want to know the answer.

[Capone]

0.2>0.3 Core Change that the main reason, in 0.3 core there was no ini.

hope this answer it.

[njr1489]

0.2>0.3 Core Change that the main reason, in 0.3 core there was no ini.

hope this answer it.

Hold on, I thought that 0.3 still used the 0.2 core, and so does 0.4 and 0.5.....

[Capone]

0.1 I'm not sure wot core it was (cos i never played it)

0.2 which i did play, its the same core as vc-mp.

your asking why they didnt use the .ini script, mainly cos 0.2 was buggy, so the team came up with 0.3 (best verion, n1 team), in 0.3 core they stopped using .ini script.

[njr1489]

0.1 I'm not sure wot core it was (cos i never played it)

0.2 which i did play, its the same core as vc-mp.

your asking why they did use the .ini script, mainly cos 0.2 was buggy, so the team came up with 0.3 (best verion, n1 team), in 0.3 core they stopped using .ini script.

Ok, then, why did they stop using the ini? It would have been a lot more fun, and people would actually play 0.5 if it were still here.

[Capone]

why they stop?

probably wanted sumfin new.

(I'm not sure if all this is correct, don't take my word for it)

[njr1489]

why they stop?

probably wanted sumfin new.

(I'm not sure if all this is correct, don't take my word for it)

I don't think that is the reasons, because ini's = customizeable servers. I don't think ini's would get old, since they allow you to make changes in your server, which means its something new when others play MTA.

[Gamefreek]

MTA has never used an ini like VC-MP does, they have always used an scm. Also there is no 0.3 core, all the VC versions have used the 0.2 core which as we all know is very out dated and is being pushed to its limits already. Capo i have no clue where you got that info but you might want to check it again.

EDIT: By the way..VC-MP doesnt use the 0.2 core, the vc-mp built there own.

[Capone]

its was in one of the sa-mp vs mta topics which probably got deleted.

someone posted.. its old(sa-mp) vs new(mta),

they also said sa-mp was using the old 0.2 core & mta was gonna use the new core blue.

cant remember who wrote it.

[njr1489]

MTA has never used an ini like VC-MP does, they have always used an scm. Also there is no 0.3 core, all the VC versions have used the 0.2 core which as we all know is very out dated and is being pushed to its limits already. Capo i have no clue where you got that info but you might want to check it again.

EDIT: By the way..VC-MP doesnt use the 0.2 core, the vc-mp built there own.

Yeah I thought that was more like it. Think about it, if they used ini's all these things that made MTA suck after 0.3 would have never happened.

[Oli]

VC-MP uses SCM hooking to create vehicles/spawn players etc etc. This is done using C++ in their engine, so the packets from the server can easily determine where the SCM hook spawns these things.

In MTA 0.1-0.5 thevehicles and spawn points are actually done in an SCM. This is not as easily changed locally, and hence is hard to do with a packet from the server.

Basically, this is something that isn't supported by these versions of MTA due to their inferior core.

This is, however, extremely easy using BLUE

[njr1489]

Oh, I see. Like always, its a wait for blue answer. We'll just have to wait.

[[FMJ]chode]

Not quite just a "wait for blue" answer is it? He told you why the option of vehicle spawns and character spawns wasn't included in the previous core and he says this has been fixed in blue what else did you want to know, or are you just trying to point out every tit bit that is wrong with the current core and "how it can be improved" No wonder all you get is wait for blue answers, because these have probably already all been fixed/done.

[Toreno]

they also said sa-mp was using the old 0.2 core

lol offcourse that's not true, that's bullshit man

-kyeman has different plans/ideas and he and his team probably use another method(otherwise progress of vc-mp couldn't be so fast ?) so they wouldn't want to use the 0.2 core(it's too old anyway).

-kyeman has never worked on the old core(as far as i know)

so how would he have access to the old core?

-the mta team would probably not allow the sa-mp team to use that core

-0.2 core isn't able to have the synchronisation vc-mp currently has.

PS: 0.2, it's probably 0.3 core! mta blue was formerly known as core 0.4 right?

[njr1489]

Not quite just a "wait for blue" answer is it? He told you why the option of vehicle spawns and character spawns wasn't included in the previous core and he says this has been fixed in blue what else did you want to know, or are you just trying to point out every tit bit that is wrong with the current core and "how it can be improved" No wonder all you get is wait for blue answers, because these have probably already all been fixed/done.

Whoa, my post was nothing negative, I just wanted my question answered. I didn't know that MTA didn't use SCM hooking until Oli told me in his post. Before he posted, I thought ini's could have been used with the current core. I'm fine with the way he answered my question. For me, its a wait for blue answer because I would have to wait to do something like that.