Hard to say but it could be a dependency issue?  I'd first doublecheck that walktest and celtst work and then move on from there.  I doubt its  Arches fault, great distro and I love pacman!

Well the bug only exists for linux users.  It doesn't work on any of my machines atm but I only have PS compiled on four of them.  The rest suck too much to care about even bothering with.  In any case you may have just the right combo of drivers, hardware, and software versions of X and such that it works but most will experience this issue nonetheless.

The Cg Toolkit does that unless you are on an insane machine like caarrie.  I don't know why hers works but its a noted bug that the standard shader doesn't work with cg.  The reason your walktest worked was because the default castle map is a dynamic map with parallax mapping and basically no standard shader applied, hence it looks fine.  It only fails on the standard shader, all others work.  PlaneShift is completely static everywhere I've found, they make no use of shaders at all that I'm aware of save maybe a few on cal3d char models perhaps.  As a result PS looks textureless with cg2.0.

Forgot about those kernels! You're 32 bit

That looks like either an incomplete download or the wrong architecture to me.  Are you sure you aren't on a 64 bit distro?

I'd get turned away from an "open source license." So in my case, you'd actually lose an artist. Might want to consider that, Ahrimann. This is not a new argument, and my eyes glaze over every time someone brings it up. Not new. Stop it

Agreed, its almost impossible to know what the ratio of potential artists who are willing to work for free whom would prefer the protection of a proprietary license vs those that would prefer the freedom of an open license like Creative Commons.  It really depends on the person and I really don't think there is a good metric for measuring that.

We certainly don't lack encouragement. Where are you coming up with this? Self-imposed limitations? Perhaps only limited in that we can't dedicate 24 hours to learn how to make better art, though everything we make turns out better and better anyway. And who the hell "forces" players to thank developers..? I am so lost. And irritated at this nonsense.

I don't think anyone ever forced any players to thank the devs but there are times that I've gotten the impression that some devs consider at least some aspects of the community ungrateful so maybe he got that vibe and added the traditional political spin. 

I didn't really mean that we were lacking good artists, rather we are lacking artists who have a good amount of experience in game development (at least one AAA title on their resume) and who know how to use the engine well, which isn't their fault at all but rather the result of a lack of excellent documentation about the engine. The best artist in the world can't make a good looking game if he/she doesn't know how to leverage the engine in the most optimum manner.

Too true, there are lots of aspects of it from good knowledge of the 3d package you are using for doing things like generating low poly models and texture baking to optimizing your export for your game engine.  I'm a pretty good brain to pick for that by the way if anyone needs to know something

You can freely use the engine for your own game. But make your own levels, graphics, characters ...

Too true though its at least [somewhat] actively discouraged.  You're right though.  I don't think people really realize how much work it is actually to do something like that.  Arianna did it once for a college thing once and knows the most about it.  Creating something like that is an immense amount of work!

If anyone wants to look for a fight, I suggest they find a new hobby, the FOSS arguments bore me. Join us in making the dream of a add free fee free game possible, or please, stop wasting our time.

Awww but you know me! I'm always looking for a fight! Keeps things interesting and gives me good reason to stay up late at night working feverishly to become some leet super artist!!!  Its part of my incredibly opinionated and stubborn nature! 

Really though purely insulting arguments don't get anyone anywhere because it just makes anyone with an opposing viewpoint defensive so then they respond in a different manner that isn't usually a discussion based on merit and the whole discussion deteriorates from something that could potentially include things that are worth discussing into something with nothing really useful at all for anyone to look at at all.  I could make an argument for or against open licenses on the art without calling anyone stupid or using a condescending tone.

Ex:

Person 1.) Artists have a tendency to want to protect their work, as its theirs after all.  A license like PS makes it evident what their work will be used for so they maintain that control and protection. The license also allows it for use in a portfolio so anyone can use it to get a job so it really makes it function like an internship which you can use to get a professional job. 

Person 2.) I agree to an extent but I think the artists that are being targeted are ones whom are intending their stuff to be used for free and create it for free and that shifts the demographic of who is willing to contribute towards people who tend to be more for open style licenses.  There are large communities of people using blender and Gimp so they are people who are easier to target since they tend to fall towards the open source mentality anyways.


Note:  Both Person 1 and Person 2 have valid points.  Neither Person 1 nor Person 2 insulted anyone.  Discussion should in my opinion follow formats like that.  So long as both parties are willing to discuss things and no one results to stupidity in the face of a counter argument then while things may not change, the discussion maintains relevance much better.  Sometimes discussions don't have to be made with the intent to change things but rather to explore many possibilities, points, counterpoints, and generally allow everyone to look at different perspectives on things.  Even if things don't change its not always a waste of time ( I think many people think that if you argue something and you are persuasive [and right in your opinion] but nothing changes then you wasted your time talking to people who aren't going to change, etc don't listen, blah blah blah).

I have a suggestion:

Open psclient.cfg in a text editor and locate the following lines:


; Linux - ALSA buffer sound setting

SndSys.Driver.ALSA.SoundBufferms = 150



; Linux - OSS sound system

;SndSys.Driver = crystalspace.sndsys.software.driver.oss

And change it to look like the following:


; Linux - ALSA buffer sound setting
; SndSys.Driver.ALSA.SoundBufferms = 150

; Linux - OSS sound system

SndSys.Driver = crystalspace.sndsys.software.driver.oss
SndSys.Driver.OSS.SoundBufferms = 150

Basically what we have done there is switch to the open sound system which works for some in cases where Alsa fails.  We then also have to set the SoundBufferms to 150 to prevent the otherwise essentially inevitable crash associated with it.

Another option is simply commenting out the SoundBUfferms for ALSA line and see if that helps or play with different values.

You can also cd into the PlaneShift directory and try running it in verbose mode with some capturing of a better log as follows:

./psclient --verbose=xcf >> customlog.log 2>&1
You could then paste the whole thing in its entirety after running, logging in and quitting.  We could then examine it for relevant portions and see if we can see where the derned thing is failing!

Good luck and hope this helps.