You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowSign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new account
Thanks for the clarification. That's a great way to do it - I can go explore the new stuff, or follow the plot. Best of both worlds!
Mostly, yes.
One more difference that I forgot to mention is that OSP starts with the New York and Liberty jump gates open.
The storyline begins with the gates closed, and you have to play through a few missions before they will all be open.
Nevertheless, you can explore new parts of Crossfire before you even leave New York.
So at some point I will be able to travel to the new systems and still come back for the storyline?
You can do that at any time. As soon as you finish Mission 1 and King tells you to pick up some work on Pittsburgh -- from that point on, you can go anywhere that you like.
Just ignore Juni and King when they tell you to "hurry" for a mission. They will wait for you forever.
Go explore.
As I said, there are new places to explore, even in New York!
(PS: The best things are not along the tradelanes. And use your eyes... in Crossfire, your eyes sometimes have longer range than your sensors.)
(PPS: While OPR8R is, obviously, correct that a few features are multi-player only, the vast majority of stuff -- new systems, aliens, and things to do -- are the same for both SP and MP.)
So what am I missing out on by playing single player storyline instead of open single player?
Nothing.
The Storyline *adds* cut scenes and missions. Open SP simply removes those.
If I play the storyline in single player, will I still have access to the new worlds and ships created by the mod at some point? Or is it exactly like vanilla SP? Thanks
Single Player Crossfire is nearly identical to Multi-Player Crossfire.
So, yes, you will have access to all of the goodies. Some of the fun begins right in New York! (although you may have to look around to find it)
when you are in the mood and have time to test it and you didnt found a result here than test it. If not then not.
Cool. Sounds like a good plan, Huor.
the more it test the better
OK, let me put it another way... I do not want to test it. At least, not anytime soon. However, I am willing to help you if you need help, but not before tomorrow.
@OP: All I know is what I read on this thread. It appears that jflp is not working, but Huor cannot test it. So I volunteered to help you guys figure out what is wrong.
I am, however, busy in RL. So if somebody else can test for you, then I would prefer that.
I only ask that you let me know (or post it here) if you get it tested or figured out, so that I will not waste a couple of hours duplicating the effort (as I have already done once, on your behalf, regarding jflp).
jflp is working on the clients. I tested it - the only thing i was not able to test is and was the widescreen support.
Wait... so what did you test? The only important thing that jflp does is widescreen support!
I suppose there are a couple of smaller things you could test.
I cant test this as i dont have a widescreen system - so that would need someone who could do the tests for me...
If you still need this tested tomorrow night, then I will be able to test it for you, Huor. Just, please, don't be like OP and forget to tell me if somebody else does it, ok?
I have a project release tomorrow, and am busy with that until it is done (and accepted).
only of the AC version was not compiled under the original name without ac extension
Assuming that jflpac works correctly with the name changed, and that the dll was built correctly, then I do not have any other ideas without trying 1.82, which is not going to happen soon.
However, if it is not working, then I would examine the above assumptions (if you have not already done so).
Name changes are usually, but not always, harmless.
I think that I remember that Adoxa posted header files on his web site. I do not know whether they are required for building jflp(ac). If the standard jflp(ac) works but your recompiled version does not, then check the headers.
Also, if you built your new jflp(ac).dll with a recent version of Visual Studio, then make sure that it is not built for a specific version of Windows. That could, potentially, cause the dll to work on some systems but not on others. It may be easier to build with older versions of Visual Studio (2005 or earlier) than it is with new versions.
This is Off Topic, but IMHO Microsoft's best software was the 2003 versions. Since then there have been more problems than there have been improvements. The only reason to use newer versions is for 64-bit support (which is important for big memory, unfortunately).
2003... that was a great year for Microsoft!
condition 1 fulfilled
condition 2 fulfilled
condition 3 not neccessary as we are talking about jflpac which from what was being told does not require such changes
OK, that should be correct. I have not tried 1.82 so I cannot confirm.
(Obviously, the line in DaCom.ini should be "jflpac.dll" and the file in the EXE folder should be jflpac.dll.)
Note that the fovx values still need to exist in Cameras.ini, and that jflp/jflpac support more cameras than vanilla. It does not matter what the values for the various fovx's are, but the lines must exist in Cameras.ini.
Don't tell too much about what's inside files....
Installing jflp is well-documented. The instructions appear several times in this thread.
But, yeah, I know that Swat is the only place in the Freelancer universe where modding information is taboo. 
I have the "manual" settings found on these boards
jflp (widescreen) requires all fovx values in Cameras.ini to be zero.
If you have manual edits in Cameras.ini, then jflp will not be enabled.
Also, you can double-check DaCom.ini in the EXE folder. It should have a line in the [Libraries] section as follows (case does not matter):
[Libraries]
jflp.dll
In other words, three conditions must be met for jflp to work:
- jflp.dll must be in the EXE folder
- line added to DaCom.ini
- fovx = 0 in all sections of Cameras.ini
both = less buggy than all others
Mod: Discovery is far more reliable. Too bad it is also not as much fun. 
Opera: LOL 
Opera isn't even in the "serious software" category, let alone the "good software" category. I did put it on my list and I do use Opera, but it is more like a fun toy. Firefox is a stable, reliable, tool for doing real work.
If you prefer Opera for your own environment, that's cool. But putting down other people when you're just plain wrong is kind of... uncool. Especially when you're the "boss".
I'm just sayin'....
of course only the best can afford and handle good software (Opera)
the mass has to use the primitive stuff
That's funny that you would call Opera "good software", OP!
Opera has some nice features, for sure -- some of them are innovative and unique and nice ideas -- but it is buggy and unreliable!
Oh, wait... that sounds like my favorite Freelancer mod... I am sensing a trend here!
Firefox is the do-all king of browsers.
Portable Firefox allows multiple profiles and lets you take all of your settings, extensions, bookmarks, etc with you. Install Portable Firefox in your Dropbox, and you will always have your Firefox environment with you on all of your computers (and on borrowed or public computers, as well). You can synchronize many of the same things in regular Firefox by using the Xmarks add-on, but I find Portable Firefox to be overall superior (for my environment). YMMV.
Chrome is light and fast for a quick lookup. Chrome's App pages are terrific as email or other specialized clients.
Opera has add-on tools that make file sharing (and other common tasks) a cinch. The features may not be robust, but they sure are simple to use!
Safari is already installed on my Hackintosh. Otherwise I see no advantage over Firefox.
The bottom line is that I use different browsers for different purposes. However, my two Firefox Portable profiles are, by far, the most used.
[align=justify]
... get rid of the anti-cheat feature ... And I told him that I could only play crossfire in sp
Welcome, Extros!
You made a fine choice with Crossfire. For my taste, the Quest System stands out as Crossfire's greatest feature. It extends the storyline dramatically.
Keeping your mods intact during SP is easy enough -- just disable your Internet connection when you launch Crossfire. However, as you discovered, OPR8R (the "boss" around here) does not like to encourage people to mod Crossfire for any purpose. For that reason, you will not find information about modding Crossfire in the forums. 
(But you can always PM if you get stuck.)
Nevertheless, there is a lot to see and do with Crossfire as it is. Enjoy your adventures!
[video]
[/video]
...was just looking for some sympathy
Well, I feel sorry for you, UncleGlennie. Does that help?
If it helps any, it is not just you. Almost everybody who plays Crossfire has to deal with this issue at some time.
Remind us... which version of Windows? Which firewall? Which A/V? Any additional security software?
i didn't yet fully understand about that keystroke thing
There is a situation that can happen in widescreen mode, after loading a saved game, that displays a base without the top menu. Freelancer's first rendering of the page happens at 4:3 aspect ratio, even with jflp.dll. All that is required to correct the aspect ratio is to launch. Once in space, jflp is able to correct the aspect ratio for the duration of the session.
The player must launch but is unable to launch because the top menu is not visible. The player becomes stuck at the base.
The proposed solution is to add a keystroke to launch: Pressing F3 (while at a base) will launch.
(BTW, TSP is the best Freelancer modding site on the 'Net. Don't let OP's irrational (and largely incorrect) rant discourage you!)
i dont get flamed by normal ppl, just by idiots which put personal feelings over facts
Oh, you get flamed by normal people. Often enough.
In case you were wondering, this is an example of one of those times when you were the person who did not "get it".
huor already excluded the stuff that should not be in there
Oh, thanks for telling me, so I would not continue to work on the topic for a few more days!
So now what? Shall I tell Adoxa to forget about the keystroke launch because you cannot be bothered to communicate with people who try to help you?
And you wonder why you get flamed by normal people?!
@OPR8R: OK, give it a spin on your server and let me (or Huor) know if you want changes. Also, please list exactly which changes you want.
Did you decide what you want, OP?
I dug into this further and confirmed that there is a case where it is possible to get stuck on a base without the top menu: When you begin at a base and restore a game that was saved at a base. I discussed this with Adoxa and he is interested in adding a keystroke-to-launch to jflp.dll. He is hopeful that he will be able to use F3 (Dock) as the launch key.
So the remaining question is whether you want changes in error suppression. If so, what changes?
