Activemark and Blitz3d
Community Forums/General Help/Activemark and Blitz3d
| ||
| My publisher's reporting an error when trying to wrap my Blitz3d game with ActiveMark. The publisher said that it wasn't returning a meaningful error code, so I assume it's just a general protection fault when trying to run the wrapped exe - however I've not had any experience with AM, so I don't know what the process is. The game uses a few DLL's and has a couple of cfg files the .exe needs to write to, but I've let the publisher know about these. Has anyone had any experience using Activemark with Blitz? |
| ||
| maybe you can get your publisher to try using it on a 'spinning cube' program made in blitz to see if its blitz or a dll? |
| ||
| maybe you can get your publisher to try using it on a 'spinning cube' program made in blitz to see if its blitz or a dll? That's a possibility. But can anyone confirm that Blitz actually works natively with ActiveMark? |
| ||
| ..unfortunately, I never try it so I cant help..by the way any goods from steam issue you had? |
| ||
| by the way any goods from steam issue you had? I sent Simon a copy of the Steamworks SDK. Unfortunately, I learnt soon afterwards that Steam had rejected Tank Universal for inclusion on the Steam portal, so I told Simon to hangfire. However, my publisher pushed them to reconsider and Steam has agreed to re-evaluate the game. Haven't heard anything further. So this means Simon has the SDK, I don't know if he's looked at it at all and I'm still in limbo regards Steam. Sorry I can't give you a more productive answer at this point ;-( |
| ||
| Steam rejected TU? That is sad, but I might understand why they did so. Still it's a good game. |
| ||
| Steam rejected TU? Yes - but they're reconsidering, so I'm still in there with a chance. |
| ||
| >>Steam rejected TU<< Thats really weird..i saw loads of crappy games they sell, and TU is pretty much better than many games they selling already...have you receive any particular reason why they initially reject TU? |
| ||
| particular reason why they initially reject TU? No reason was given - or at least none was passed on to me. Back on topic though, my publisher has informed me that the problem has been elevated to the next level of support (at ActiveMark) Apparently the AM techie wrote that 'It appears to be self referencing, but it's doing that in a way that I've seen work for other games. There may be more to it than that, so I'm escalating this to the dev team.' |
| ||
| Have you molebox'ed anything or otherwise packed stuff into the EXE? |
| ||
| Have you molebox'ed anything or otherwise packed stuff into the EXE? I provided a non-moleboxed copy of the full game to the publisher and there's nothing else packed within the game. I'll check with the publisher just to make sure they're not trying to use an earlier Moleboxed copy though. |
| ||
| If Steam reject it again, I'd recommend you ask them for their reasons. It may be something you can fix in TU, or work on improving for your next game. It would certainly be interesting to find out what specific issues they had with the game. |
| ||
| So nobody's allowed their Blitz game to get intimate with Activemark then? |
| ||
| Because I know you're all hanging out for the resolution to my ActiveMark + Blitz3d = error problem, I've just received word that by rolling back two versions of ActiveMark, the problem appears to be resolved. So Blitz3d doesn't like the latest version of AM - or at least, my game doesn't. |
| ||
| what is it for Activemark anyway? |
| ||
| It's an activation/protection system - like Armadillo apparently. I haven't used it, but I think it's common for portals to require it for their games. |
| ||
| ahh...I see...why not Armadillo then..its working just fine with B3D? |
| ||
| yes, but it's not up to me - the publisher's handling getting it out to the portals so it's their call. |
| ||
| MadJack, any updates on this Trymedia ActiveMARK issue. This really bites. I'm having the same troubles ;( |
| ||
| LL Sorry I can't be a lot of help, but your best best is to contact AM. As far as I was concerned, the issue had been resolved. At the time (11 months ago) my publisher referred it to AM who handed it on to their dev team. I don't know what resulted from that bug report. In the meantime, the publisher rolled back a couple of versions which fixed the issue, but I'd be surprised if they're still doing that. |
   |