zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums

Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Welcome to Independent Gaming Forums. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:

Return to Independent Gaming
Pages: (3) 1 [2] 3  ( Go to first unread post )

 Making Games (Help/Curiosity), programming languages and engines
rinkuhero
Posted: Feb 21 2007, 07:33 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 93
Member No.: 11
Joined: 21-August 06



Replying in this thread as you suggested,

I'll check out the game, but I didn't mean to imply that you hadn't made any games, only that until you have made full games in both pure coding and the engines it's easy to say that nobody should ever use game engines. And the game doesn't sound (from your description) like the type of game that takes a significant amount of time to make (1000 hours or so); when you make games on that scale, the time the engines can save you becomes very significant. It might mean the difference between three months and three years in some cases.

I don't know of any independent developer who uses things like the Unreal Engine. I think that engine costs like 100,000$ to license. Some do use things like the Torque2D engine or the PopCap framework, or even SDL, and those are about half-way in between engines like the Game Maker and RPGMaker XP in terms of the trade-off between time saved and power.
Top
haowan
Posted: Feb 21 2007, 09:53 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 75
Member No.: 10
Joined: 20-August 06



Speaking as someone who is writing their engine from the ground up in XNA, I still think game making tools are an awesome step forward for game development. Yes, writing my own stuff lets me do exactly what I want with it, and I like that freedom, but getting to the point where I could make the same game in my own stuff and GameMaker has taken me at least 6 months so far and there's stilla lot of work to do.

It all depends on the project - a hi-res 2D game made entirely with vector art would indeed require its own engine, and could be really cool and stylish with it. One would be insane to attempt such a project in a game maker. If all you're interested in doing is making fun games without the hassle of learning to do the programming, game makers are perfect smile.gif
Top
haowan
Posted: Feb 21 2007, 10:19 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 75
Member No.: 10
Joined: 20-August 06



Relevant daily quote on brainyquote.com smile.gif

Quote of the Day

QUOTE
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."
Theodore Roosevelt
Top
Timerever
Posted: Feb 21 2007, 09:47 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 14
Joined: 21-August 06



QUOTE (rinkuhero @ Feb 21 2007, 07:33 AM)

I'll check out the game, but I didn't mean to imply that you hadn't made any games, only that until you have made full games in both pure coding and the engines it's easy to say that nobody should ever use game engines. And the game doesn't sound (from your description) like the type of game that takes a significant amount of time to make (1000 hours or so); when you make games on that scale, the time the engines can save you becomes very significant. It might mean the difference between three months and three years in some cases.

I never did large games, this may seem heresy but whenever I touch a compiler is for more 'usefull' things, I'm not saying that games are useless but I almost always code or fix regular apps that I need rather than do games. So yeah I never did full games.
But let me say that I'm not fond of these so-called full games that much either, especially the commercial action/adventure ones. IMHO the simpler the game engine is the funnier that game is too because since the game engine is simple so it is the game and it's easier to understand and play.
Also I think random generation plays a big part in making more with less, you can make a game 'infinite' using only a few lines of code that generate a different game everytime you play. There are ways to do more with less code without resorting to game makers, it's just a matter of thinking them up.

QUOTE (rinkuhero @ Feb 21 2007, 07:33 AM)

I don't know of any independent developer who uses things like the Unreal Engine. I think that engine costs like 100,000$ to license. Some do use things like the Torque2D engine or the PopCap framework, or even SDL, and those are about half-way in between engines like the Game Maker and RPGMaker XP in terms of the trade-off between time saved and power.

I was talking about Pro coders that use 'game makers', they don't, they use pro game engines or middleware to ease their work.
And I think SDL performance is way better than these game makers and enough for most games, but if you really need high perfeormance you freind C++ and DirectX/OpenGL are never too far away (along with their complexity aswell). tongue.gif


QUOTE (haowan @ Feb 21 2007, 09:53 AM)
Speaking as someone who is writing their engine from the ground up in XNA, I still think game making tools are an awesome step forward for game development. Yes, writing my own stuff lets me do exactly what I want with it, and I like that freedom, but getting to the point where I could make the same game in my own stuff and GameMaker has taken me at least 6 months so far and there's stilla lot of work to do.

Yeah, I've also took a look at XNA, it seems quite intresting and easy but unfortunly it seems to be lacking on the 2D side. Or maybe I didn't check it well enough, which ever comes first tongue.gif
Also no pain, no gain, when doing your own stuff if anything else at least you learned a bunch of coding that you wouldn't using a game maker.

QUOTE (haowan @ Feb 21 2007, 09:53 AM)

It all depends on the project - a hi-res 2D game made entirely with vector art would indeed require its own engine, and could be really cool and stylish with it. One would be insane to attempt such a project in a game maker.

That is indeed my intention, but the vector art must be rasterized first, ie turned into a png/jpg/whatever file. There is no such thing as vector graphics hardware acceleration, a game using SVG graphics would be dog slow no matter what. What you can do (and I'm already giving free ideias here, so consider yourself very lucky cool.gif) is to use SVG graphics as source and then render then to raster files based on the desired game resolution. So the game would ask at what res you wanna play and the render the SVGs into raster's during a 'loading' screen (it should be called rendering but that would confuse the users).

QUOTE (haowan @ Feb 21 2007, 09:53 AM)

If all you're interested in doing is making fun games without the hassle of learning to do the programming, game makers are perfect smile.gif

That is exactly the thing that bothers me most on game makers, games are before anything else a program, a program that happens to be funny and entertaining but it's still a program. Saying that I wanna game games without the 'hassle' of learing how to code is as absurd as saying that I wanna do furniture but without the hassle of learing how to use the woodworkers tools and techniques. It's nonsense on it's purest form.
Top
rinkuhero
Posted: Feb 22 2007, 04:06 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 93
Member No.: 11
Joined: 21-August 06



I wouldn't say engines don't require coding, even in Game Maker's "drag and drop" system (which only beginners at Game Maker use, most use GML) it's a type of coding: it has if statements, variables, and so on. It just doesn't have things like pointers or typedefs, the kind of things that you can do without.

Also, coincidentally, I am making a vector-based game in Game Maker. It uses some sprites, but most of its graphics are semi-procedurally generated using graphics primitives.

What I meant was that independent game developers of whom previously worked in the games industry, when they go off on their own and create single-author games, they tend to use game engines to do it. Pure programming is only really reasonable if you have a team of people, if you're a single author creating everything for the game I don't think you can create a great game in a reasonable span of time without some form of engine, whether it's Torque, SDL, Game Maker, etc.; there are some exceptions like Pixel, but even he takes 2-3 years to make a game.

But anyway, I don't really buy your argument: of course games are programs, but that's to me like saying that books are made out of printed text and so if you want to write a novel you shouldn't use word processors because those don't use ink and paper.

Also, I think game design is about making games, not programs. Good programmers hardly ever make good game designers, the skills required are very different. the skills required to make a great computer game are much more similar to the skills required to make a great board game or a great card game than the skills required to create great program. The people who I consider greatest game designers in the world (Miyamoto, Wright, etc.) tend not to be really great programmers; I don't even think Miyamoto *can* program.
Top
haowan
Posted: Feb 22 2007, 09:05 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 75
Member No.: 10
Joined: 20-August 06



QUOTE (Timerever @ Feb 21 2007, 09:47 PM)

QUOTE (haowan @ Feb 21 2007, 09:53 AM)

It all depends on the project - a hi-res 2D game made entirely with vector art would indeed require its own engine, and could be really cool and stylish with it. One would be insane to attempt such a project in a game maker.

That is indeed my intention, but the vector art must be rasterized first, ie turned into a png/jpg/whatever file. There is no such thing as vector graphics hardware acceleration, a game using SVG graphics would be dog slow no matter what. What you can do (and I'm already giving free ideias here, so consider yourself very lucky cool.gif) is to use SVG graphics as source and then render then to raster files based on the desired game resolution. So the game would ask at what res you wanna play and the render the SVGs into raster's during a 'loading' screen (it should be called rendering but that would confuse the users).


Hey, ideas are free, it's products that are not smile.gif That's what I've been talking about this whole time.

There is no such thing as vector graphics hardware acceleration? I hope you are talking about curves (I'm not sure what you mean by SVG). There's no reason why your shapes couldn't be broken down into triangles to suit the resolution they're being displayed in and then sent to the graphics card. Flash obviously does it by rasterising each frame, which I'd imagine is the reason it can get pretty slow. If your shapes are made from static splines, i.e. they don't animate, then I reckon you could write or find (god forbid wink.gif) a decent algorithm to turn them into collections of triangles instead of writing out bitmaps.

QUOTE (Timerever @ Feb 21 2007, 09:47 PM)

QUOTE (haowan @ Feb 21 2007, 09:53 AM)

If all you're interested in doing is making fun games without the hassle of learning to do the programming, game makers are perfect smile.gif

That is exactly the thing that bothers me most on game makers, games are before anything else a program, a program that happens to be funny and entertaining but it's still a program. Saying that I wanna game games without the 'hassle' of learing how to code is as absurd as saying that I wanna do furniture but without the hassle of learing how to use the woodworkers tools and techniques. It's nonsense on it's purest form.


Wow, you say some really weird things dude smile.gif Perhaps we should get rid of computers and go back to using the abacus? That would be nonsense smile.gif

A game before anything else is a game. It should be fun. Yes, they are programs, but so is a choose-your-own-adventure book. It's a sequence of logic with branches. In a game maker, the engine (or framework or API or whatever) is a distinct and seperate program from the game logic, but they're both programs - it's just that in order to make the game, the designer doesn't need to write the engine first.

A game doesn't have to have its entire supporting code base written expressly for it. Sudoku works whether you play it on paper or on your palmtop, which means the game itself is portable between those two mediums. It doesn't rely on the supporting medium. Does that make it a worse game?

What do you think the famous furniture designers do? Make their prototypes in Maya or in the workshop?
Top
Timerever
Posted: Feb 23 2007, 09:36 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 14
Joined: 21-August 06



You guys are getting me a bit wrong here:

1. Vector graphics are the kind of graphics created with Adobe Illustrator for example, SVG is a open vector image file, you can use Inkscape to create these for example. AFAIK there's no way to tell the GPU hardware to render these like they do with 3D models, you need to use the CPU to do it and it can be insanely intensive to render just 1 (one) frame let alone 60 per second.

2. I'm not saying that we shouldn't use PCs or whatever, I'm saying that if you wanna do a game you need to learn how to code like if you wanna do furniture you need to know how to cut and join the wood pieces.

3. I'm not saying that you should make every part of the game from scratch in C/ASM, of course one should use DirectX/SDL/OpenGL and such to ease the coding, no one in their sane mind would do else, at least for PCs. What I'm saying is that these drag and drop like game makers and such are too strict/rigid and you can't do anything outside the scope of these tools.
For example, if I wanted to do a custom collision detection like this: every pixel collision does small damage (pixel perfect collision) + 2 hit boxed that do moderate damage if hit + these 2 boxes intersect with each other, if the intersection is hit then it's instant kill... will you be able to do this in a game maker? And this is just a small and simple example, if you push your imagination soon enough you realise these game makers are worthless since they are designed to do 'yet another <insert standard game genre here>'

What you should use is APIs that ease the interaction with the hardware/software/drivers and provide basic game aiding function that are flexible enough so that you can come up with crazy stuff. AFAIK game makers don't allow this, they are just a tool to do predefines games. Programming languages don't suffer from this, they are extremely flexible and if you need even more flexibility (XXL hardcore coders) you can create your own hardware/software APIs.
Top
rinkuhero
Posted: Feb 24 2007, 03:39 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 93
Member No.: 11
Joined: 21-August 06



QUOTE (Timerever @ Feb 23 2007, 09:36 PM)
For example, if I wanted to do a custom collision detection like this: every pixel collision does small damage (pixel perfect collision) + 2 hit boxed that do moderate damage if hit + these 2 boxes intersect with each other, if the intersection is hit then it's instant kill... will you be able to do this in a game maker?

I think you're under an incorrect impression about game makers. I haven't used all of them, but in Game Maker you can code what you describe, and it'd be coded much the same way as it would be in SDL. You'd simply use two collision masks, calculate the number of pixels that the two overlap, etc. While it would be slower in Game Maker than in SDL (due to GM being an interpreted language) it'd work almost identically.
Top
Tim W.
Posted: Feb 24 2007, 05:03 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 198
Member No.: 4
Joined: 19-August 06



Saw Immortal Defense posted on your LiveJournal earlier and tried it out. Excellent stuff.

If you want some feedback you can find me on MSN Messenger: kimkallstrom1@yahoo.com smile.gif
Top
Timerever
Posted: Feb 24 2007, 11:24 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 14
Joined: 21-August 06



QUOTE (rinkuhero @ Feb 24 2007, 03:39 PM)
I think you're under an incorrect impression about game makers. I haven't used all of them, but in Game Maker you can code what you describe, and it'd be coded much the same way as it would be in SDL. You'd simply use two collision masks, calculate the number of pixels that the two overlap, etc. While it would be slower in Game Maker than in SDL (due to GM being an interpreted language) it'd work almost identically.

Ok maybe they are more flexible than what I think but I'm pretty sure it isn't as flexible as a programming language, and if you just use game makers without knowing how to code you are certain to someday try to do something different and be blocked by a game maker limitation. Since you dunno coding and you wasted your time learing a game makers instead of proper code you are now in trouble.

Also game makers are mostly platform/OS locked, normally locked to x86/Win32(64) if you wanna do a game for OpenBSD or Xbox 360 you are out of luck again.


QUOTE (Tim W. @ Feb 24 2007, 05:03 PM)
Saw Immortal Defense posted on your LiveJournal earlier and tried it out. Excellent stuff.

If you want some feedback you can find me on MSN Messenger: kimkallstrom1@yahoo.com smile.gif

Tim are you doing drugs? tongue.gif What on earth has that to do with game makers or coding or anything at all of this topic? rolleyes.gif laugh.gif
Top
Tim W.
Posted: Feb 24 2007, 11:37 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 198
Member No.: 4
Joined: 19-August 06



It was in his signature, anyway. Plus I want to keep feedbacks for Immortal Defense to it's own thread, but then it's still in closed beta. tongue.gif

(You can add me if you want, too) biggrin.gif
Top
rinkuhero
Posted: Feb 25 2007, 02:15 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 93
Member No.: 11
Joined: 21-August 06



re Timerever: What do you mean by wasting one's time? Wasting time implies that someone isn't happy with what they're doing, and there are 8 year olds (yes, 8 year olds) who have used Game Maker to create a game and are perfectly happy with never learning coding; they don't intend to make games professionally and just want to have fun making something of their own. I wouldn't call that wasting time. Your argument seems like saying that a true artist would never use crayons, only oil paint, because crayons aren't as flexible.

re Tim W.: Thanks for trying it! Though I wouldn't even call it beta yet (beta is usually v0.9 on up, whereas ID is v0.6.5 right now). I'll add you.
Top
Timerever
Posted: Feb 25 2007, 09:31 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 14
Joined: 21-August 06



QUOTE (rinkuhero @ Feb 25 2007, 02:15 AM)
re Timerever: What do you mean by wasting one's time? Wasting time implies that someone isn't happy with what they're doing, and there are 8 year olds (yes, 8 year olds) who have used Game Maker to create a game and are perfectly happy with never learning coding; they don't intend to make games professionally and just want to have fun making something of their own. I wouldn't call that wasting time.

If they just want to do yet another game then maybe it's not a waste of time, maybe. Because if you wanna play these there's a bunch of them already made, why bother doing one on your own? Just for the sake of it?


QUOTE (rinkuhero @ Feb 25 2007, 02:15 AM)
Your argument seems like saying that a true artist would never use crayons, only oil paint, because crayons aren't as flexible.

Actually professional grade crayons (and color pencils aswell) are quite flexible and allow a bunch of neat tricks, especially layering ones.
On a sorta of unrelated note: Inkscape 0.45 was release a few days ago and includes a Gaussian Blur filter! That allows near realistic images like this to be crafted. Of course that is nothing compared to Illustrator CS2 and now that Adobe is making AI CS3 as fast as the old AI8 + the Live Color it'll put Illustrator on a nearly god like status application.


@Tim: Ok then, I have signatures disabled so I hadn't noticed rinku's links. If you want me to add you to my contact list I can but I don't have anything to chat about right now. biggrin.gif
Top
rinkuhero
Posted: Feb 25 2007, 10:38 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Editors
Posts: 93
Member No.: 11
Joined: 21-August 06



Yes, just for the sake of it. Why do kids draw pictures of houses and clouds and monsters or whatever if there are a million drawings like that already? If you were a parent and your kid draw a drawing that wasn't that great would you tell them it's a waste of time to draw it? Creating is fun regardless of who has done it before or how bad or good it is.
Top
Timerever
Posted: Feb 25 2007, 01:36 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 14
Joined: 21-August 06



QUOTE (rinkuhero @ Feb 25 2007, 10:38 AM)
Yes, just for the sake of it. Why do kids draw pictures of houses and clouds and monsters or whatever if there are a million drawings like that already? If you were a parent and your kid draw a drawing that wasn't that great would you tell them it's a waste of time to draw it? Creating is fun regardless of who has done it before or how bad or good it is.

Not only I'd say it's a waste of time but slap the kid 'till he made a well done drawing. biggrin.gif
Anyway we ain't getting anywere, let's just call it a day and agree that some people (lazy ones tongue.gif ) like game makers and other people (strong, pretty and inteligent ones tongue.gif laugh.gif ) use programming languages

P.S.: Just kidding!
Top
« Next Oldest | The Gamer's Section | Next Newest »
zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Sign-up Now

Topic OptionsPages: (3) 1 [2] 3 



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.1810 seconds | Archive