[QUOTE=Dj-J3;31510179]Why don't you assign them the answer instead of multiplying two values?[/QUOTE]
Why would he? That's like when I see people that need to assign a function the number of seconds in a day or a week, and they go open up their computer's calculator to do 60 * 60 * 24 and write that number, with a comment "number of seconds in a day", instead of just putting the multiplication in there. The computer is there to do calculations, plus if you see 60 * 60 * 24 you'll know exactly what it is compared to the confusing magic number 86400.
[QUOTE=Cyril;31511255]I updated my game with the layer display system described above.
It's way less confusing, see by yourself:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szktNTKxh0I[/media][/QUOTE]
I think it'd be cool to have it fade into the background the farther back it is.
Whats wrong with a mobius melt of layers?
[QUOTE=i300;31510970]It makes it so I don't accidentally type a number that isn't divisible by 10. Does it really matter anyways?[/QUOTE]
Was just curious
[QUOTE=SomeFaggot;31511521]I think it'd be cool to have it fade into the background the farther back it is.[/QUOTE]
Adding a fog with the background color with the density depending on the distance from the player layer?
I will try that.
[QUOTE=Map in a box;31511782]Whats wrong with a mobius melt of layers?[/QUOTE]
I don't understand.
You know, the [url=http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/340908/july-07-2010/thought-for-food---kentucky-tuna---grilled-cheese-burger-melt]mobius melt[/url]
Hey guys! I'm not sure if you'd noticed but I posted that "Arcane, Stealth & Power" game I was showing progress of to you guys - it's in the Showcase section of the forum. It's a tech demo but it should be interesting enough to check out.
I saw that, it looks like it has a lot of potential. Whats it made in again? Also, make a level editor of some sort to make it better :D
It's made in Construct.
...a WYSIWYG software so easy, you have your level editor right there.
[B]Edit:[/B]
Oh wow, 1000th post.
How could this procedural space background generator could be improved?
[img]http://i.imgur.com/DCTM2.png[/img]
(Not for the contest btw)
I.. I don't really know what I'm doing, but the end result is some sort of 2 dimensional gravity/collision simulation on individual bits using assembly.
[img]http://localhostr.com/files/vCrE2yK/CUsersMathiasDocumentsVisual%20Studio%20.png[/img]
Source: [url]http://pastebin.com/rS1CD2Aq[/url]
Simulating the falling of 5600 bits takes 0.001999 to 0.002666 milliseconds. Including rendering, one frame takes ~1.5ms to do.
A little sample of some work I've been doing with the unreal engine...
[IMG]http://i715.photobucket.com/albums/ww156/McMissile/sample.png[/IMG]
Mind explaining what that is and how it's programming related?
UDK. Basically, modding Unreal.
But what kind of mod is it?
[QUOTE=McMissile;31513890]A little sample of some work I've been doing with the unreal engine...
[IMG]http://i715.photobucket.com/albums/ww156/McMissile/sample.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Did you just make the map, or was there programming involved
I've been working on making my own game engine, when I realized "I can just mod the fuck out of id tech 3 and go from there!" and I went on an epic quest to mod ioquake3, rid it off the cd key protection and add shitloads of awesomeness features!
So far it's not much. In fact, it segfaults when run :v:
But hopefully, I'll get it working, since I just started working on it now :)
My old engine was written in C++, and didn't really got anywhere, so I'm pretty much okay with this. I expect getting things like Bullet physics implementend, and once I get it working (without segfaulting from start), I'll work on "converting" the C code to C++.
It's a major project, especially for me, and it's probably overdoing what I need to do, but It'll be one hell of a learning experience!
I'm like short circuiting. I can't articulate my opinion on you "converting" ioquake to C++. That's how flabbergasted I am.
Seriously, just start with Sauerbraten or something.
[QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;31515935]I'm like short circuiting. I can't articulate my opinion on you "converting" ioquake to C++. That's how flabbergasted I am.
Seriously, just start with Sauerbraten or something.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't rewrite the code to C++ if I didn't have to, but I don't know any other good physics libraries than Bullet Dynamics, and it's written in C++ :(
[editline]4th August 2011[/editline]
Nevermind, Bullet Dynamics can be used in C :v:
I guess that proves just how much I've used that library.
Oh, and also, I'm using the id Tech 3 engine because it's something that I somewhat know, and expanding the engine itself as well as updating to a newer version of SDL and all the things that I've mentioned, is something I want to do.
And Sauerbraten just has too much stuff in it from the start, as opposed to id Tech 3 in my opinion. I don't want the built-in editor thing.
I also know that the engine used by Infinity Ward in the CoD series is id Tech 3 and modified versions of it (original CoD used id Tech 3), and that the id Tech 4 engine was a rewrite of id Tech 3 to C++ with a lot of extra graphical enhancements.
But all in all, I like the C language, and I want to use this engine, unless other ones show up that are as simple yet functional as this one :)
[QUOTE=thomasfn;31513605]How could this procedural space background generator could be improved?[/QUOTE]
All the stars look like they're in front of the nebulae. You should vary the blending so that some of them appear behind instead.
Also, some of the stars should be dimmer. It looks like you have a few different sizes, but none smaller than a single pixel. The density of stars looks OK, but some of those 1-pixel white dots should be 1-pixel grey dots (representing a small or distant star covering less than a whole pixel) instead.
Maybe a little variation in star color? Think of red giants, for example. If you want to be accurate, read about the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_sequence]main sequence[/url] and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body]black body radiation[/url].
It's just one damn thing after another for me. I finally get to doing that Functor work around for the ProcessPoolExecutor, and suddenly BAM, I find out there's a bug with subprocess.Popen (on Mac OS X) wherein arguments surrounded by quotes (") are not read by clang. This means I can't allow paths with spaces in them, and it's not for extremely complex things, it's for something like -I"include", and it errors out saying "There's no path "include"" (which makes sense, however Python 2.7 accepts this type of command :/)
Ugh. At least I know this stuff works in .NET (because in a fit of anger last night, I wrote some parts to run in IronPython where it worked perfectly :/)
At this point, I'm ready to jump ship on CPython. .NET and PyPy are the "future" (that's a joke btw, about concurrent.futures. It's not very funny in hindsight :v:)
Alas,
[cpp] namespace
{
// Format flags.
using std::boolalpha;
using std::showbase;
using std::showpoint;
using std::showpos;
using std::noboolalpha;
using std::noshowbase;
using std::noshowpoint;
using std::noshowpos;
using std::skipws;
using std::noskipws;
using std::uppercase;
using std::unitbuf;
using std::nouppercase;
using std::nounitbuf;
using std::internal;
using std::left;
using std::right;
using std::dec;
using std::hex;
using std::oct;
using std::fixed;
using std::scientific;
// Input manipulators.
using std::ws;
// Output manipulators.
using std::endl;
using std::ends;
using std::flush;
}[/cpp]
I'm going to go break my fingers now.
[QUOTE=Jookia;31517306]Alas,
[cpp] namespace
{
// Format flags.
using std::boolalpha;
using std::showbase;
using std::showpoint;
using std::showpos;
using std::noboolalpha;
using std::noshowbase;
using std::noshowpoint;
using std::noshowpos;
using std::skipws;
using std::noskipws;
using std::uppercase;
using std::unitbuf;
using std::nouppercase;
using std::nounitbuf;
using std::internal;
using std::left;
using std::right;
using std::dec;
using std::hex;
using std::oct;
using std::fixed;
using std::scientific;
// Input manipulators.
using std::ws;
// Output manipulators.
using std::endl;
using std::ends;
using std::flush;
}[/cpp]
I'm going to go break my fingers now.[/QUOTE]
Whats the purpose of that?
For my logger class.
[QUOTE=Chandler;31517250]I finally get to doing that Functor work around for the ProcessPoolExecutor, and suddenly BAM, I find out there's a bug with subprocess.Popen (on Mac OS X) wherein arguments surrounded by quotes (") are not read by clang.[/QUOTE]
Are you using shell=True or shell=False (the default) when constructing the Popen object? The shell is what takes quotes into consideration when splitting up a command string into a list of argv strings.
Instead of putting quotes around things, you can just use shell=False and pass a list with each argument as a separate string. The strings in your list should directly become the subprocess's argv strings, so there should be no problem if one contains a space.
[QUOTE=T3hGamerDK;31514483]I've been working on making my own game engine, when I realized "I can just mod the fuck out of id tech 3 and go from there!" and I went on an epic quest to mod ioquake3, rid it off the cd key protection and add shitloads of awesomeness features!
So far it's not much. In fact, it segfaults when run :v:
But hopefully, I'll get it working, since I just started working on it now :)
My old engine was written in C++, and didn't really got anywhere, so I'm pretty much okay with this. I expect getting things like Bullet physics implementend, and once I get it working (without segfaulting from start), I'll work on "converting" the C code to C++.
It's a major project, especially for me, and it's probably overdoing what I need to do, but It'll be one hell of a learning experience![/QUOTE]
Keep in mind that ioquake3 is GPL-licensed if you ever plan on distributing any of your projects.
What's more important, having good-looking functional easy to read code, or actually getting stuff done?
Because I am having real trouble doing both things.
[QUOTE=Jookia;31517306]Alas,
[cpp] namespace
{
// Format flags.
using std::boolalpha;
using std::showbase;
using std::showpoint;
using std::showpos;
using std::noboolalpha;
using std::noshowbase;
using std::noshowpoint;
using std::noshowpos;
using std::skipws;
using std::noskipws;
using std::uppercase;
using std::unitbuf;
using std::nouppercase;
using std::nounitbuf;
using std::internal;
using std::left;
using std::right;
using std::dec;
using std::hex;
using std::oct;
using std::fixed;
using std::scientific;
// Input manipulators.
using std::ws;
// Output manipulators.
using std::endl;
using std::ends;
using std::flush;
}[/cpp]
I'm going to go break my fingers now.[/QUOTE]
[cpp]
using namespace std;
[/cpp]
[QUOTE=Biotic;31518088][cpp]
using namespace std;
[/cpp][/QUOTE]
I'm trying to keep my namespace tidy and clean for things related to my game engine, I highly doubt I'll be using more than a fraction of that namespace.
[QUOTE=Dehodson;31518079]What's more important, having good-looking functional easy to read code, or actually getting stuff done?
Because I am having real trouble doing both things.[/QUOTE]
It's a bit subjective, but if you are working a team project or intend to someone to read the code you should make it readable, it's horrible to spent hours "decrypting" someones code, on the other hand, if it's a private code and you have no intentions to either show it off or go back to it then program as you like.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
