Also shitty storyline/messages is going to be changes in the final version, that was just temporary to find suitable places to put the strings.
[editline]20th August 2011[/editline]
Way to snipe my edit :(
[QUOTE=Hruhf;31841114]Why is everyone suddenly working on dungeon crawlers/roguelikes?[/QUOTE]
I would assume it's because it's fun
[QUOTE=Dj-J3;31841217]I would assume it's because it's fun[/QUOTE]
Makes sense but all at once?
[QUOTE=coolity;31840934]Still cant figure out them stairs.[/QUOTE]
What can't you figure out? They're pretty easy to do, imo.
[QUOTE=BlkDucky;31841399]What can't you figure out? They're pretty easy to do, imo.[/QUOTE]
I would show my code, but everyone would kill me over it.
Edit: TLDR My code is held together with tape.
Edit: That and last time I added stairs my whole map became tunnels and thousands of mutants spawned.
[editline]20th August 2011[/editline]
Whole code:
[url]http://pastebin.com/4mNaMc9V[/url]
[QUOTE=coolity;31841461]Edit: That and last time I added stairs my whole map became tunnels and thousands of mutants spawned.[/QUOTE]
I, uh. What?
How did that even happen? You set the stairs AFTER the level has finished generating everything else, so I don't see how that happened.
Edit: THIS IS WHY CODE TAGS NEED A SCROLL BAR, GARRY
[QUOTE=BlkDucky;31841542]I, uh. What?
How did that even happen? You set the stairs AFTER the level has finished generating everything else, so I don't see how that happened.[/QUOTE]
I dont either, I dont at all.
[QUOTE=coolity;31841461]Whole code:
-SNIPOHGOD- What was the scrolling code tag again?[/QUOTE]
That was it. Garry (or whoever) removed the scrolling for some reason.
Edit: Just use pastebin or something.
[url]http://pastebin.com/4mNaMc9V[/url]
There, the code without the major pagestretching.
[editline]20th August 2011[/editline]
Please tell me I have a better way of doing this codewise.
Edit: Also that doesnt have stairs in it, I broke the version with stairs.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;31841110][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1dmn5Cl4XU[/media]
Intro and first area in all their programmer art glory (redoing all the art).
Crossposting WAYWO.[/QUOTE]
You should animate the pictures with particles, like the smoke from the burning town, or magic fizzle at the magic rod.
With parallax scrolling.
Damn it I always forget that the default constructor for vectors in Bullet don't zero the components, they are junk instead -_-
[QUOTE=r4nk_;31842554]Damn it I always forget that the default constructor for vectors in Bullet don't zero the components, they are junk instead -_-[/QUOTE]Yeah I keep getting caught out when setting spawn transforms and wondering why shit's fucked.
It just seems like a bad idea in general to assume that a default constructor initializes values to anything in particular.
[QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;31843282]It just seems like a bad idea in general to assume that a default constructor initializes values to anything in particular.[/QUOTE]
Isn't the purpose of a constructor to initialize values?
[QUOTE=Robber;31843335]Isn't the purpose of a constructor to initialize values?[/QUOTE]
Yes, but you can't always rely on the default constructor to initialize them in any meaningful way (sorry if I don't know what I'm talking about, I'm just now learning C# and I only lurk in waywo) if you use one of the overloaded constructors you can specify better starting values.
[QUOTE=Robber;31843335]Isn't the purpose of a constructor to initialize values?[/QUOTE]
My point is that if garbage values are breaking your program, then the initial value is probably important enough for you to specify yourself. The only time you should be using the default constructor is if you don't use the initial values at all or if you have thoroughly read the documentation and [i]know exactly what those values will be[/i]. In fact, it probably takes less time to type out "new Vector(0, 0, 0)" then it does to dig through the documentation, anyway.
Additionally, there are plenty of reasonable choices for initial value. Whatever you believe to be the sole obvious choice is often not the same choice another programmer would make. No initialization at all is actually a perfectly reasonable choice.
[QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;31843589]My point is that if garbage values are breaking your program, then the initial value is probably important enough for you to specify yourself. The only time you should be using the default constructor is if you don't use the initial values at all or if you have thoroughly read the documentation and [i]know exactly what those values will be[/i]. In fact, it probably takes less time to type out "new Vector(0, 0, 0)" then it does to dig through the documentation, anyway.
Additionally, there are plenty of reasonable choices for initial value. Whatever you believe to be the sole obvious choice is often not the same choice another programmer would make. No initialization at all is actually a perfectly reasonable choice.[/QUOTE]Yes, but for a transformation (a Vector and a Rotation), there are certainly some good default values.
[QUOTE=danharibo;31843762]Yes, but for a transformation (a Vector and a Rotation), there are certainly some good default values.[/QUOTE]
For a transformation, yes, you've got a set of values for the identity. But still, assuming this to be the default is a mistake.
For something more general-purpose like a 3- or 4- component vector, there are an assortment of different values which would make sense to be the default in several different cases. <0, 0, 0> for offsets, <0, 0, 1> for normals, <1, 1, 1> for scale -- for 4-component you could either have <0, 0, 0, 0> just for the sake of consistency or <0, 0, 0, 1> because it's more useful in three-dimensional transformations.
[url=www.livestream.com/mrstaneh]I am livestreaming my entry for Ludum Dare, making a jail escape game.[/url]
[QUOTE=Staneh;31843881][url=www.livestream.com/mrstaneh]I am livestreaming my entry for Ludum Dare, making a jail escape game.[/url][/QUOTE]
Copying / Pasting variables has been replaced by this fancy new-fangled technology called "Classes"
[QUOTE=Staneh;31845398][img]http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7683/ludumdareentry201108202.png[/img]
Ludum Dare[/QUOTE]
Mine is worse
I got pissed of at buttons not working, so I just let you press space to start
[img]http://www.ludumdare.com/compo/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/6f4e7d95f4064efc0856b068787749a3.png?9d7bd4[/img]
[img]http://www.ludumdare.com/compo/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/98c5c4007343d253611a68468c1b7a10.png?9d7bd4[/img]
[QUOTE=Staneh;31845398][img]http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7683/ludumdareentry201108202.png[/img]
Ludum Dare[/QUOTE]
That's actually quite a good idea.
I really wish I wasn't the IDE-addicted poser-programmer I am, but I don't really see how I will ever break out of it.
Without fail, every SINGLE experience I've had out in the harsh manual compilation world has resulted in me getting my ass kicked by endless and constant build errors and cryptic, useless documentation. Often on the first step; "run build.bat". Ok, running... "dofosenwdnso;nseofniseo;dnvosn;nenfsdkklfksdlfkldkflm 'ljksklsdl' is not recognized as in internal or external command" I end up wasting an entire day only to finally give up before taking my computer's life, followed by my own.
I can't help but feel I'm just missing some vital experience that everyone who maintains these projects assumes everyone has already had.
The thing that ticks me off is: it doesn't HAVE to be this way. The great thing about programming is that you have the ability to take any set of inputs and guide them invisibly to the correct output, assuming no creativity is involved. There's literally no need for your users to search around for solutions to several dozens inevitable hangups along the way.
If anyone could direct me to "Old School Programming For Dummies" or something, I would appreciate it...
[QUOTE=RyanDv3;31846181]I really wish I wasn't the IDE-addicted poser-programmer I am, but I don't really see how I will ever break out of it.
Without fail, every SINGLE experience I've had out in the harsh manual compilation world has resulted in me getting my ass kicked by endless and constant build errors and cryptic, useless documentation. Often on the first step; "run build.bat". Ok, running... "dofosenwdnso;nseofniseo;dnvosn;nenfsdkklfksdlfkldkflm 'ljksklsdl' is not recognized as in internal or external command" I end up wasting an entire day only to finally give up before taking my computer's life, followed by my own.
I can't help but feel I'm just missing some vital experience that everyone who maintains these projects assumes everyone has already had.
The thing that ticks me off is: it doesn't HAVE to be this way. The great thing about programming is that you have the ability to take any set of inputs and guide them invisibly to the correct output, assuming no creativity is involved. There's literally no need for your users to search around for solutions to several dozens inevitable hangups along the way.
If anyone could direct me to "Old School Programming For Dummies" or something, I would appreciate it...[/QUOTE]
Programming at its most very basic level is
Input > Process > Output
People can argue forever about the "Process" but at the end of the day, if the output is what you want, who cares how you get to it.
If you're more comfortable using an IDE, that's what its there for.
Is this some kind of competition about the ugliest art?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBsBDUjwcII[/media]
Working abit on the dungeon crawler,
Added lightsources and Time til death on the light aswell as permanent ones,
This is only a 64x64 map i can raise it to 1024 if i want and get a huge cave
atleast i am happy :D
[QUOTE=Orki;31846352][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBsBDUjwcII[/media]
Working abit on the dungeon crawler,
Added lightsources and Time til death on the light aswell as permanent ones,
This is only a 64x64 map i can raise it to 1024 if i want and get a huge cave
atleast i am happy :D[/QUOTE]
Farsight is an awesome idea. Did you think of that yourself?
[QUOTE=CarlBooth;31846263]Programming at its most very basic level is
Input > Process > Output
People can argue forever about the "Process" but at the end of the day, if the output is what you want, who cares how you get to it.
If you're more comfortable using an IDE, that's what its there for.[/QUOTE]
Oh I agree; I don't give a fuck what people think of me as long as I can get the job done, however sometimes I find myself compiling something that wants me to use makefiles or some shit. I guess I could try to get it to work via a IDE (and have done so in the past), however it seems easier to just follow the documentation. Even thought it never works.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
