What are you working on? v19 - Developers

[IMG]http://localhostr.com/files/r6R7at8/capture.png[/IMG] My 'optimized' tile engine that was created because of a debate in FP chatroom.

[QUOTE=DevBug;31186458][IMG]http://localhostr.com/files/r6R7at8/capture.png[/IMG] My 'optimized' tile engine that was created because of a debate in FP chatroom.[/QUOTE] what does it do

[QUOTE=DevBug;31186458][IMG]http://localhostr.com/files/r6R7at8/capture.png[/IMG] My 'optimized' tile engine that was created because of a debate in FP chatroom.[/QUOTE] For a second I thought my monitor was fucked and I was freaking out

[QUOTE=vexx21322;31186239]That looks amazing. One thing though, if you have forgotten where you placed a portal, it's a little hard to see. Maybe try adding some type of particles.[/QUOTE] It now looks like the portal is full of magic [img]http://i.imgur.com/HY43G.gif[/img] and I'm not sure I like that.

It's a nice visual cue that two portals are connected

[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8745051/cubes2.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=Maurice;31187158]It now looks like the portal is full of magic [img]http://i.imgur.com/HY43G.gif[/img] and I'm not sure I like that.[/QUOTE] Make the non connected ones still have the rotating things but not the glow.

[QUOTE=Maurice;31187158]It now looks like the portal is full of magic [img]http://i.imgur.com/HY43G.gif[/img] and I'm not sure I like that.[/QUOTE] The particles look really cool, but I'd turn down the glow a bit.

You may also want to do something with the colours. Don't get me wrong, blue and orange looked great in the white and clean atmosphere of Portal, but the orange blends in really well with the bricks. Sure the glowing is obvious, but if it isn't connected..

I think the orange and blue is too trademark Portal for me to change it. Turned down glow a little, put particles in any case, and decided to break my game. [img]http://i.imgur.com/Jnoc0.gif[/img] What is going ooon [editline].[/editline] Nevermind I just made an incredibly stupid mistake. (Is it ever something else?) [img]http://i.imgur.com/sLwWY.gif[/img] (Yes, this is the fixed one) [editline].[/editline] One last gif before I leave you all alone (And before this page reaches 5mb): [img]http://i.imgur.com/fvMYx.gif[/img] Now you're thinking differently with portals.

[IMG]http://localhostr.com/files/Ltd8g6Y/Zombie%20Eat%20Out.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://localhostr.com/files/IXU5bO9/Server.png[/IMG] A lot of back-end development, I'm so close to engine ready. Edit: It's the same project I posted a while back: [IMG]http://localhostr.com/files/YIvQZvy/Zombie%20Eat%20Out.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Maurice;31187746] [editline].[/editline] One last gif before I leave you all alone (And before this page reaches 5mb): [img]http://i.imgur.com/fvMYx.gif[/img] Now you're thinking differently with portals.[/QUOTE] Mario jumps like [img]http://www.facepunch.com/image.php?u=15877&dateline=1305839590[/img] Michael jackson

[QUOTE=Maurice;31187746] One last gif before I leave you all alone (And before this page reaches 5mb): [img]http://i.imgur.com/fvMYx.gif[/img] Now you're thinking differently with portals.[/QUOTE] How do the controls work? If you hold down right to go into the blue portal do you have to switch to left to come out of the orange one? Edit: I think something should come out of the portal gun when you fire it

[QUOTE=Vampired;31188398]Edit: I think something should come out of the portal gun when you fire it[/QUOTE] Maybe just some effect on the portal gun itself (like a glow or some particles coming out of it), since a projectile would probably look pretty strange at certain angles.

[QUOTE=Vampired;31188398]How do the controls work? If you hold down right to go into the blue portal do you have to switch to left to come out of the orange one?[/QUOTE] Yeah. The momentum carries you over though, it's not that hard. If you keep holding right, Mario spazzes all out. Maybe I should make it like in Devil May Cry 1 where when the camera changes you keep walking in the same direction until you go in a different one. [QUOTE=Vampired;31188398]Edit: I think something should come out of the portal gun when you fire it[/quote] I agree, but I really wanna do the portal rendering next. [QUOTE=DarKSunrise;31188491]Maybe just some effect on the portal gun itself (like a glow or some particles coming out of it), since a projectile would probably look pretty strange at certain angles.[/QUOTE] I got a pretty good idea of how to make the projectile look good. But yeah, also effect on the gun. But in the end, I am way too lazy to do anything right now. Also I am a terrible artist. I wish I knew a dedicated artist. I mean, someone else than [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1044832-What-are-you-working-on-v15?p=27280793&viewfull=1#post27280793]that other one[/url]. [editline].[/editline] While I'm having a huge quotepost; [QUOTE=foszor;31180767]This is gonna sound silly, but in Portal when you fling through different axis, you see the world rotate around you (since its an FPS). Not to keep it this way, but how hard would it be to see what your game would look like if the world rotated around Mario instead of rotating him. I'm just curious I wanna see what it would look like.[/QUOTE] It's disorienting as fuck. Kinda like [url=http://firstpersontetris.com/]this[/url] (Which is a [B]great[/B] game, but the whole idea is for it to be disorienting)

New gameplay concept involves playing in a parallel alternate world that is right under you. Effect done by rendering the parallax map background and the world/entities into render targets. Then drawing the render targets twice, one with normal shaders on such as lighting and what not, and then drawing it again upside down and beneath the level with grayscale/blur/bloom, etc.. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AO-Tsqej64[/media]

Making a component based entity system. Is it a good idea to not have a component manager and just do inheritance of the Component class for different functionality(with just referring them by type name), and just have the entity class hold components, update, and initialize them?

[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;31184499]Is there something wrong with Allegro?[/QUOTE] Allegro is slow as hell compared to either of them, has extremely inconsistant function arguments (the blit function asks for what you want to blit followed by where you want to blit it to, yet the draw_sprite function is opposite etc. etc.), and it also has those stupid hacky END_OF_MAIN() macros.

I'm working on getting some nice terrain generation done for my voxel engine. I tried messing around with 2D heightmaps, they were ok but of course you can't have any really interesting features like overhangs and caves and tunnels and so on. I decided to try and draw some inspiration from Notch, using his [URL="http://notch.tumblr.com/post/3746989361/terrain-generation-part-1"]blog post about terrain generation[/URL], but I'm having a hard time understand what he means, specifically when he says "So I switched the system over into a similar system based off 3D Perlin noise. Instead of sampling the “ground height”, I treated the noise value as the “density”, where anything lower than 0 would be air, and anything higher than or equal to 0 would be ground. [B]To make sure the bottom layer is solid and the top isn’t, I just add the height (offset by the water level) to the sampled result.[/B]" Add the height of what to what sampled result? What does "offset by the water level" mean?

[QUOTE=neos300;31189373]Making a component based entity system. Is it a good idea to not have a component manager and just do inheritance of the Component class for different functionality(with just referring them by type name), and just have the entity class hold components, update, and initialize them?[/QUOTE] Yes. I don't really see any advantage to having a manager. You want something that allows you to make a component and just roll with it; not have to add it to any managers or what ever.

[QUOTE=Chris220;31189621]I'm working on getting some nice terrain generation done for my voxel engine. I tried messing around with 2D heightmaps, they were ok but of course you can't have any really interesting features like overhangs and caves and tunnels and so on. I decided to try and draw some inspiration from Notch, using his [URL="http://notch.tumblr.com/post/3746989361/terrain-generation-part-1"]blog post about terrain generation[/URL], but I'm having a hard time understand what he means, specifically when he says "So I switched the system over into a similar system based off 3D Perlin noise. Instead of sampling the “ground height”, I treated the noise value as the “density”, where anything lower than 0 would be air, and anything higher than or equal to 0 would be ground. [B]To make sure the bottom layer is solid and the top isn’t, I just add the height (offset by the water level) to the sampled result.[/B]" Add the height of what to what sampled result? What does "offset by the water level" mean?[/QUOTE] If y is your up/down axis, then I believe he means to add the difference of the y position with the sea level to the density value returned by the noise function. When the difference has a large positive or negative magnitude it makes rock and air more likely respectively.

Had my first day as a software engineer working at Immersive Technologies today! It was so awesome. The job is working on mining vehicle simulators like this: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkvCO9OHG8I[/url] [editline]18th July 2011[/editline] I don't think I could be happier right now, working my ass off through 3 years of uni and not knowing if I'd get a job I enjoy that's also relevant to my interests was kind of stressful.

[QUOTE=Chris220;31189621]Add the height of what to what sampled result? What does "offset by the water level" mean?[/QUOTE] It would be safe to assume Notch's logic derives from the following: terrain_value = 64+noise(x, y, z)*randomness ..where terrain_value < 64 is dirt and terrain_value > 64 is air. (64 is sea level) If randomness where a constant, it would be the maximum height that mountains and ares lower than sea level can exist. Randomness could also be dependent on the y value (up and down), so to create and prevent certain features from occurring (super deep valleys, floating islands, etc). The conditions for terrain_value dictating air and ground would also be different. A non-linear function with a hard fall of is most likely.

So anyway the book I'm learning C++ from kept telling me to do this: [code] #include <iostream> using std::cout; using std::cin; using std::endl; // etc.. [/code] so I don't have to type "std::cout", "std::cin" etc all the time, and can just type "cout" and "cin". And I just found out I can just do this: [code] #include <iostream> using namespace std; [/code] and it seems to do pretty much the same thing, but I don't need all the other "using"s at the top. Please tell me if this is horrible and I should never do it - I'm new to C++ :v:

[img]https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-aj8dFIshF6Y/TiROvAy3SgI/AAAAAAAAAOs/K-uZ4xhqMiI/s400/landscape_demo.gif[/img] A demo of our current landscape generator.

[QUOTE=Azur;31190914]So anyway the book I'm learning C++ from kept telling me to do this: [code] #include <iostream> using std::cout; using std::cin; using std::endl; // etc.. [/code] so I don't have to type "std::cout", "std::cin" etc all the time, and can just type "cout" and "cin". And I just found out I can just do this: [code] #include <iostream> using namespace std; [/code] and it seems to do pretty much the same thing, but I don't need all the other "using"s at the top. Please tell me if this is horrible and I should never do it - I'm new to C++ :v:[/QUOTE] With small programs it's OK to use using namespace std; but in bigger programs try to make a habit of doing std::cout and std::cin etc.

[QUOTE=Azur;31190914]So anyway the book I'm learning C++ from kept telling me to do this: [code] #include <iostream> using std::cout; using std::cin; using std::endl; // etc.. [/code] so I don't have to type "std::cout", "std::cin" etc all the time, and can just type "cout" and "cin". And I just found out I can just do this: [code] #include <iostream> using namespace std; [/code] and it seems to do pretty much the same thing, but I don't need all the other "using"s at the top. Please tell me if this is horrible and I should never do it - I'm new to C++ :v:[/QUOTE] It's a bad thing to put at the top of a file - it basically imports the entire std namespace into your global namespace, meaning name collisions and so on can easily happen. To be honest, I find typing std:: to be no problem, it avoids having to even touch the using statement.

[QUOTE=r4nk_;31189971]Had my first day as a software engineer working at Immersive Technologies today! It was so awesome. The job is working on mining vehicle simulators like this: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkvCO9OHG8I[/url] [editline]18th July 2011[/editline] I don't think I could be happier right now, working my ass off through 3 years of uni and not knowing if I'd get a job I enjoy that's also relevant to my interests was kind of stressful.[/QUOTE] What's an average workday like? I'm going to be working with software engineering.

Feeling a little paranoid and so building a few applications to help my security. I find the best way to know how to increase your security is to know how it's being penetrated, so I'm building an application in C# which will take voice input and send it over a network. Has anybody done anything with voice in C# before? I could really do with a hand.

[QUOTE=Chris220;31189621]I'm working on getting some nice terrain generation done for my voxel engine. I tried messing around with 2D heightmaps, they were ok but of course you can't have any really interesting features like overhangs and caves and tunnels and so on. I decided to try and draw some inspiration from Notch, using his [URL="http://notch.tumblr.com/post/3746989361/terrain-generation-part-1"]blog post about terrain generation[/URL], but I'm having a hard time understand what he means, specifically when he says "So I switched the system over into a similar system based off 3D Perlin noise. Instead of sampling the “ground height”, I treated the noise value as the “density”, where anything lower than 0 would be air, and anything higher than or equal to 0 would be ground. [B]To make sure the bottom layer is solid and the top isn’t, I just add the height (offset by the water level) to the sampled result.[/B]" Add the height of what to what sampled result? What does "offset by the water level" mean?[/QUOTE] This explains it better: [url]http://http.developer.nvidia.com/GPUGems3/gpugems3_ch01.html[/url]