What are you working on? November 2011 Edition - Developers

[QUOTE=esalaka;33432005]Lower-case reminds me of lambda calculus which is not what you're doing. So let's go with Λ[/QUOTE] This. "lambda" is confusing.

I know that I've been shitposting, but it was actually part of something I'm having a lot of fun with. [URL=http://imgur.com/DOHv4.png][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/DOHv4l.png[/IMG][/URL] This is definitely still Java, and definitely still running on a Mac, but the reason I'm even toying around with this is that it's a super portable little 2D graphics engine. Everything is being drawn using Java2D which unlike LWJGL and friends doesn't require getting annoying native dependencies to work. The fun part is that unlike the usual speed of development for a "game engine" I've gone from being able to render a black screen to rendering eyeballs of different sizes that can scoot around on the screen in under 24 hours. Better still I can zip up the distrobution folder and send it to anyone and they should be able to run it no questions asked (I guess assuming they have a JVM installed). Maybe I'll even make a game out of this.

Is it just me or does the new lighting in terraria 1.1 look a lot like benji's game?

[QUOTE=Legend286;33430563]Long-ass road to rendering begins... 1117 lines just to set up the viewport, because I'm just going straight into it. Boilerplate code is still kinda interesting for me anyway. [img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9038221/Rendering%20Engine/EngineWindow2_NowDX11.png[/img] It's using DX11 too, no point using anything less really. Hopefully by the end of these tutorials I'll have learned enough to just keep adding features.[/QUOTE] Looks like a copy-paste from [URL="http://www.rastertek.com/dx11tut03.html"]this[/URL].

[QUOTE=altern;33433267]Is it just me or does the new lighting in terraria 1.1 look a lot like benji's game?[/QUOTE] I think Terraria was first with it, I don't know, it looks cool though.

CUBES! [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/GTGtV.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=mlbfan560;33433671]CUBES! [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/GTGtV.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] When I saw that, I had a flashback to the time in GMod when I accidentally forgot to install the materials to a model pack and spawned the biggest model

[QUOTE=Staneh;33433337]I think Terraria was first with it, I don't know, it looks cool though.[/QUOTE] Yeah they definitely were, there's progress threads on their forum from a long time before Benji's game was posted here.

Handed in my assembly language and machinecode exercise today. Man it feels nice to be back at a high level language. Seriously felt like torture.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/qrGvm.png[/img] And then there was rain!

[QUOTE=Staneh;33433893][img]http://i.imgur.com/qrGvm.png[/img] And then there was rain![/QUOTE] Make the droplets smaller.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/ZlYwV.png[/img] Smaller like this? [editline]25th November 2011[/editline] Also don't mind the wide drops, they aren't seeable ingame.

[QUOTE=Jawalt;33431531]Honestly, no offense but your fire looks like ass. Just write an actual particle system, it's not going to kill your performance. Plenty of IOS/Android games render like Xbox quality shit, they can handle a few particles.[/QUOTE] i'm sorry you don't like my fake particle system, i'll try to write a real one now i'm sure a 533 MHz Samsung S5L8720 and a PowerVR MBX Lite 3D GPU can simulate and render 100k particles where each particle has 4 verts, 2 triangles and 6 indices, AKA an extra ~10MB per frame, in real time, along with high-resolution cloth physics. or, you kno, i could stick with my 100k real-time particles that only use 1 vert, 0 triangles, and 1 index per particle, AKA 0 memory overhead because the simulation shares the same data i will improve the texture, etc., and do my best, but i [b]will[/b] keep ipod touch 2g generation compability

[QUOTE=DevBug;33433295]Looks like a copy-paste from [URL="http://www.rastertek.com/dx11tut03.html"]this[/URL].[/QUOTE] I'm following the tutorial, but obviously I'm writing it out myself. What would be the point otherwise?

-snip- oops double

[QUOTE=Legend286;33434203]I'm following the tutorial, but obviously I'm writing it out myself. What would be the point otherwise?[/QUOTE] - Code is an exact copy (including naming convention, indentation, comments, etc.) - Exact same filenames (including non-mentioned) - etc.

[QUOTE=DevBug;33434286]- Code is an exact copy (including naming convention, indentation, comments, etc.) - Exact same filenames (including non-mentioned) - etc.[/QUOTE] Because I want to constantly refer to my own naming convention when this is perfectly fine? Why else would it be taking me so long to do if I was just copying the code without reading through it and ~learning~? You're dumb.

[QUOTE=mlbfan560;33433671]CUBES! [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/GTGtV.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] I was instantly reminded of [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUlAQZB9Ng"]this scene[/URL] from Jurassic Park.

[QUOTE=ChristopherB;33434583]I was instantly reminded of [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFUlAQZB9Ng"]this scene[/URL] from Jurassic Park.[/QUOTE] Didn't someone here make a jurassic park filesystem viewer?

[QUOTE=Jookia;33430715]Except for blocking out a good 90% of video cards.[/QUOTE] Doesn't DX11 support every Shader Model 4.0+ GPU (Geforce 8800, ...)?

[QUOTE=Robber;33434772]Doesn't DX11 support every Shader Model 4.0+ GPU (Geforce 8800, ...)?[/QUOTE] You still need fallback shaders with less instructions / features though. I'm not sure whether the scaling is actually automatic or not, but it's possible.

As far as I know you can use direct3d11 like it was 10. It seems like a good idea even if you're only using 10.

Posix shared memory is annoying. I swear I hosed my ram 2 times before learning how to destroy Posix shared memory. Who in their right mind would design something so that you have to explicitly tell it to automatically destroy itself when it detects that it does not have any owners?

[QUOTE=Legend286;33434377]Because I want to constantly refer to my own naming convention when this is perfectly fine? Why else would it be taking me so long to do if I was just copying the code without reading through it and ~learning~? You're dumb.[/QUOTE] Get over yourself. You copied the freakin' comments.

Whenever I try tutorials I just end up copying everything and not learning I guess that's why I'm self taught. Makes if difficult when people want help learning to program [editline]25th November 2011[/editline] Time to sync up images through the server Uhghgghhg

[QUOTE=killman;33435477] Who in their right mind would design something so that you have to explicitly tell it to automatically destroy itself when it detects that it does not have any owners?[/QUOTE] OS programmers? It's probably some UNIX relic.

[QUOTE=Legend286;33434377]Because I want to constantly refer to my own naming convention when this is perfectly fine? Why else would it be taking me so long to do if I was just copying the code without reading through it and ~learning~? You're dumb.[/QUOTE] That's got to be a new world record for the fastest ad hominem.

[QUOTE=icantread49;33434200]i'm sorry you don't like my fake particle system, i'll try to write a real one now i'm sure a 533 MHz Samsung S5L8720 and a PowerVR MBX Lite 3D GPU can simulate and render 100k particles where each particle has 4 verts, 2 triangles and 6 indices, AKA an extra ~10MB per frame, in real time, along with high-resolution cloth physics. or, you kno, i could stick with my 100k real-time particles that only use 1 vert, 0 triangles, and 1 index per particle, AKA 0 memory overhead because the simulation shares the same data i will improve the texture, etc., and do my best, but i [b]will[/b] keep ipod touch 2g generation compability[/QUOTE] Instancing, dude. Also, 100k particles sounds [i]really[/i] excessive for a simple 2.5D application where all the action is going on right in front of the 'camera'. 100k particles in that situation would be enough to block out everything and make the entire screen white. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDjtd8tL-vM][i]This[/i] is 100k particles[/url] Scale your fire up a bit and draw it additively. I think you'll find that you can get away with many fewer particles. [editline]25th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Map in a box;33434610]Didn't someone here make a jurassic park filesystem viewer?[/QUOTE] Not here, AFAIK. However the "Jurassic Park" file manager is a real thing. It shipped with SGI Irix workstations.

[QUOTE=Darwin226;33435505]Get over yourself. You copied the freakin' comments.[/QUOTE] Because I don't mind them?

[QUOTE=icantread49;33434200]i'm sorry you don't like my fake particle system, i'll try to write a real one now i'm sure a 533 MHz Samsung S5L8720 and a PowerVR MBX Lite 3D GPU can simulate and render 100k particles where each particle has 4 verts, 2 triangles and 6 indices, AKA an extra ~10MB per frame, in real time, along with high-resolution cloth physics. or, you kno, i could stick with my 100k real-time particles that only use 1 vert, 0 triangles, and 1 index per particle, AKA 0 memory overhead because the simulation shares the same data i will improve the texture, etc., and do my best, but i [B]will[/B] keep ipod touch 2g generation compability[/QUOTE] I'm not sure how intensive your cloth simulation is on the CPU, but that's essentially how I do my particle system on my MMO and I haven't had any issues. Most simulations only use around 10-20 particles max, though, and to be honest, your cloth burning shouldn't need any more than 50-60 particles at any given time for a decently convincing effect. EDIT: The only thing you should really be bound by is fillrate and blending, not bandwidth. EDIT: I think.