[QUOTE=Dj-J3;37251355][t]http://frameaway.org/ftp/ShareX/Tekkit_2012-08-15_18-42-32.png[/t][/QUOTE]
And the theme song starts playing in my head
Computercraft is really rad, though. I like using it for everything possible on servers that have it.
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
Oh man 1.4 makes it even more rad
[QUOTE=ECrownofFire;37252190]3.30? Shit man, the graphics on this XP comp only support OpenGL 2.1 and GLSL 1.2 :v:
Makes it really easy to have backwards-compatibility I guess...
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
Yeah it just instantly seg-faults for me.
Also, why the fuck are you dynamically linking everything? For fuck's sake, GLFW is only 47.5 KB.[/QUOTE]
The only reason it requires opengl (glsl?) 3.30 is because I wrote the shaders using a 3.30 tutorial :u. It should be easy to change it to use old opengl/glsl.
I'm dynamically linking because it's far easier. Attempting to statically link caused tons of problems that I'm not willing to fix when it's such an early game prototype and I don't even use windows.
In the future I'll look into static linking, but right now I'll work on adding old opengl support. Thanks for the feedback!
[QUOTE=Foda;37249830]Our game finally has shown up in the Windows App store. We've worked really hard the past 6 weeks making it.
It's called Inkarus. You can find it by either searching, or looking under Games>New Releases (Note: you have to be running RTM, which hits MSDN today). I'd be really grateful if you could let me know what you think about it. Here's some screenshots:
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/inkarsooo1.png[/img]
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/odsuhgks1.png[/img]
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/sdigu2.png[/img]
If anyone is interested, I'll write a bit regarding the tech behind the game, and some of the challenges we encountered working with WinRT. For now, the basic overview of how our engine works is like this:
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/layout20.png[/img]
I would also be willing to share some code if anyone is interested.[/QUOTE]
May I ask why(and how?) you used javascript for drawing, while you could use that xaml ui thing that comes with metro style app stuff? (I dont have vs right now, its broken for me and I just cant open it and remember what it was, but I suppose there was another "normal" ui option comes with metrostyle project as default when you create it)
I had one chance to look at metrostyle then visual studio broke. so its likely that im missing something obvious.
[QUOTE=esalaka;37252631]Computercraft is really rad, though. I like using it for everything possible on servers that have it.[/QUOTE]
Seconding this. Now I know a little Lua!
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/lRc6A.jpg[/img_thumb]
[img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/RM3zZ.jpg[/img_thumb]
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
let's see how many people notice the space
[QUOTE=egomanyak;37253114]May I ask why(and how?) you used javascript for drawing, while you could use that xaml ui thing that comes with metro style app stuff? (I dont have vs right now, its broken for me and I just cant open it and remember what it was, but I suppose there was another "normal" ui option comes with metrostyle project as default when you create it)
I had one chance to look at metrostyle then visual studio broke. so its likely that im missing something obvious.[/QUOTE]
We used JS for drawing because we need to place images and move them around a lot. It's not really possible to do that quickly using xaml (xaml is used mostly for UI/static stuff).
As for the how, WinRT projects let you add multiple projects to a single solution that use different languages. The solution's main project uses HTML/JS, and so it makes an instance of the C# gamelogic, and updates it while also getting a list of things to draw from it. The gamelogic object is written in C#, but can be instanced from JavaScript.
[QUOTE=Jookia;37252519]I don't want to start a flame war, I really don't want to, but Facepunch programmers are pretty bias towards OpenGL for the obvious reasons. I'd like to know why you dislike it?
[editline]16th August 2012[/editline]
That's genius.[/QUOTE]
Documentation is lacking, no audio/input, and the overall development of OpenGL (the project) is really slow. I feel that OpenGL is a lot less "organized" in both the API department and the management of the project. In today's day and age though, neither of the two have all that much difference overall, so really it's more of just a personal preference. It's not like I won't buy a game because it uses OpenGL or anything like that.
[QUOTE=Foda;37253531]Documentation is lacking, no audio/input, and the overall development of OpenGL (the project) is really slow. I feel that OpenGL is a lot less "organized" in both the API department and the management of the project. In today's day and age though, neither of the two have all that much difference overall, so really it's more of just a personal preference. It's not like I won't buy a game because it uses OpenGL or anything like that.[/QUOTE]
While this is true, OpenGL is an open standard and is cross platform. That should give it preference over others should it not?
[QUOTE=Jookia;37253573]While this is true, OpenGL is an open standard and is cross platform. That should give it preference over others should it not?[/QUOTE]
I've always wondered the same thing. Although I've heard that DirectX is more powerful than openGL on Windows. But the fact that openGL runs on pretty much everything except the xbox 360 and is still pretty powerful is a good reason to use it.
[QUOTE=Jookia;37253573]While this is true, OpenGL is an open standard and is cross platform. That should give it preference over others should it not?[/QUOTE]
That's true, and it's a very good reason to use OpenGL. However, there are some issues: OSX does not support OpenGL 4.0 yet, and both Nvidia and ATI refuse to be cooperative with their drivers.
I should also add that I don't develop 3d games or applications. I really get frustrated though when people get their panties in a bunch when a company chooses Dx over OpenGL. A lot of people don't realize that the market (Windows + Xbox) is in favor for Dx and is usually the most cost-effective solution. However, If I was an indie developer who was making a new game tomorrow, I would choose OpenGL purely because I would be able to get more sales.
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Electroholic;37253695]I've always wondered the same thing. Although I've heard that DirectX is more powerful than openGL on Windows. But the fact that openGL runs on pretty much everything except the xbox 360 and is still pretty powerful is a good reason to use it.[/QUOTE]
Well kinda. PS3 uses an odd version and has the whole SPU thing going on so the cost/time needed to develop for it is going to be the same regardless of what you're starting off in.
[QUOTE=Foda;37253875]That's true, and it's a very good reason to use OpenGL. However, there are some issues: OSX does not support OpenGL 4.0 yet, and both Nvidia and ATI refuse to be cooperative with their drivers.
I should also add that I don't develop 3d games or applications. I really get frustrated though when people get their panties in a bunch when a company chooses Dx over OpenGL. A lot of people don't realize that the market (Windows + Xbox) is in favor for Dx and is usually the most cost-effective solution. However, If I was an indie developer who was making a new game tomorrow, I would choose OpenGL purely because I would be able to get more sales.
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
Well kinda. PS3 uses an odd version and has the whole SPU thing going on so the cost/time needed to develop for it is going to be the same regardless of what you're starting off in.[/QUOTE]
Most PS3 games tend to use a Low-Level graphics API that isn't OpenGL or DirectX.
[QUOTE=Foda;37253531]no audio/input[/QUOTE]
You [B]do[/B] realise the question isn't "DirectX or OpenGL" but "Direct3D or OpenGL", right? Graphics APIs aren't [I]supposed[/I] to have audio or input functionality.
[QUOTE=Foda;37253875]Well kinda. PS3 uses an odd version and has the whole SPU thing going on so the cost/time needed to develop for it is going to be the same regardless of what you're starting off in.[/QUOTE]
It's called OpenGL ES.
Practically, that means you'd be likely to get your mobile games easily ported on PS3 or something :v:
(Of course, if you don't use many non-ES functions the porting of the graphics code is gonna be relatively simple)
Currently working on an API wrapper I'm calling "Vanillin". It exposes the standard Lua C API to binary modules written for GMod by implementing all of their functions using the GMod C API. So far, it's about 95% working, and its useage is literally drop-in. It takes the form of a static library called "lua51.lib", and during your build process, you just link against that instead of the Lua 5.1 DLL's import library (also called "lua51.lib") - there's no changes to the source code of any of these programs necessary, just need to be re-linked and renamed.
This makes most of the hundreds of already-written binary modules for Lua available for Garry's Mod, and more importantly for the large multi-person project I've been working on, means my team and I don't have to write separate versions of our binary modules for Garry's Mod and for the rest of the Lua Universe. Plus it's just nicer to be able to write with a more sane, consistent, and well-documented API that we have experience working with.
Here are some screenshots of the primary things I've been testing it with. First up, [B]LPeg[/B], a kind of advanced pattern-matching library that takes after SNOBOL:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ANYDn.png[/IMG]
Here's [B]LuaXInput[/B], a module I wrote myself for my large team project; it is one of the sub-modules of a larger LuaGameInput library, one of my personal projects:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/TYm75.png[/IMG]
Here are the [B]MD5[/B] and [B]DES56[/B] libraries, part of the [B]Kepler Project[/B]:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yv4Yr.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/oOla6.jpg[/IMG]
And finally, here's [B]LuaSocket[/B], which is currently only [I]mostly[/I] working...the TCP stuff seems fine but http.request() is crashing me:
[IMG]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/578964650873313240/4B60C795B6668D7FE3638B831962B1DD7849FA23/[/IMG]
The library implements all of the Lua C API's functions but does not necessarily [i]support[/i] all of them...things like lua_setallocf() or lua_setpanic() will merely trigger an error, for obvious reasons. But through much effort and reverse-engineering, it fully and correctly supports things like strings with embedded nuls (both pushing and retrieving), lua_getstack() and lua_getinfo(), full userdata works correctly, including setting arbitrary metatables on it and correct support for __gc metamethods...it's been a lot of effort and I've spent nearly three months on this all told, but the gains have been well worth it.
With the changes to the API coming in GMod 13, it's delayed progress by about two weeks, but when it's all finished, I'll release it to the public. I can imagine quite a few people will be able to get a lot of use out of it.
[QUOTE=Electroholic;37253695]Although I've heard that DirectX is more powerful than openGL on Windows.[/QUOTE]
Valve ported L4D2 to OpenGL, they posted a detailed post on their Linux blog about it. Ran at the same FPS as the DX version.
[QUOTE=Foda;37253875]That's true, and it's a very good reason to use OpenGL. However, there are some issues: OSX does not support OpenGL 4.0 yet, and both Nvidia and ATI refuse to be cooperative with their drivers.
I should also add that I don't develop 3d games or applications. I really get frustrated though when people get their panties in a bunch when a company chooses Dx over OpenGL. A lot of people don't realize that the market (Windows + Xbox) is in favor for Dx and is usually the most cost-effective solution. However, If I was an indie developer who was making a new game tomorrow, I would choose OpenGL purely because I would be able to get more sales.
[editline]15th August 2012[/editline]
Well kinda. PS3 uses an odd version and has the whole SPU thing going on so the cost/time needed to develop for it is going to be the same regardless of what you're starting off in.[/QUOTE]
Have you considered making a modular rendering engine that accept more than one API? It's much more easier to implement than what most people would except, especially if you are using CG for OGL since the syntax is exactly the same as HLSL. I've always seen this as the perfect alternative for rendering :v:
[QUOTE=esalaka;37254049]You [B]do[/B] realise the question isn't "DirectX or OpenGL" but "Direct3D or OpenGL", right? Graphics APIs aren't [I]supposed[/I] to have audio or input functionality.
It's called OpenGL ES.
Practically, that means you'd be likely to get your mobile games easily ported on PS3 or something :v:
(Of course, if you don't use many non-ES functions the porting of the graphics code is gonna be relatively simple)[/QUOTE]
I tend to group them together because there's no point of just using direct3d without considering directwrite+directcompute+direct2d
[QUOTE=Infectious;37254128]Here are the [B]MD5[/B] and [B]DES56[/B] libraries, part of the [B]Kepler Project[/B]:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/yv4Yr.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/oOla6.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I find it quite unlikely that you would be breaking cryptographically somewhat secure hashes in real time. Consider using the verb "hash" and just speaking about the original message. It causes me pain when people suggest hashes might simply be a form of encoding or encryption when they [cryptographic hashes] are (supposed to be) irreversible mappings of strings to n-bit integers.
[QUOTE=Matt-;37254202]Valve ported L4D2 to OpenGL, they posted a detailed post on their Linux blog about it. Ran at the same FPS as the DX version.[/QUOTE]
They were also running L4D2 in Dx9, which has a massive overhead that was eliminated in Dx10/11.
[QUOTE=Foda;37254290]I tend to group them together because there's no point of just using direct3d without considering directwrite+directcompute+direct2d[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but for the comparison to be fair you'd have to also include OpenCL/CUDA, some freetype wrapper (for instance) and an audio library (like OpenAL, which isn't actually open)
[QUOTE=esalaka;37254296]I find it quite unlikely that you would be breaking cryptographically somewhat secure hashes in real time. Consider using the verb "hash" and just speaking about the original message. It causes me pain when people suggest hashes might simply be a form of encoding or encryption when they [cryptographic hashes] are (supposed to be) irreversible mappings of strings to n-bit integers.[/QUOTE]
I think he's just using bad terminology in this instance. I figure he's just echoing what was said, and not actually performing any "decoding".
[img]http://i.imgur.com/9zElW.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Amiga OS;37238743][img]http://puu.sh/Vmod[/img]
I spy a stack of Commodore 64's[/QUOTE]
On the other side of the cabin, they have a Commodore 64 with a blu-ray drive.
[QUOTE=Maurice;37254521]On the other side of the cabin, they have a Commodore 64 with a blu-ray drive.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.commodoreusa.net/cusa_c64.aspx[/url]
It's more powerful than my current system.
[QUOTE=amcfaggot;37254520]I think he's just using bad terminology in this instance. I figure he's just echoing what was said, and not actually performing any "decoding".[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I know. It's just that the terminology specifically bothers me.
[QUOTE=Maurice;37254521]On the other side of the cabin, they have a Commodore 64 with a blu-ray drive.[/QUOTE]
Your site's tweet's links are broken.
[QUOTE=Darkwater124;37254579]Your site's tweet's links are broken.[/QUOTE]
They work fine for me
[QUOTE=Richy19;37254627]They work fine for me[/QUOTE]
[img]http://new.tinygrab.com/7cfbd51783660e159978ca80d69522e7d96ab147ab.png[/img]
:(
[QUOTE=Foda;37253875]OSX does not support OpenGL 4.0 yet[/QUOTE]
It doesn't support DirectX either, so I don't see your point.
[QUOTE=esalaka;37254554]Yeah, I know. It's just that the terminology specifically bothers me.[/QUOTE]
Then I hope you'll accept my apology for my imprecise terminology; as I am not the actual crypto-geek on my team (the actual crypto-geek recommended the library to me for testing).
As for how I was able to...'decode' it so quickly (please let me know the correct terminology), [URL="http://pastebin.com/LFTQEkMV"]the function[/URL] that prints that message has access to the key, the plaintext, and the ciphertext. I hope you'll understand that the point of the test was merely to see if the md5.sum(), md5.crypt(), md5.decrypt(), des56.crypt(), and des56.decrypt() [URL="http://www.keplerproject.org/md5/manual.html#reference"]functions[/URL] could be called correctly from GMod and return their results correctly to GMod, not to actually create a cryptographically secure communications system, which is beyond my current level of knowledge.
[QUOTE=ArgvCompany;37254724]It doesn't support DirectX either, so I don't see your point.[/QUOTE]
The point is that if you want to be cross platform you have to conform to the lowest version. Plus they were mad slow at updating from 2.1 to 3.2, it could be the same again.
[QUOTE=Foda;37253531]Documentation is lacking, no audio/input, and the overall development of OpenGL (the project) is really slow. I feel that OpenGL is a lot less "organized" in both the API department and the management of the project. In today's day and age though, neither of the two have all that much difference overall, so really it's more of just a personal preference. It's not like I won't buy a game because it uses OpenGL or anything like that.[/QUOTE]
Every function is [url=http://www.opengl.org/sdk/docs/man4/]properly documented [/url] and all extensions have a document describing each function and constant, I don't see what you mean by a lack of documentation.
OpenGL may be less oriented because it's not controlled by a single party, but this also means that it can get new features faster through its extension mechanism (which has repeatedly happened in the past, e.g. with tesselation).
Having said that, neither of the specifications should be slower than the other in theory, because in the end they're both just wrappers hardware specific interfacing.
[QUOTE=Infectious;37254759]Then I hope you'll accept my apology for my imprecise terminology; as I am not the actual crypto-geek on my team (the actual crypto-geek recommended the library to me for testing).
As for how I was able to...'decode' it so quickly (please let me know the correct terminology), [URL="http://pastebin.com/LFTQEkMV"]the function[/URL] that prints that message has access to the key, the plaintext, and the ciphertext. I hope you'll understand that the point of the test was merely to see if the md5.sum(), md5.crypt(), md5.decrypt(), des56.crypt(), and des56.decrypt() [URL="http://www.keplerproject.org/md5/manual.html#reference"]functions[/URL] could be called correctly from GMod and return their results correctly to GMod, not to actually create a cryptographically secure communications system, which is beyond my current level of knowledge.[/QUOTE]
Oh, so it's Kepler I have to blame, actually. Nevermind!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
