What are you working on? v16 - Developers

[QUOTE=iNova;28789630]You are [b]so[/b] going to submit that to steam when you're done, right?[/QUOTE] I think thats his entry to the facepunch game comp

[QUOTE=iNova;28789630]You are [b]so[/b] going to submit that to steam when you're done, right?[/QUOTE] It doesn't have nearly enough deformable grids to be accepted there.

[QUOTE=efeX;28789618]it's more of the language not what it sits on.[/QUOTE] You don't like it's syntax, and that makes it slower and less flexible?

[QUOTE=iNova;28789630]You are [b]so[/b] going to submit that to steam when you're done, right?[/QUOTE] I'd love to but it's my FP game competition entry so that wouldn't really work out... I do plan on making a sequel though which might be published on Steam, I'm already starting to hate all the code I've written so far... but I'm not really looking forward rewriting it all either :v:

Dlaor's entry looks so good, I almost feel like continuing my entry is a futile effort :P

[QUOTE=Chris220;28789942]Dlaor's entry looks so good, I almost feel like continuing my entry is a futile effort :P[/QUOTE] Hey now, I'm putting all the effort in graphics, which is one of the less important factors... Remember, gameplay > graphics!

DevBug just accept that some people don't like Java and move on with your life.

[QUOTE=Dlaor-guy;28789977]Hey now, I'm putting all the effort in graphics, which is one of the less important factors... Remember, gameplay > graphics![/QUOTE] You wouldn't be telling me that if you didn't think you had good gameplay as well ;)

I think you should focus more on your [del]hand[/del]girlfriend as opposed to making your game with your girlfriend.

Progress! The chunks will now load and save dynamically as you walk along in any direction. These operations are run in separate threads to keep the performance high. The console is also fully functional at this time. We've also made progress when it comes to terrain generations. We have started to look at the generation functions for desert areas, hills, tundras and alpine areas. Below are some pictures: Here is all the chunks the player sees at any point in a desert area. The rendered map is 16x16x16 chunks, and gives a constant 60 fps. [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-38-45-03.jpg[/Media] This is what the player sees (around 7 chunks ( 224 blocks ) in radius with normal fog range enabled) [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-39-31-08.jpg[/Media] Here is a random generated hill map. There will, of course, be lots of vegetation once we get further along with development. Again, the map size is 16^3. [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-45-13-15.jpg[/Media] This is the hill map from the player's point of view. The default fog is enabled. [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-45-58-17.jpg[/Media] Here's a view of the tundra map. The snow block is just a placeholder for what will be frosted grass. The hilltops might still be snowy, though. [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-51-23-51.jpg[/Media] Here's a picture of what the player sees from the top of a hill on the tundra map. [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-51-08-18.jpg[/Media] This is an alpine map. The mountains are tall and pointy (due to use of both bicubic and bilinear interpolation). The "snowy" dirt will be replaced with snowy rock. [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-56-57-95.jpg[/Media] And last but not least, the player's view of the alpine map (the best picture of the lot, in my opinion). Think of walking in this "majestic" reagion with snow blowing in your face, listening to the wind howl. You're freezing, but you just gotta keep walking until you find some coal to start a fire to warm yourself :smile: [Media]http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx120/Azzi777/UmbraEngine2011-03-2423-57-45-43.jpg[/Media] And yeah, I know, we're still using the default minecraft textures. Don't abuse me for this :v: We're going to change the them, but we are not that artistic, so we're delaying that issue. Anyone willing to do some textures, please reply :wink:

[QUOTE=DevBug;28789681]You don't like it's syntax, and that makes it slower and less flexible?[/QUOTE] when the fuck did i say that?

You implied it (quite heavily in fact).

Great work, Matte!

[QUOTE=DevBug;28790973]You implied it (quite heavily in fact).[/QUOTE] oh when i said it's not what it sits on it's the language? wow that's actually the complete opposite.

Dear god, lets stop arguing about Java!

Some people like java, others dont. [h2]End of discussion.[/h2]

I really should boot into Linux and work on Batallion some more, eh?

[QUOTE=Dlaor-guy;28789498]That's a simple particle effect with my simple particle system :v: You'll probably not be able to use this since basically all Lua stuff in here is made specifically for my game, but whatever: -snip- Now I'm going to finish my homework :sigh:[/QUOTE] I'd move the entity type outside the table, since it's required and it being in the table implies optionality. [lua]Entity 'Player' { pos = Vector( 216, 457 ) }[/lua] Same for LevelData, where I'm guessing the name is also required. And for extra measure, use a Vector class instead of separate numbers. Sorry, I always find myself sperging all over Lua wrappers for some reason. I'm obsessed with clean interfaces :eng99:

Started playing about with SDL on Windows, working again on game architecture now. This is like the fifth try at a 2D game lol [img]http://content.screencast.com/users/Kopimi/folders/Jing/media/227a33f7-2477-4e3c-84ca-14ef79a80bb7/2011-03-24_2221.png[/img] I spent more time making that image than I did making the code to display it :v:

[QUOTE=DevBug;28790973]You implied it (quite heavily in fact).[/QUOTE] lmao java doesn't even have delegates, why are you defending it

[QUOTE=Tangara;28795769]lmao java doesn't even have delegates, why are you defending it[/QUOTE] Could we get back to what you're working on rather than reverting to the usual "JAVA SUX XD" tone of the thread?

I just finished file compression to my file-system library. Also I can load a .net dll in memory and execute it but that is pretty minor.

[QUOTE=geel9;28790258]I think you should focus more on your [del]hand[/del]girlfriend as opposed to making your game with your girlfriend.[/QUOTE] ...? I really don't see what this has to do with anything, did you even read my posts?

Cheeky little image dump because I'm bored. [img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/99765/66231.png[/img] [img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/99765/6523434.png[/img] [img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/99765/7432334.png[/img]

[QUOTE=layla;28796688][img_thumb]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/99765/7432334.png[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] Holy shit, are those proper rigid body physics in a voxel world? When will you finally release a demo?

[QUOTE=Robber;28797153]Holy shit, are those proper rigid body physics in a voxel world? When will you finally release a demo?[/QUOTE] Yup, like in this video [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQMBGLMtdFE[/media] And when It's fun to play.

How is a generic falling sand game implemented? Is it wiser to use a 2D int array with an element for each pixel or to make an object for each "point" without having an array that necessarily has to contain an element for each point?

Slowly but surely making my own physics engine. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4KNisbbh34[/media]

[QUOTE=TerabyteS;28798463]How is a generic falling sand game implemented? Is it wiser to use a 2D int array with an element for each pixel or to make an object for each "point" without having an array that necessarily has to contain an element for each point?[/QUOTE] It depends. Most games go with the 2d array I think so that they can have "air" or "empty" particles that things can interact with, for example - you could have air triggered explosive. If you don't think you need that functionality or you don't think your users will (if you allow modding) then I guess a list of particles could be better. I would also look into setting particles asleep and then waking them if something near them happens.

[QUOTE=TerabyteS;28798463]How is a generic falling sand game implemented? Is it wiser to use a 2D int array with an element for each pixel or to make an object for each "point" without having an array that necessarily has to contain an element for each point?[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1062318-What-are-you-working-on-v16?p=28674552&highlight=#post28674552]That think I posted[/url] a few days ago works by modifying the pixels directly on the screen. I know what kind of element it is by their color. That allows you to easily make it drawable without having to implement some circle fill algorithm and what not. The way I did it was loop through the pixels from the bottom to the top, swapping them for the pixel below them if it's blank space. At first, for the rows, I was always looping from left to right, but that made the sand fall unequally, so I tried looping alternatively, from left to right, then right to left, etc, and the result is not so bad. [editline]25th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=iPope;28798947]It depends. Most games go with the 2d array I think so that they can have "air" or "empty" particles that things can interact with, for example - you could have air triggered explosive. If you don't think you need that functionality or you don't think your users will (if you allow modding) then I guess a list of particles could be better. I would also look into setting particles asleep and then waking them if something near them happens.[/QUOTE] The thing with an array of particles is that you have to loop at least twice through it to check for collisions, which can be demanding, depending on various factors.