Getting straight to the point, I want to make games. However, I was reading the stickied thread and noticed that it said C# would be used to make small games.
What does it mean by small games? Should I start with C# to learn to program games, or should I just get into C++?
Now, I know I'm not going to be making anything huge like Half-Life, but I want to start off simple with just a side scrolling game.
So, C# or C++?
If you're just starting, I'd just use C#. Extremely simple to program in and there are plenty tutorials.
C# is the way, doesn't really matter small or big games, C# just makes it
easier to jump directly into game development instead of learning how to do small internal stuff
[QUOTE=andersonmat;22011253]Extremely simple to program in...[/QUOTE]
I don't know why people keep saying stuff like this, probably because they don't know the language at all. C# is [b]not[/b] simple. It's actually rather complex, and aside from the silly grammar things c++ likes to throw at you now and then, they're probably on par with each other. Productive ~= Simple.
C#.
[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;22011751]I don't know why people keep saying stuff like this, probably because they don't know the language at all.[/QUOTE]
Relative to C++ I'd consider it easier, and speaking of which, I [B]do[/B] know C#. I've spent my fair share of time dabbling with it. That's what I was going off of.
C++ has a whole range of libraries to speed up the process of development and is portable across almost every platform (you can compile stuff on the Nintendo DS and PSP if you want).
It's worth the learning curve by far.
[QUOTE=CPPNOOB;22012955]C++ has a whole range of libraries to speed up the process of development[/quote]
And so does C#, except more and better.
[quote]and is portable across almost every platform (you can compile stuff on the Nintendo DS and PSP if you want).[/quote]
And so can C#. Minus the DS and PSP stuff, which doesn't work like that for C++ either. It's not like "oh, hey, all I need to do to run my PC game on the DS is just recompile it."
GMod on psp = :gizz:
[QUOTE=nullsquared;22013359]And so does C#, except more and better.
And so can C#. Minus the DS and PSP stuff, which doesn't work like that for C++ either. It's not like "oh, hey, all I need to do to run my PC game on the DS is just recompile it."[/QUOTE]
Woops, I meant C for the DS and PSP.
Anyway, I recommend C++ simply because of some current legal issues with C# that you can PM me about if you want more info on.
Personal legal issues you are having?
[QUOTE=r4nk_;22014753]Personal legal issues you are having?[/QUOTE]
Most likely, FUD over whether Mono infringes Microsoft patents and is at risk of being sued out of existence someday. There's ongoing debate about whether open-source developers should embrace or avoid the .NET platform.
[QUOTE=Wyzard;22014825]Most likely, FUD over whether Mono infringes Microsoft patents and is at risk of being sued out of existence someday. There's ongoing debate about whether open-source developers should embrace or avoid the .NET platform.[/QUOTE]
The majority of it is not actually informed debate, it's just a bunch of morons fear mongering. And in the end it's beside the point, because telling developers what to use is never going to work anyway.
[QUOTE=Wyzard;22014825]Most likely, FUD over whether Mono infringes Microsoft patents and is at risk of being sued out of existence someday. There's ongoing debate about whether open-source developers should embrace or avoid the .NET platform.[/QUOTE]
I'm not so sure about this, but the only part of Mono I could think Microsoft could sue the shit out of them for would be their binary-compatibility with .NET assemblies.
C# is an open standard, so there's no way in hell Microsoft could ever sue them for implementing the language.
Even then, Microsoft aren't as bad as everyone makes out to be. They're capitalists, but who cares? They're a business.
They aren't dumb enough to sue the Mono people for anything. It would just make them look bad and shun people away from the platform.
[editline]06:49PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=blankthemuffin;22018086]The majority of it is not actually informed debate, [b]it's just a bunch of morons fear mongering.[/b][/QUOTE]
This to the max.
[QUOTE=turb_;22018722]I'm not so sure about this, but the only part of Mono I could think Microsoft could sue the shit out of them for would be their binary-compatibility with .NET assemblies.
C# is an open standard, so there's no way in hell Microsoft could ever sue them for implementing the language.
Even then, Microsoft aren't as bad as everyone makes out to be. They're capitalists, but who cares? They're a business.
They aren't dumb enough to sue the Mono people for anything. It would just make them look bad and shun people away from the platform.[/QUOTE]
See now you're somewhat biased to the other side with your 'facts'.
Microsoft (or any other company) could hold patents for any part of .NET. Microsoft DO hold patents for lots of .NET. The current debate is whether Microsoft's patent promises (actual documents) provide significant coverage. Since the promises cover only the EMCA specifications, and only when you're fully compliant with the spec, people are worried mostly about things from .NET that Mono includes from outside the spec. Some people (FSF Lawyers) also say the legalese in the promises are somewhat dubious, and still request a royalty free irrevocable patent licence before they can support it at all.
Since the patent promises were released by Microsoft though, the opposition has been reduced considerably.
C#
C#
Edit: Post deleted.
Silly me and my fantasies. I still like C++ though because I don't really like the slightly mixed java syntax in C# and how C# is not cross-platform. :(
[QUOTE=Kaphonaits;22021561]... how C# is not cross-platform. :([/QUOTE]
Yes it is?
C# is made of C++, so C# is more functional and easy to use
[QUOTE=Ericsson;22021756]C# is made of C++, so C# is more functional and easy to use[/QUOTE]
That doesn't make much sense. Both languages have different objectives, and having one simply inherit the semantics of another for "boilerplate" doesn't amount to much.
[QUOTE=Ericsson;22021756]C# is made of C++, so C# is more functional and easy to use[/QUOTE]
C# and C++ are C-style languages, which simply means that their syntax is roughly the same.
That'd be like saying that Half-Life 2 is made out of Doom.
[QUOTE=ZeekyHBomb;22022153]C# and C++ are C-style languages, which simply means that their syntax is roughly the same.
That'd be like saying that Half-Life 2 is made out of Doom.[/QUOTE]
I think the meaning he's trying to get across is more like Half-Life 2 is made out of C++, so C++ has better gameplay, and a more interesting storyline.
So it sounds like C# is better and easier to use. Thanks guys, I guess I'll get started with using that.
What can I use to write C# code into?
Probably a Microsoft Visual X.
Visual Studio 2010 (If you have dreamspark)
If not, then Visual C# Express 2010
[QUOTE=TheBoff;22024078]I think the meaning he's trying to get across is more like Half-Life 2 is made out of C++, so C++ has better gameplay, and a more interesting storyline.[/QUOTE]
Instead of pointing out the limitations of my analogy I'll get back to the real thing and say that C# serves a different purpose as C++.
If that would be the case, anyone using assembly or C would be an idiot, since we have much more functional languages, such as Scheme or something.
I didn't wanna say which one was better, but saying that C# is made out of C++ is just wrong. And which one is better is actually dependent on more factors than just the language itself.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
