|
Wozbo posted:Yeah, loving with the baseline is a no-no. Especially NEGATIVELY loving with the baseline Combine that with the fact that its price tag is seriously hurting its ability to compete with the PS4, and it's a pretty reasonable cut.
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 18:38
|
|
.
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Combine that with the fact that its price tag is seriously hurting its ability to compete with the PS4, and it's a pretty reasonable cut. What they've done now is turned the XB One into a device identical to the PS4, except it's inferior on every remaining metric. Not that the differences are THAT pronounced, but there's just no way to spin "yeah it's less powerful, and our gamepad is basically just a gamepad, and...". With the Kinect, they could at least play the different capabilities card, and set up a comparison based on what features were most important to the user and so on. I don't think they could have done anything else, is the thing. The only "good" play would have been to cut the price by $100 and leave everything intact, but I assume that was completely out of the question wrt. their bottom line.  EDIT: That said, I'm one of those users that has a Kinect sitting on my TV that I've long since disabled as a useless piece of plastic, so I can't say I'm sad to see it go... but the second I did that, I basically switched to the PS4 and never looked back. Without that, the XB One is just a kind of disappointing console that doesn't compare well to the PS4. Now, all they can do is compete with exclusives, and that's looking pretty grim right now. Shalinor fucked around with this message at 19:39 on May 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
Cryohazard posted:I just finished up a match-3 (bejeweled-style) base for a procedural RPG thingy I'm going to be working on. It's basically the first thing I've ever really put together (it's done in Construct 2, that's how inexperienced I am.) I know GameMaker-likes aren't particularly great for bigger projects, but for what I'm doing it seems more than adequate, if a little fiddly. As a side-question, is it teaching me any bad habits that I'm going to have to wean myself off? Use the tool you are using. Finishing games is by far the most important skill to finishing games. Construct is fine for one man projects. The main problem with game maker likes is they are hard for larger teams to work simultaneously. Besides that game maker makes some great games. Splunkeys first version was game maker. Nuclear throne is game maker. Hell game maker can publish to the ps4 now.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
Finally installed Game Maker and have some time to fool around with it. Can anyone recommend a good tutorial series or resources? I tried to find some on youtube and all I could find were mouth breathing 13 year olds explaining how to make bare-bones platformers.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
This seems to be the standard for Game Maker tutorials. I found them useful when I needed a crash course.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Baldbeard posted:Finally installed Game Maker and have some time to fool around with it. The original spelunky is open source, and it uses a really nice platforming engine. Depending on your level of experience reading other people's code, that might be a really good start. Actually, just tweaking what's there to see what changes would be an excellent exercise at any skill level.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:What they've done now is turned the XB One into a device identical to the PS4, except it's inferior on every remaining metric. Not that the differences are THAT pronounced, but there's just no way to spin "yeah it's less powerful, and our gamepad is basically just a gamepad, and...". The PS3 was suffering from the same malaise for a while, and it had a much more compelling justification for its $100 price difference. OneEightHundred fucked around with this message at 07:42 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
I have a broken idea of what fun is so I've been making fun patterns while testing some very basic pathing code I've written. I've tested it with manually assigned collision boxes and it seems to be giving me back the waypoints I would like to assign to my characters. The first version I wrote was awful and used lists. This one is now storing my collision information in an int[][]. From my reading on the subject it seems to be low tech variant of the standard ideas. It grows out from a point until it reaches another and then crawls back to generate a path with a priority to not zigzag. No diagonal movement either. It's handled a few failures I've thrown at it. Like clicking outside of the map to give it bad indexes and trying to path in or out of voids. I feel pretty happy with it so far.  edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9PNmEfO1x4 point and click to move around boxes shrimp fried rice 4-EVA fucked around with this message at 06:36 on May 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
This is a little general, but since my ultimate goal is related to game development I'm hoping this is the right place. I'm interested in learning to develop in Unity, partially because it supports multi-platform development but also because I'm learning C# at work. I stress the "learning" part. At work I develop for the .Net framework, but until I started looking at Unity I never thought to consider where C# ends and the framework begins. Since I'm learning, I'm assuming I'll want to spend some of my personal time advancing my background knowledge before I get really serious with the game stuff. If I choose to focus on learning C# through Visual Studio and for the .Net framework (which most existing documentation tends to be geared towards, natch) is that ultimately going to be a handicap? Should I just jump into Unity stuff and hope the little background I have thus far will carry me through?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:This is a little general, but since my ultimate goal is related to game development I'm hoping this is the right place. The broader ".Net framework" will mostly not be required for game development in Unity. Most game engines use their own framework of classes and libraries that are tailored to running a game rather than an app/server/whatever else the standard framework is used for. To get started in Unity all you really need is the basics of C# and to look into anything you don't know about in the language or in Unity's framework. I always recommend jumping in and trying to create something rather than putting it off while learning a bunch of stuff. There are people who prefer a structured learning environment but I rarely see them succeed in game dev since a lot of the day-to-day of game dev is jumping in and making something happen that you won't find in a tutorial. That said, any programming experience, especially in the same language, will carry across to games.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
This is also part of the 2d 4.3 inclusion thing, before then if you wanted to do 2d unity you had to use futile, which is VERY VERY codebased (bad example of incomplete lovely code here) and it SEEMS Like this is more how you would code a c# game without unity, and the futile stuff is just there to simplify "this is just here to draw pretty boxes on screens for you to fill in with sprites" The 2d unity stuff that came out with 4.3 seems to just use c# as scripting inside of it's normal stuff, and while you can use classes and do everything through code you'd be doing everything from the ground up when they're trying to push you to using their component stuff for simplification and ease of use, so while you learn c# you'd learn it without dealing with classes or namespaces (which is fine by me) This is my bad opinion listen to someone else first.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 04:49
|
|
|
Hey, with all the help you guys gave me I thought you might wanna know how the thing you helped with is doing. Which is really well! Here it is: http://www.fastswf.com/HUnc9Oo Again, thank you all very much for the help. I might have to get to a point where I ask around who wants to be in the credits. 
Pizzatime fucked around with this message at 10:32 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
Forer posted:This is also part of the 2d 4.3 inclusion thing, before then if you wanted to do 2d unity you had to use futile, which is VERY VERY codebased (bad example of incomplete lovely code here) and it SEEMS Like this is more how you would code a c# game without unity, and the futile stuff is just there to simplify "this is just here to draw pretty boxes on screens for you to fill in with sprites" If you wanted to do 2d development in unity before Unity 4 the suggested path was 2d toolkit + ngui. Futile was created for a specific development method (all code). The creator was using it for his successful game and decided to open source it. But he suggested no one use it as it's so specific to his method and completely opposite of the normal highly GUI method of development that Unity uses. The futility of working against the programs standard workflow and having to reimplement ever thing unity had implemented is why it's named futile. All that said it's a good alternative to monogame if you want to control every aspect of your 2d game.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:This is a little general, but since my ultimate goal is related to game development I'm hoping this is the right place. Go get the unityvs trial. It lets you use Visual studio to develop Unity. The trial is for 14 days and you can get more than one if you use more than one email. It costs $100 per year. If your going to spend money on Unity buy this before asset store packages. I didn't do this and regret it every time Monodevelop opens.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
Stick100 posted:If you wanted to do 2d development in unity before Unity 4 the suggested path was 2d toolkit + ngui. Futile was created for a specific development method (all code). The creator was using it for his successful game and decided to open source it. But he suggested no one use it as it's so specific to his method and completely opposite of the normal highly GUI method of development that Unity uses. The futility of working against the programs standard workflow and having to reimplement ever thing unity had implemented is why it's named futile. Matt Rix actually created it independent of any game's development. His game Disco Zoo (published by us) is the first commercial game he's made with it. That said it was created for those prefer code-based development with the cross-platform capabilities of Unity. I developed NimbleQuest, Pocket Trains and our upcoming Tiny Tower sequel with it and I still love it to death.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
Stick100 posted:Go get the unityvs trial. It lets you use Visual studio to develop Unity. The trial is for 14 days and you can get more than one if you use more than one email. Do this only if you can afford $600 (cost of baseline Visual Studio) + $100 (cost of UnityVS). It's really worth it, IMO. But it is a serious amount of money. Monodevelop just sucks compared to VS, and Unity's special modified version is loving garbage. I'm really hoping that Microsoft, with their new found era of openness and with their collaboration as of late with Xamarin, create a Visual Studio that works on OSX. Either that or JetBrainz makes a C# IDE and someone makes a Unity debugger for it. Please, God, make one of those things happen. xgalaxy fucked around with this message at 17:12 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:08
|
|
|
eeenmachine posted:Matt Rix actually created it independent of any game's development. His game Disco Zoo (published by us) is the first commercial game he's made with it. That said it was created for those prefer code-based development with the cross-platform capabilities of Unity. I developed NimbleQuest, Pocket Trains and our upcoming Tiny Tower sequel with it and I still love it to death. I had no idea you guys used Unity.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Work gives me an MSDN account with access to Visual Studio, but I'm not sure if it's legitimate for me to use that for personal projects. I don't really have $700 to drop on a project before I even start learning the tools so I'll probably just have to settle for MonoDevelop.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Hey so I'm working on this platformer and having a good time, gonna try to knock out some more features this weekend. One thing I need to add is my current model is primarily tile based, (Think NES Megaman or Mario) I have a huge grid of tiles and I'm using those to determine which blocks will stop the player or which blocks you can stand on, and it runs very well with the player jumping and landing on platforms and then running around and whatnot. But I need to implement sloped surfaces, some ramps and stairs ideally. I've got at least a solution in my head and I could just go poke at it and see how that performs and see what I come up with, but anybody have any good best practice advice for how to handle sprite collisions and physics efficiently, especially for sloped or irregularly shaped surfaces? Squares and circles are easy and I can get away with most of my hitboxes being squares, but a few slopes would be nice. I could just do per-pixel calculations but that'd be slow obviously, or I could try to store slope metadata somewhere in the level for each slope (fit each slope to a linear function) and then use that to calculate the intersect point quickly, but then I have to make sure to go tag the angle of incline for all my slopes, as well as start and end points, IDK. I guess I could just tag each tile that has a slope with an angle to represent that it isn't a full square hitbox but just a triangle/trapezoid or something, and then build it out of triangles... Definitely need some moonwalking on stairs in this game. Zaphod42 fucked around with this message at 17:27 on May 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
xgalaxy posted:Do this only if you can afford $600 (cost of baseline Visual Studio) + $100 (cost of UnityVS). I actually have a windows dev machine en route simply to try Visual Studio for Unity Development as I've become so frustrated with Monodevelop.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
eeenmachine posted:I actually have a windows dev machine en route simply to try Visual Studio for Unity Development as I've become so frustrated with Monodevelop. I use VS13 Express and even without that Unity plugin it's miles ahead of Monodevelop
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
eeenmachine posted:I actually have a windows dev machine en route simply to try Visual Studio for Unity Development as I've become so frustrated with Monodevelop. The UnityVS plugin can actually connect to Unity across a VM sandbox, with Unity running in OSX and Parallels with Windows + VS + UnityVS. I don't use this option because I have an older Mac Air and Parallels doesn't run so great with it. But if you have a better machine this is a good option too.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
xgalaxy posted:The UnityVS plugin can actually connect to Unity across a VM sandbox, with Unity running in OSX and Parallels with Windows + VS + UnityVS. I don't use this option because I have an older Mac Air and Parallels doesn't run so great with it. But if you have a better machine this is a good option too. I'm on an air as well and I generally hate having do deal with VMs. I figure I need a PC to play proper games anyways!
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Monodevelop/Xamarin loving blows but at least they finally included default values for optional parameters when referencing a function.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
xgalaxy posted:Do this only if you can afford $600 (cost of baseline Visual Studio) + $100 (cost of UnityVS). The specific user said he had Visual Studio at work so I assumed he could coast of that for home. In addition Bizspark gives you every piece of MS software for free (including all Windows and Visual Studios) for three years, all you have to do is apply. At the end you can keep everything you've downloaded for a one time buy out of $100. It is limited to companies creating software (not consulting). I already had some WP7 games at the time, made a submission saying I make WP7 games, apps and windows apps and it was approved a couple days later. There are plenty of MS advocates that can give you a preapproval codes. Visual Studio is miles ahead of MonoDevelop. While you're at it I'd suggest getting Re sharper too. If your a professional C# developer you'll almost certainly be working in Visual Studio for your day job, so I'd suggest using it in your free time.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Stick100 posted:The specific user said he had Visual Studio at work so I assumed he could coast of that for home. I'm still trying to figure this part out. I asked my boss about it and, as far as legitimacy goes, he seemed unclear. It seems to be a bit of a grey area.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 20:53
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Hey so I'm working on this platformer and having a good time, gonna try to knock out some more features this weekend. One thing I need to add is my current model is primarily tile based, (Think NES Megaman or Mario) I have a huge grid of tiles and I'm using those to determine which blocks will stop the player or which blocks you can stand on, and it runs very well with the player jumping and landing on platforms and then running around and whatnot. Found this pretty well written article which confirmed my suspicions, answered my own question. Posting here in case anybody cares. http://www.gamedev.net/page/resources/_/technical/game-programming/the-guide-to-implementing-2d-platformers-r2936 Really good examples and analysis of 2D platforming mechanics.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:Work gives me an MSDN account with access to Visual Studio, but I'm not sure if it's legitimate for me to use that for personal projects. I don't really have $700 to drop on a project before I even start learning the tools so I'll probably just have to settle for MonoDevelop. This is gonna be down to your individual company so it may not hurt to ask. My company doesn't mind using MSDN access for personal projects but they'd frown on using it to do freelancing on the side. Personal projects that may result in revenue? I'd probably ask first. edit: oops missed that you'd already asked at work.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
What are peoples' preferences (or good examples in games) for dealing with visibility when behind large objects in a 2.5d isometric game? It's going to be in a city with lots of tall buildings, so the UO style circle of transparency and the Shadowrun style 'draw mobs as a wireframe over the building' will probably leave too much occluded. Maybe making enough of the building (that you are behind) fully/partially transparent so that all the street below is visible?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
Yeah I think in that case you're better off keeping the units looking normal and then just fade out or wireframe any buildings or other objects that obstruct your view.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
I like the faded circle of transparency method. I can't think of an example game that does it to show what I mean though.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
xgalaxy posted:Do this only if you can afford $600 (cost of baseline Visual Studio) + $100 (cost of UnityVS). You can http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/ yourself a copy of Visual Studio.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
roomforthetuna posted:I like the faded circle of transparency method. I can't think of an example game that does it to show what I mean though. The only reason I'd say this might be more of a hassle than its worth is if there could be large gaps between units and/or projectile tracking. Do you put the circle around each unit? Try to stretch one big circle around everything hidden? Might just get kinda messy compared to just making the entire building fade out of existence.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
roomforthetuna posted:I can't think of an example game that does it to show what I mean though. Yodzilla posted:The only reason I'd say this might be more of a hassle than its worth is if there could be large gaps between units and/or projectile tracking. Do you put the circle around each unit? Try to stretch one big circle around everything hidden? Might just get kinda messy compared to just making the entire building fade out of existence. Personally, I prefer having a flat silhouette over where whatever's behind the building is, but fading out the obstruction is probably fine too. Where things get REALLY complicated in terms of both drawing and unit selection is if the large building is also clickable. OneEightHundred fucked around with this message at 09:44 on May 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
Yodzilla posted:The only reason I'd say this might be more of a hassle than its worth is if there could be large gaps between units and/or projectile tracking. Do you put the circle around each unit? Try to stretch one big circle around everything hidden? Might just get kinda messy compared to just making the entire building fade out of existence. Though fading the entire building could work pretty nicely too, especially if you do it gradually, like 100% opaque when it's not occluding you, 75% opaque when you're half occluded, and 50% opaque (or whatever your chosen threshold is) when you're fully occluded.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
How is Unity for Android development compared to any other frameworks (what's out there?)? I'd like to get started toying around with both Android and Game Dev, so figure making a basic mobile game would be a good start.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
Mr. Crow posted:How is Unity for Android development compared to any other frameworks (what's out there?)? I'd like to get started toying around with both Android and Game Dev, so figure making a basic mobile game would be a good start. It's Unity except you deploy to phone. Same things you worry about normally will be things you need to deal with in Unity such as keeping draw calls down (atlas your images) and keeping performance a priority. I've released on android and it's by far the easiest of the 3 app stores to do. I do recomment xARM and NGUI for ui stuff since you're dealing with 60 zillion phone resolutions. There's also Unity Remote on the app stores (free). It basically creates a remote desktop session on your phone and you can use phone features like accelerometer and gyroscope without having to push to your phone. This also allows you to debug in the editor while still playing the game on your phone. I highly recommend Unity for phone dev.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Now that the Ludum Dare results are out, how did everyone do? My game did fairly well! My personal goal was to get to top 100 overall but I managed to beat my expectations by squeezing in to #35! code:
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 09:44
|
|
|
Mr. Crow posted:How is Unity for Android development compared to any other frameworks (what's out there?)? I'd like to get started toying around with both Android and Game Dev, so figure making a basic mobile game would be a good start. It's inarguably one of the best frameworks I've used. The 'play on PC before deploying to phone' alone is worth the (probably hours) I've saved waiting to push to a device to test. Other alternatives may be libGDX, which is far less speedy as far as prototypes are concerned, but might be more your cup of tea if you want to get down and dirty in all the details. As a word of advice, download Unity Remote for your Android phone. It is a way to use your phone's accelerometer and touch screen without having to package and deploy to the phone for each code change.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 06:45 |
|
|
j.peeba posted:Now that the Ludum Dare results are out, how did everyone do? code:code:code:
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2014 04:33
|
|
