Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / What's your MOD?

Author
Message
MicroMan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Aug 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posted: 24th Sep 2003 19:24
Link
I got a mail today. Someone on another site wondered about two things: a) Why I used something like Basic to try and make games, when I should use VC++, and b) why I didn't show any screenshot.

All right, the first was easy to answer, the second got me thinking. What is the better MOD, really? To see something grow sort of organically, with better and better graphics -- or just concentrate on one thing at a time?

I've always worked like this. First I make the game algorithm, and then I do the content. I.e. first I write the code, and make sure it works, and then I make the imagery, and adapt already existing code to the imagery.

Now, this isn't intended to be a "My way is better than yours"-thread. I'm just curious as how, and if, my way differs from yours. See it as a comparison excercise.

-----
They SAID that given enough time a million monkeys with typewriters could recreate the collected works of William Shakespeare... Internet sure proved them wrong.
-----
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 24th Sep 2003 20:12
Link
I tend to code first, tart up later. I often make simple models rather than use boxes, it gives me a better feel for how things are going.

I often use "placeholders" as well, so that I can create skeleton code, and fill in the gaps later. For example, I have a full menu, but only two of the options go anywhere. The rest of them just say "Option X here" and pause for a keypress.

To sum up, I think I'm with you on this one.

BatVink (formerly StevieVee)
http://facepaint.me.uk/catalog/default.php
Back to top
Profile PM Email
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 24th Sep 2003 20:16
Link
I pretty much work that way too.

There's no way that you can prototype code in C++ faster than in BASIC. I generally aim to get the ideas down in BASIC first, then convert to C++ later if necessary ... and it hasn't been necessary that often actually with the speed that I can get out of DBPro.

Also, for me, screenshots would be useless. How can anyone tell how well my code works by seeing a few blocks in a screen shot. Media is the last thing I add - but then I'm a 'hacker' (in the original sense of the word), not an 'artist'.

So, three in a row agree at the moment
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
MicroMan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Aug 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posted: 24th Sep 2003 21:40 Edited at: 24th Sep 2003 21:41
Link
I agree with you, IanM. DBP is great for prototyping, and that's probably what I intend to do with my project Dark Castle. Make one level, and then use that as a prototype to show to people.

I'll decide later if I should continue developing in DBP or not. Right Now I'm perhaps a bit prejudiced against Basic as a serious development language, but that'sperhaps a fawlty prejudice.

As to the topic, I -- for my part, I must add -- don't really see the value in having screenshots of a game that doesn't really exist yet. I could, I suppose, build a height map of a level in 3ds Max, put a castle in it, add some lighting and SAY it's a picture from my game. But that would be wrong, IMHO, because things might change.

Oh well...

-----
They SAID that given enough time a million monkeys with typewriters could recreate the collected works of William Shakespeare... Internet sure proved them wrong.
-----
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 24th Sep 2003 22:30 Edited at: 24th Sep 2003 22:31
Link
I don't see DB as basic, I see it as a games engine. The pro code is compiled not interpreted, and if it cuts my learning curve down by 90%, I'm quite happy to use someone else's rounder wheel!

Any programmer worth their salt can adapt to pretty much any language, and the better programmers will push it that little bit further...and it shows.

BatVink (formerly StevieVee)
http://facepaint.me.uk/catalog/default.php
Back to top
Profile PM Email
MicroMan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Aug 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posted: 25th Sep 2003 03:04
Link
I don't think Basic can be considered a pure interpreted language anymore anyway. All the good versions of Basic are compiled these days: PowerBasic, Dark Basic, Blitz Basic (I think) and Visual Basic.

Truth to tell, apart from QBasic, I can't think of any other Basic that's interpreted -- and QBasic is pretty much defunct anyway as I don't think that Microsoft is maintaining it now.

But my prejudice lies more in the efficiency of the code. I don't think Dark Basic is very efficient because it lacks fundamental characteristics of a truly efficient language: such as full UDT support, nor does it have more than a nod toward object orientation. I'd LOVE it if more object orientation could be implemented in the management code. I can't say whether the actual instances of objects are considered as pure objects internally or not.

It would make life easier if you could have classes.

-----
They SAID that given enough time a million monkeys with typewriters could recreate the collected works of William Shakespeare... Internet sure proved them wrong.
-----
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-09-20 13:44:21
Your offset time is: 2024-09-20 13:44:21