Jump to content
Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:56 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:37 AM
Edited by Zoomulator, 03 July 2012 - 06:44 AM.
Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:36 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:38 AM
Edited by L. Spiro, 03 July 2012 - 07:40 AM.
Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:52 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:01 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:08 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:26 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:26 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:28 AM
My post was about my experiences, which was what the OP asked for. Make an objective case instead next time.
Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:28 AM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:32 AM
Just to tack this on if OP is thinking about XNA: I'm biased of course (using XNA now) but SlimDX and SharpDX provide two refactor targets should XNA truly become a deprecation problem in your game code. If you design your components and interfaces wisely, at the drop-dead point of XNA you could rewrite the XNA-reliant portions for either of these two alternate libraries. Or if you're not going to bother targeting Windows 8 / Metro, you'll be fine.
I think some devs are arguing that its a dead fish now (XNA that is) with the arrival of metro and windows 8
Posted 03 July 2012 - 12:04 PM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 03:56 PM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 04:24 PM
Edited by DevLiquidKnight, 03 July 2012 - 05:14 PM.
Posted 03 July 2012 - 04:55 PM
It appears that the gentleman thought C++ was extremely difficult and he was overjoyed that the machine was absorbing it; he understood that good C++ is difficult but the best C++ is well-nigh unintelligible.
Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:04 PM
Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:30 PM
Nobody has commented on this yet so I might as well do it...
Should I travel to the Himalayas and become a monk?
Posted 04 July 2012 - 12:12 AM
I'm going to go out on the limb and say learn C++ first. Java can be easier for some people, but the transition from Java to C++ is a rather bad one. Many may suggest C# while its very elegant, I wouldn't considering the primary tool used to develop games unless you intend to use XNA, its better used for tool development. Languages like C# tend to wrap everything up for you in nice easy to use objects that you don't have to think too much about.
I don't like the idea of people suggesting that C# is a stepping stone to what they perceive as harder languages, you can easily learn C++ right away if you want. It is not conceptually harder to learn C++, its just like any other language, plus its very powerful. Once you know C++ you will begin to understand a lot of lower level coding going on, and be able to truly understand what a computer is doing. Especially if you eventually take up assembly. This in return makes you a better programmer within all languages.
Plus you will never get anywhere in life, yet alone game programming if you shy away from what is hard.
However if your planning on focusing on android you need to know java, if you prefer to do iOS you need to know Objective-C.
Posted 04 July 2012 - 12:57 AM
And in the end, the Android market just makes it a waste of your time.
They have only 20% of the share and you have to code tons of special cases for all kinds of devices with different capabilities, as apposed to iOS in which there are basically only 3 classes of devices (none of which require any special coding to handle), 3 total resolutions to handle, etc. So not only are you reaching the larger share, you are also saving yourself from a large pain in the ass, multiplied by a larger pain in the ass.
So your choices are to code in Java and drop any notion of iOS, code in Objective-C and drop any notion of Android, or code in C++ in order to keep both on the table.
Since the obvious choice is C++, you then have to decide between the pain of supporting both Android and iOS, or the easy feeling of just supporting iOS.
Ultimately the choice is fairly clear, and you can save yourself hundreds of dollars by not having to buy a wide variety of Android devices too!
Edited by mike4, 04 July 2012 - 09:14 AM.