PurpleAmethyst

Nowadays, space is cheap, and the machines don't have as many restrictions. So use as much space as you need. :-)

Programming attitudes like this makes me cringe.

I've seen horrid things happen when people take a casual attitude towards using memory and CPU efficiently - It leads to ugly botched code. I could name games but I'd probably get a legal letter.

I would suggest:

 

• Taking it one step at a time.
• ​Start coding simple games right away. Maybe implement a version of a simple game like hangman - IIRC that is the first game I ever coded on a computer!!!
• General Computer Science
• Data Structures and algorithms (This is very important)
• Object oriented design
• Linear algebra
• A few programming languages other than just C++ (eg Python, Java, Lua, JavaScript/ActionScript, Haskell, Ruby)

I've used Marmalade professionally on projects I've worked on. I think Marmalade is a bit more low level then you're expecting - It will do all the things you want, but it is very much a portability framework and hardware abstraction layer. Marmalade is not a magic bullet either, you will still have portability issues. Android suspend and resume can be an issue with OpenGL, threading was non existent (I think it supports it now) and the Marmalade layer caused sound problems on various devices (Kindle Fire IIRC). Video playback was a bit crap too.

There is a good discussion of the pro and cons of Marmalade on Stack Overflow (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7555134/native-android-ios-development-vs-marmalade-sdk), which pretty much matches my personal experience with Marmalade.

Marmalade is a good option if you are an indie and want something that just works without too much messing around.

I did some research at the into to cocos2d-x but found it did not suit our purposes at the time. It is a more high level object oriented framework, but I don't really have enough experience to comment on it.

Its amazing that so many programming contributions came from so few people

Not to burst the balloon or start a row but isn't it amazing that many are middle class, rich, white, straight men?

I did say learn OpenGL > 3.2, not the glBegin/glEnd rubbish.

I still, personally, think GL is easier to learn even with the modern way of doing things in GL is easier and clearer.

I'm not going to get into a row about OpenGL vs DirectX. They are both graphics APIs, they do exactly the same job.

I generally advise that when you're learning you're better off just forgetting about portability, at least for the first few programs.  Your primary task is to learn, not to be portable.

++ to that

I wasn't really talking about portability - which is all well and good until you see a horrible attempt to hack a DirectX like interface over OpenGL sent from the US office and that creates even porting more headaches.

I would consider having OpenGL as your most familiar graphics API is better because of wider support and it is easier to get going with in my experience - It is more fun to learn with OpenGL and there are usually less "WTF is going on??" moments.

IMO, learn OpenGL > 3.2. Everything except the Microsoft systems use OpenGL, better to learn 3D graphics via OpenGL and then learn Direct X when you need to.

Does anyone ever get sick of the "How powerful is language X?" or "My language pwns yours"?

Better to ask "Can I get the job done in time with language X?". The answer is usually yes.

*yawn*