Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Telastyn

Member Since 13 Oct 2003
Offline Last Active Apr 23 2016 04:13 PM

#4822160 Where do you fill up the void deep within when you're demotivated by exte...

Posted by Telastyn on 11 June 2011 - 01:17 PM

Programming like this isn't going to take you to far places. (Describing how my project is really small and noticeably useless, which in truth, it is useless.


Sandbox apps won't. They're little places for you to get experience, play around with something, learn how you need to learn... When you're beginning, nothing is going to take you far. This isn't exactly damning criticism.

Don't keep reading programming books, learn to read some other books that are not programming related. (Been reading too many programming books that I'm stuck in wrong places.)


If you enjoy reading, then read. Reading programming books cover to cover is rarely helpful (especially as a beginner). Skim most of it, read a little, program a bit, re-read as necessary then repeat.

You have not devoted a lot when you're writing this. Especially this rather small and crude project, it looks like you're just following tutorials and not actually learning how to use them. (I always follow in other
programmer's footsteps when it comes to learning APIs.)


You should follow tutorials just far enough to make sure they work. Then you'll need to play with them. Programming in the end is a creative art; be creative. You'll learn the most via experimentation.

If your family is able to afford you higher education, you're best bet is to give up programming for the time being and finish your Master's degree. Then come back. (Don't know if it's encouraging...)


I don't know the situation or context here, but given the option, good higher education is nearly always preferred.

I wanted to know how programmers / developers fill up the hollow void inside of you, how do you get your motivation back up and running, like it was used to a few weeks ago?


Well what's the problem? Is it actual demotivation (nothing is compelling, not enough progress is seen) or is it burnout (doing studies and coding and work and.... just too much) or is it something more serious like actual depression (lethargy, nothing really makes you happy at all, everything sucks, etc)?

If it's depression, then it's a serious medical condition which you're perhaps best served being safe and seeing a professional. Some of the other advice here can help, but...
If it's burnout, then work on your time management. Play some games, hang out with friends, make sure you're getting enough sleep and a good diet (which as dumb as it sounds is quite effective; your brain just doesn't work at 100% on nothing but mountain dew and red vines). Determine what is important and what is not. Gamedev might need to be put on hold a bit until the other things are in order.
If it's demotivation then some of the burnout things apply. Don't force yourself to program. When you feel like it, do it. Set little goals. "At the end of 2 hours, I want to see X working". This helps you set reasonable expectations for yourself and keep everything on track.


#4821105 3D MMORPG makers for newbies?

Posted by Telastyn on 08 June 2011 - 04:05 PM

What are you talking about???
The whole point is that people are giving advice on the wrong topic.

NOT that it's wrong to give advice based on personal experience as a general idea (it can be difficult to do anything else).
For the umpteenth time, the OP's question was and is not "how difficult is this?" or "should I attempt this at all?".


No, it is (as interpreted by me):

"How can I make a 3D MMO (yes, massive is a requirement) RPG with basic graphics, despite the fact I know nothing about programming?"

The answer to this question is: "You can't."; assuming of course the OP doesn't have a few million dollars of disposable income. Even with tools, the architecture alone requires a lot of expertise to get right, a pile of code to glue together parts and define the world's behavior.

As much as he or you might dislike the answer doesn't change it, or the relevance of that answer. The best, quickest way to make a 3D MMORPG with basic graphics when you know nothing about programming and don't have a few million dollars is to start with learning to program very basic things. This necessarily involves making them unrelated to the end goal of making a 3D MMORPG with basic graphics.

To the person who voted down this reply of mine: I'd be delighted to hear what's so wrong with it.


I didn't rate you down, but:

You likely got rated down because you've decided that people shouldn't behave like they want, because the OP should be able to behave like they want, but somehow fail to see the irony in this...


#4821076 3D MMORPG makers for newbies?

Posted by Telastyn on 08 June 2011 - 03:01 PM

Personally, I wish people were a little more insistent in telling me how little I knew when I was a n00b. I wish people were a little more insistent in telling me how little I know now.

The best way to go about it is to stop. Learn your limits. Achieve a goal that pushes those limits. Repeat until your limits are at the point where a basic MMO becomes a realistic endeavor.


That's the whole thing. PERSONALLY, you wish. People are not all the same, even if many seem to be. Don't assume that everyone else wants the same thing you do, that's just silly. If you really wish to assume that, then do what I said and ask them beforehand if they do or not.


No, sorry. That's just stupid. People come here for advice. I give them the best advice I can. Is much of that based on personal experiences? Of course. That's why other people, with different experiences are here (presumably) doing the same.

The entire point of someone being inexperienced is they lack the experience to judge effectively how to do things. Why in the world would I then ask how I should give advice?

People aren't giving discouraging advice to be asshats. Flailing at something well beyond your capabilities is fruitless.


Fruitless, but not your decision to make. It's up to everyone to decide if they want to spend their time on a hopeless project or not.


Indeed. All I can do is offer advice and insights based on my experience to help the OP make better decisions. Now perhaps you can do the same.


#4821061 3D MMORPG makers for newbies?

Posted by Telastyn on 08 June 2011 - 02:28 PM

Yes, but why assume that someone doesn't understand the amount of work it takes?


Because everyone underestimates the time it will take to code anything. Even after 20 years programming, including work on a system that required 100,000 clients connecting to a central system every 2 minutes, I realize after reading ApochPiQ's blog that I'd underestimated the work involved in that sort of thing by around an order of magnitude. People are bad at estimation. Ignorant people are worse.

Think for a bit before you assume every newbie is badly informed and ignorant. If you feel the need, just ASK - "Do you understand how much work this would take, and that it might end in tears?"
If they reply "Yes, I think I do", then leave it to them and try to actually help out technically instead.


Personally, I wish people were a little more insistent in telling me how little I knew when I was a n00b. I wish people were a little more insistent in telling me how little I know now.

Your comparison isn't relevant either, for the same reason. It would have been: "Yes, I know it's the grand canyon. It's going to be difficult. So, how do I best go about doing it?"


The best way to go about it is to stop. Learn your limits. Achieve a goal that pushes those limits. Repeat until your limits are at the point where a basic MMO becomes a realistic endeavor.

People aren't giving discouraging advice to be asshats. Flailing at something well beyond your capabilities is fruitless.


#4820084 Need help understanding Encapsulation, Properties and Fields in C#

Posted by Telastyn on 06 June 2011 - 08:11 AM

So Fields are class-specific variables, and Properties are the method-like feature to allow access to them outside of that class?


No.

Fields may be private, protected, internal, protected internal, or public. If fields are public, then things outside of that class can access them. Fields are variables. They have a type and store some value in memory. Properties are... properties. They look like variables, and have a type, but do not store some value in memory (unless you're using auto-properties from C# 3.0). Properties have two parts, a getter and a setter. The getter is a method used whenever someone tries to access the property. Since there's no actual value stored in memory, you need to tell the program what the value should be. The setter is used whenever someone tries to write to (or assign something) to the property. Since there's no actual value stored in memory, you need to tell the program what to do with it.

If the original (or this) explanation wasn't clear... well crap. It's plain English, and I assumed you'd read at least a few chapters of a C# book. It might help if I understood more of your background or if we could focus on one specific question at a time.


#4817506 Reading someone's code

Posted by Telastyn on 30 May 2011 - 07:58 AM

I generally agree with loom_weaver on the descriptions of good/bad comments, though the 'in msec' comment is a bad comment. Well, not such a bad comment as 'duration' is a bad name. In general, I disagree with your assessment of comments:

1. what is this class supposed to do (and what things isn't)


This should be fairly obvious by name. And if you are good about your 'one class handles one task' it's even better.

Sure, sometimes things need to push the envelope or can't have a great name due to their... generalness. Then make a comment describing what's going on, but realize that the need to make a comment is a code smell.

2. who is supposed to call it, and with what kind of parameters (nothing exhaustive)


Protection level enforces who can call it, and your parameters have descriptive types/names to make the calling convention obvious.

3. maybe explain how it does it if it takes some unexpected approach to optimize it or something like that


Certainly. This is the case where comments are most valuable (in addition to loom_weaver's 'don't do this or else' or 'bug 4255 was caused by this being ___'). Cases where you divert from coding norms for a good reason. Comments exist to supply reasons to code, not to describe code.


#4817068 Computer Science pre-school requirements

Posted by Telastyn on 29 May 2011 - 06:32 AM

Part of getting a degree is exhibiting proof that you can stick through all the crap that you don't like. Do you think that actual workplaces will be 100% interesting and easy to build motivation for?


#4816771 Where i can get a programmer for a clientless bot?

Posted by Telastyn on 28 May 2011 - 08:09 AM

Do your own dirty work.


#4816151 What is Microsofts problem?

Posted by Telastyn on 26 May 2011 - 01:54 PM

Because clearly, dicking around with makefiles is a far superior approach.


#4814056 OOP is "necessary"... yeah, and so is dancing in traffic...

Posted by Telastyn on 21 May 2011 - 07:27 PM

Assuming this isn't simply trolling, but ignorance (and for the benefit of others)

A class is just, to be blunt, "A space that holds things inside of it that can be accessed from other spaces.".


Classes aid object oriented programming, but are not a specific requirement of it. It's nothing more than an approach for designing and conceptualizing your program. One that over time, programmers have found to be very easy to teach, and fairly good for many domains.


Frankly, you need to do more than "used it before" before denouncing something pretty much an entire profession has found to be a fairly good way of approaching things. And offer more than hand waving backed with nothing even resembling an argument.


#4814046 A base-language is really necessary?

Posted by Telastyn on 21 May 2011 - 07:10 PM

Weren't you already banned for trolling?

(For beginners that might read the thread):

Is this true?


Able? No. Succeed? For any relatively sizable game, yes.

Like, if I'm not an expert at, say, C++ inside and out, that limited-knowledge will prevent or make it difficult to develop a game? How so?


It will make things more difficult. The best analogy is to tools. You can build a house with a handsaw and plain old hammer, but you'll get a better house done quicker with more/better tools. Language features, API knowledge, program design skill are all tools for a developer's box.

I know C++ basics, how to use it for what I do, but I really don't know it that well overall. I found it kind of dumb to dig deeper into the language seeing how it has little to do with game programming itself, in the big picture, but why do people say that?


Because they know that all parts of the language have to do with game programming if you apply the language to writing a game.

I hear everyone saying that knowing a base-language 100% is necessary before programming games. But again, why? A base-language, to the max, doesn't have much effect on game programming mechanisms, like APIs themself(which have nothing to do with base-languages in the field of relation of use), graphics(which, again, don't pertain to a base-level language's structure or use), etc.


Because making a game is more than sending some commands to an API. How do you tie the different APIs together? How do you implement the game rules?

To be honest, many here recommend such a strong foundation in programming because far too many beginners have this viewpoint. 'It doesn't apply to games, so I won't learn it'. Programs are programs. Games have a few certain nuances and requirements but 98% of the process and skills required are the same. Too many beginners start before they're really ready; to their detriment.

I really believe it's true. The people who are pushing programming languages so much are people who probably just know the language and assume "everyone" must as well, when it's not necessary to know a whole language in and out to use it to your advantage, program, etc.


No, but everything else being equal, a programmer with more knowledge of the language at hand will produce better code than one without. Sometimes this doesn't matter. The resultant code is good enough.

Again, remember, most of C++'s "deeper" things seem to be related to OOP, and we ALL should know that OOP will not make or break the weight or code behind a game.

All in all, since C++'s deeper things are mainly OOP, it is basically not necessary to learn them because OOP doesn't limit or unlimit your ability or knowledge, skills or code behind a game: It is not necessary.

BUT I'd like to hear some others' opinions. This is why I asked this. Sorry if it came off mean...


Pssh. Templates are not OOP. Metaprogramming is not OOP.

Basic, competent C++ knowledge should provide some skill designing programs in an OO fashion. Having that isn't strictly necessary to create a working game, but it will help significantly, and will aid you in not getting laughed out of any programming interviews.


There's no OOP in Java,


Troll alert!!!



#4812227 Computer science or game programming?

Posted by Telastyn on 17 May 2011 - 09:00 PM

... especially in a field such as CS, which is constantly evolving.



Sorry, I don't mean to pick on you, but I would like to take a moment to point out that while I agree with your overall conclusion, I strongly disagree with you on this point. The fundamentals of CS are not really evolving much today. Basic algorithms, data structures, analysis and computer architecture have not changed in the past 30 years, nor does it seem likely that they are going to go through any radical updates in the forseeable future. Of course the cutting edge of CS is rapidly advancing, but this is not the sort of stuff that you will learn in a typical undergrad CS curriculum, nor is it even that important (no offense to those involved in research) to 99% of the general programming population out there. This is exactly why a CS degree is so valuable; because these foundational concepts are not likely to change and are very useful in a wide array of situations.


Note that this involves core structures and algorithms, computation... the math based part of computer science. Gamedev specific stuff in general changes much more rapidly (except for some core graphical concepts and 'near real time' practices/considerations), which is one of the reasons that many gamedev specific degrees suck; much less of them is relevant for the entirety of your career.


#4811184 8yr+ .Net developer interested in game programming - should I learn C++?

Posted by Telastyn on 15 May 2011 - 01:26 PM

Learning C++ when you comes from C# is just dropping a few concepts and learn to manage the memory efficiently.


This is patently false. To use C++ effectively if you're coming from a .NET world also involves learning much of the undefined behavior, best practices regarding it's retarded compilation model, adapting to work with horrific compiler infrastructure, and learning the standard library (and hunting down some framework to provide all the things you'd expect a standard library to provide, but C++'s doesn't).

For the OP:

If all you know well is C#, it's an entirely practical endeavor to learn another language. If your goal is just to make a game (which is a good goal, since making a game; any game... is hard) then C# is a better option than C++ given what you've said. Will using C# restrict where it can run? Certainly. But let's be honest here, your first game isn't going to be any sort of profitable venture. The skills learned about tying different parts of the game together, designing it, tweaking the pacing/rules, handling graphics will all apply regardless of language used. If you're realistically looking to get into professional gamedev in the next 4-6 years, use C++. If you're looking to make games for the web or mobile, don't use C#. Until then, use what you know so you can ignore the environment and focus on the game. It's hard enough without you adding complexity.


#4810943 Why you ALWAYS wanna use brackets

Posted by Telastyn on 14 May 2011 - 09:25 PM

The bug in this code isn't the lack of brackets, it's the lack of semi-colon after the first return in main. If anything this is an argument for language designers to require parens for return calls.


#4810261 Game Engine or not?

Posted by Telastyn on 13 May 2011 - 09:42 AM

This is one of the most bizarre responses I have ever gotten lol. Is this a serious answer? Do you all actually think like this ? I would honestly hate using something and not knowing what the hell it was truly doing.


After spending many years playing around with low level details and not getting anything actually done, yeah. Knowing the gist of how things work is good enough for pretty much everything. I don't particularly care about the mechanics of buffering and decoding video if I just want to play one. I want an API that reduces all that headache to 1-2 lines of code so I can go back to making the game.

So you would recommend that a new programmer whos never made games before to use the highest level engine possible to make a game, and not at all concern themselves with anything that they dont need to in order to finish the game?


I recommend that a new programmer not make games. Learn to program first.

If your short term goal is to make a game, use the most/best APIs/tools to accomplish that goal.

If your short term goal is to learn to program, then some portion of that will involve mucking about in low level stuff to get used to debugging things there and get a better understanding about buffers, bit fiddling, pointers, implementing your own algorithms/data structures and the such. But all of that code should be throw away. It should be focused on gaining knowledge and experience, and once done a programmer should pretty much avoid doing any of it again.




PARTNERS