Sign in to follow this  

why people use C++

This topic is 4836 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

heh, you know this is probably going to turn into a flame war, don't you? Anyway, first of all, DX only works on windows and C# encorages(in my opinion) bad naming conventions. And C# was pretty much only created as microsofts response to sun making java(Notice the naming conventions are exactly the oposite of java's).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by thoue
Im my opinion C# and managed DX is really more intuitive and simple. For beginners its the winning combo IMO.

Why people still going with C++ ?


Because people may disagree with your points of view about C# and managed DX.

Because there are other platforms to develop for beyond Mrs.Windows.

Because people already know c++ and has a lot of stuff already working with it, and other libraries that are not DX.

lots of reasons.

Personally, I like to develop applications under linux, where there is no C# (at least doesn't come with my distro) and much less DX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
The documentation for Managed DirectX sucks compared to the documentation for straight DirectX, although this has gotten better with the latest DirectX SDK.

Despite what anyone tells you, Managed code is still slower than unmanaged code.

Managed DirectX is still dependent on unmanaged code segments so you don't get the free garbage collection (see IDisposable)

C++, in my opinion, is more straightforward and clearer than C# as to what it is doing...C# gives up some of unmanaged C++'s clarity for simplicity and ease. This is inherant as C# is compiled to managed code before being turned into x86 code. Then again, C++ gives up some of assembly's clarity for simplicity and ease.

For doing .net stuff, C# is a dream. But I'm on the fence about using Managed DirectX + C# versus unmanaged DirectX and C++.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Also, if a person only uses C++ with plain-Jane DirectX, end users don't need to download the .NET framework in order to use it...it will work assuming the person has DirectX (which most users, especially gamers do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C# and Managed DirectX are really awesome. However, they require the .NET Framework installed in order for your game to work. The user must have the latest .NET Framework (20MB) + Managed DirectX (16MB 9.0c). Depending how computer savvy your audience is, this maybe asking way to much.

Customers shy away from games if the newest tech doesnt work on their computer, especially in the 'casual' game market. Some customers dont even know what DirectX is, let alone .NET and Managed DirectX. Plus if you wanted to port the game to Mac or Linux, it would be difficult from a development standpoint.

As great as C# is, I dont think it will be practical until the .NET Framework has a large install base (ie when Longhorn debuts).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why use a platform specific library like DirectX, when you can get just as many features on something like OGRE that works on multiple platforms?(and what ogre doesn't have, you can use SDL to do)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are much more already-created libraries and examples in C++, that it isn't funny anymore. It's kinda scary man, it really is.
C# is still the new bunny, but to many people, it seems to heavy-weight comparing to C++. It's not that grab-and-go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SLOW!

no body uses C# and especially not managed DX in any type of real game project.

maybe for beginners but, it just oversimplifies the whole 3d process, hiding and masking everything, so really you cant learn that much from something that hides just about everything from you. same thing with learning VB as a first language...sure you can program "advanced looking" things right away, but honestly how much have you really learned? also it just fortifies bad techniques and algorithm design early on, making it harder on you later on to step out of your protective environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i use C++ because i dont like the syntax of C# and Java, its easier for me, there are more resources in the internet about C++ than C# (i think, i dont know. see this: http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=c%2B%2B&q2=C%23&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us) and i already know C++.
simply, i dont need C# & i dont like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why people use c# amd dx

i d never us a platform specific api just to make development easier

and btw if you someone is new to programming i suggest to get msvc++6.0 or later + the halflife sdk and write some tiny mods

i learned coding with hlsdk and then switched to engine programming with c++ and opengl
opengl because i like its low level implementation and the solid documentation + it s a standard in graphics development


another reason why i chose opengl was because d3d/dx`s naming of functions ... is as ugly as microsofts MACRO declaration in nearly every windows dependant code e.g. MFC

P.S.: although i hate this ugly macro notation i really like MFC in conjunction with msvc++ due to simplicity, just create a little mfc app add some code and you have a little tool

but the overall notations of microsoft code is sometimes really a pain in my eyes
you could break your fingers when writing code
and it isn t even cross platform *bah*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I tried C#. Thought it was ok, but made me feel handicapped for some reason. AFAIK, you can't use visual assist with it either.. and I plan on getting my money's well worth out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Lee_
I tried C#. Thought it was ok, but made me feel handicapped for some reason. AFAIK, you can't use visual assist with it either.. and I plan on getting my money's well worth out of it.


I believe Visual Assist X works with C#

Quote:
Original post by coder
Just a friendly reminder for future participants: A thread like this often turns into a flamewar. So far that hasn't happened. Please don't be the one to start it.


Since it is likely to happen anyway and a lot of the same arguments have already been posted, perhaps it's time to close the thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Kippesoep
Quote:
Original post by coder
Just a friendly reminder for future participants: A thread like this often turns into a flamewar. So far that hasn't happened. Please don't be the one to start it.


Since it is likely to happen anyway and a lot of the same arguments have already been posted, perhaps it's time to close the thread?

Well, I don't want to prevent people from stating their opinions, as long as they don't flame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by owl
Because there are other platforms to develop for beyond Mrs.Windows.

Owl is definetly on the right track here. The main reason that professional developers aren't using C# is that it has absolutely no cross-portability for other gaming consoles.

Most successful game developers are making games for more than one console. Usually, if they are developing for PC, they're also developing for XBOX. If they're a bigger developer, they probably are making games for PS2 and Gamecube, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C# and MDX definately speed up the development process, but unmanaged code still has its place. Imagine if the huge games (Doom 3, HL2, etc.) were written completely in managed code. Currently, it would make the already crazy lowend requirements go up even more.

I am a fan of writing the core engine in a lower level languange (like C++), then doing all the less expensive things in C#. It combines the speed of unmanaged code with the simplicity of managed.

Edit: Deleted original post since it was a pretty bad flame...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
I gave engine programming with c# a go for a while,and there was too many gaping holes and i spent more time scratching my head than actually coding anything.

Here is 10 (off the top of my head) reasons...

(1): I learnt game programming with c/c++,i don't like C# (many reasons) and i'm sure others will know what i mean if they come from a dos/c/c++(game programming)or similar background.

(2): There are more resources,tutorials,examples,and libraries.

(3): There are more books,more everything really.

(4): You need Visual Studio 7 or above(Lol) to use it efficiently.

(5): I don't like it.

(6): I don't like it.

(7): Microsoft don't understand that an operating system should remain transparent to the developer(sorry...this ones for when longhorn hits us...another thread maybe?).

(8): I would rather use BlitZ3D(DX7) IMHO i would probably get more done and better results.

(9): Microsoft think its cool to force developers to...sorry thats the longhorn thread again.

(10): Its not fast enough (for me anyways),and reminds of a language called Dark Basic.

I still use DX7,DX8 (am using some DX9 stuff) and i wouldn't touch DX9.0C or above with a
very long barge pole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
does C# will evetually replace C++ for PC and XBOX game developpement ?

In a buisness way C# is better cause it is suppose to speed up prodictivity. Right ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
productivity my arse, its Microsofts answer to java.

For me,there is no reason to touch any .NET stuff,or any DirectX9.0C or above version,and i wouldn't even think about forcing my users to download the huge net frame work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C# is still best suited for creating "productivity" apps; desktop type programs that are single-platform and don't require any crazy performance tweaks. Currently, it's future is likely as a java / VB replacement. C++? Maybe in the long run, but not until compilers are available for more systems (mono has some promise), but that'll be years out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Etnu,don't take this the wrong way(no emotion here,only pixels)
i have respect for you (yes,i do know you)... but ...
C++? Maybe in the long run

no,you are talking bollocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Anonymous Poster
C++? Maybe in the long run

no,you are talking bollocks.




Less than 10 years ago people were saying the same thing about C++ overtaking C in game development. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that our technology won't evolve past where it is today, this is a very fast moving field, and there's no reason why eventually a managed language couldn't overtake a natively compiled one, given machines fast enough to run the managed code at breakneck speeds.

Developer time is more expensive than computer time, and development houses are businesses after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
why would i NEED to use c# instead of c/c++? or anything from MS like .NET for GameDev?

c# will not replace c++ for game development any more than java (or a similar language)would or has,despite what MS think or have planned for managed .NET.

Being pretentious about it on a PC (mainly windows)game programming forum filled with MS interns is ridiculous.

Have 2D games or adventure games dissapeared or become less successfull since technology such as in doom 3 or far cry? nope. GameBoy advance games mostly outsell the most cutting edge PSX2 games.Did you know that?

Point and click games using 2D backdrops with 3D are still being released for PC,and doing better than many cutting edge 3D PC games.

Even after adventure games were announced officially dead.Because some people still prefer them to other games and outselling Doom3.

And c is still used widely(i use it still)in game development.Correct me here,but Carmack is an old timer too,and doesn't follow the heard of sheep?

If you really want to find out if the GI is going to jump on the MS.NET boat in the future,ask someone working at Criterion(EA) or from Sony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4836 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this