Sign in to follow this  
Lord Banshee

I want to rewrite my old game... where to start.

Recommended Posts

Lord Banshee    122
Ok about 3 years ago i wrote a space shotter in DirectDraw. since then i really did any work with API or anything. So i figure best why to get back into is use all my old gaphics and sound files from my old game and try to rewrite the game cleaner,better, and more features. Like i said, i have not been into game programming for a while so do you think i should try to write it in SDL? SDL DirectX? SDL OpenGL?. What about the Sound if i go with SDL? does it have a sound libary too? Thanks, Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MaulingMonkey    1730
SDL is a nice library for pixel pushing.
SDL runs atop of DirectX on windows, if you're pixel pushing.
SDL can be used to set up an OpenGL context, just like GLUT can.
SDL can't wasn't designed to be used to set up a DirectX context, AFAIK, if that's what you meant by "SDL DirectX".
OpenGL (no matter how set up) is nice for games with rotation that don't want a seperate sprite for each facing.

Which is best depends on the game :-).

And as Sir Sapo has allready pointed out, SDL does indeed have sound, see the SDL_Mixer documentation.

[Edited by - MaulingMonkey on June 30, 2005 1:30:49 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Banshee    122
Ahh yes Thanks i guess i miss read something about the DirectX Part.

On the OpenGL side of SDL, what do you mean about "don't want a seperate sprite for each facing"?

One would make a polygon and texture is like one would make a Sprite in a DirectDraw Since right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Sapo    769
What we mean is that instead of making a sprite for each direction a player can face, you can make one image, texture it onto a quad, then rotate it when you have to. It saves loads of time and filespace, instead of 16 100kb images, you can have 1, and it will work the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
matches81    474
Quote:
Original post by Sir Sapo
What we mean is that instead of making a sprite for each direction a player can face, you can make one image, texture it onto a quad, then rotate it when you have to. It saves loads of time and filespace, instead of 16 100kb images, you can have 1, and it will work the same.


I don´t see a reason why that shouldn´t work with D3D? You could also build a quad (2 tris), use a rotation matrix and your done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster   
Guest Anonymous Poster
Quote:
Original post by Sir Sapo
What we mean is that instead of making a sprite for each direction a player can face, you can make one image, texture it onto a quad, then rotate it when you have to. It saves loads of time and filespace, instead of 16 100kb images, you can have 1, and it will work the same.


Are you talking about the differences between top-down and isometric?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lord Banshee    122
Quote:
Original post by Sir Sapo
What we mean is that instead of making a sprite for each direction a player can face, you can make one image, texture it onto a quad, then rotate it when you have to. It saves loads of time and filespace, instead of 16 100kb images, you can have 1, and it will work the same.


Isn't that that same thing Direct Draw did?

I had one image filled with many sprites and i believe when i wanted different images say for an animation, i would move the RECT of the Sprite so it would show a different part of the image.

Oh and i remember there was a forum around all about 2d Programming? It was pretty big and i found it like a year ago when looking into OpenGL but lost the link anybody know what i am talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zeraan    317
Quote:
Original post by Lord Banshee
Quote:
Original post by Sir Sapo
What we mean is that instead of making a sprite for each direction a player can face, you can make one image, texture it onto a quad, then rotate it when you have to. It saves loads of time and filespace, instead of 16 100kb images, you can have 1, and it will work the same.


Isn't that that same thing Direct Draw did?



No, what you're describing is that you take one big picture that has smaller pictures (aka tiled) of your object in different angle. And when you "rotate", you're actually shifting to a different tile.

What Sir Sapo meant is that you have only one "tile" on one 3D polygon. Then you manipulate the 3D polygon so that it rotates, not the "tile". So the end result is that you rotate one tile, instead of using different tiles to achieve the same effect. The only disadvantage to this is that if your tile has lighting effect plus shadow, it will look weird when the light seem to move with the tile :)

Hope this answers your question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this