Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Can ANYONE help me?

This topic is 5885 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

I have been finding that if one askes a question about rts/wargames, it is ignored! If one askes questions about any other type of game, there are 20 million replies! Doesn''t ANYONE know anything about the best genre of computer game ever created? "Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most." Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by goober
Doesn''t ANYONE know anything about the best genre of computer game ever created?


Well, if that''s how you ask then it''s no wonder you''re being ignored. The "best" in anything is always debatable; try to refrain from turning off people who don''t necessarily agree with you. Also, don''t insult people''s egos ("doesn''t anyone know?" isn''t a very polite way to ask).

That said, I''ll agree that the most popular genre is RPGs (but I feel very few people on this site have anything new or important to add to the genre; something that would make someone like me start playing.) I like sports, some action/FPS but I''m not a dedicated/hardcore gamer. Noone talks about sports games on GameDev. RTSes, OTOH, receive a decent amount of attention, after RPGs and FPSes.

So ask nicely and clearly, and you''ll get dozens of replies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:

So ask nicely and clearly, and you''ll get dozens of replies.


I have asked in the past in a nice manner, and I am always as clear as I can be, but if you have any suggestions as to how to ask nicely/clearly and not be drowned out by the countless other posts, I''d be much obliged.

"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goober ??
do u own this forum ??
is there some where stating we must answer your
posts..??

let people answer whatever they want to answer ...



{ Stating the obvious never helped any situation !! }

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by jwalker
goober ??
do u own this forum ??
is there some where stating we must answer your
posts..??

let people answer whatever they want to answer ...



{ Stating the obvious never helped any situation !! }


jwalker ??
no, and I never said I did ??
no, and I never said there was ??

I already do. That doesn''t mean I am not allowed to reply to their replies. I too am allowed to answer whatever I want to answer. Besides, I asked Oluseyi to clarify what he was saying, I didn''t ask you to jump up on your high horse and ride off into the sunset!


{ Then how come you sent me a message stating the obvious? }

"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's a generic request template:

Hi. I'm working on/thinking about/wondering if you had thought about X.
(Alternatively: have ou ever noticed Y?) To my mind it would be best to
accomplish it using method Q, which I tried but it didn't work. This is what
happened: R. If you have any suggestions/comments/enhancements to make, I'd
really appreciate it. Thanks.


You get the picture.

Edit: newlines.

Edited by - Oluseyi on October 23, 2001 3:12:30 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on your question, I already see why it may have gone unanswered. A good general rule when speaking with humans is to avoid stereotype. For example, dont ask "What the best is", because there is no best. If I was to say "FPS are the best" then I''m combining my opinion, and attempting to state it as fact when it is not.

So you may get better response if you ask something like "What are your favorite genre''s of computer games, and do you know anything about this genre?" (lol, either way it''s still one wacked out question). Asking "Doesn''t ANYONE know anything about the best genre of computer game ever created?" is attempting to state that a best genre exists, which is false, is worded very badly making it hard to understand, and makes little sense even after I translated it to a "better" (better in my opinion of course), so you may want to rethink what you are asking entirely.

Also, you complain that questions about rts/wargames is ignored. If not because of the way these questions are asked/worded, it''s simply possible that not many people are interested in these genre''s, and nobody willing to reply has an answer. If 20 million people are answering questions about other "type of game" (gah, lol), then perhaps those people replying 20 million times are sharing the same interests, or maybe even simply having the answers to the questions being asked regarding the other genre''s. There isn''t much you can do, and complaining isn''t the smartest choice


If you can read this, All your base are belong to us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
quote:
Original post by goober
[quote]
So ask nicely and clearly, and you''ll get dozens of replies.


I have asked in the past in a nice manner, and I am always as clear as I can be, but if you have any suggestions as to how to ask nicely/clearly and not be drowned out by the countless other posts, I''d be much obliged.

"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

I checked your profile after reading this.

Actually, your other postings (the unanswered ones, anyway) have tended towards adversarial.

Your post at http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=63641 about RTS design went unanswered, probably for two reasons. 1) It was way too broad. People write books to answer questions like that. 2) You follow up with a bunch of negative conditions (Don''t tell me about X) which always comes off hostile when read.

Your post at http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=47286 probably went unanswered because we''ve seen that question posed and answered a thousand times, and if you''d done a simple forum search on ''framerate'' you''d know the answer that too. Also, the question is so basic I doubt that anyone has bothered to write an article about, which was your specific request.

I would gladly answer your questions about rts/wargames, if they were a bit more specific, and showed some evidence that you were actively working on the problem. As it is, it looks like you might be the type that just asks questions without considering that you might be able to come up with the answer yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oluseyi, SirSmoke, Anonymous Poster, ...:

OK, I take your point.
You are saying, basically, that people can''t answer me because of the way I ask my questions and the way in which I respond, and that others wont answer me for those reasons, because they cannot, and because they feel I don''t make any effort on my own. I will try to take your advice in future, but it is hard to teach a goober new tricks...

btw Some people speak/type/act/think differently to others. I am not an exeption. You(Anonymous Poster in particular) should avoid judging people by how they speak, and wonder instead why they ask that way. As I said above, I accept your points, but I will be the way I will be, and I will only ever be capable of changing my language, not my attitudes.

"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with the 1st post mentioned by the anoumous poster above is that:
1. your asking for assembly, not many people on this forum know or us it much.
2. your question is way to braud.
3. your asking a higher level question and not many people on this forum work with RTSes (I have asked questions about them several times and gotten few responses). It would be safe to assume most people on gamedev are either working on fps games or doing beginner 2D games. And most people in general on this forum are beginners. RTS games are defenately not games for newbies, they very complex beasts.

Possibility

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:

"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober


Thats not really yours thats Ozzy Osbourne, and was quoted in Hackers by Cereal Killer.

Do you really know Assembly? or you just want to code everything in Assembly?, sure if properly written is the fastest code that can be, but writting a whole game in pure ASM? not even the pros do that, true, there is an article on this here in gamedev, but I doubt you can make something bigger than whats explained there in Asm before getting bored, well its your choise.

I agree with most of the guys here, your questions are quite agressive, and too broad, but if you want a place to start, I would say, look for Isometric or Hex engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Kwizatz
[quote]
"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober


Thats not really yours thats Ozzy Osbourne, and was quoted in Hackers by Cereal Killer.


I know it isn''t mine(hence "..."), but I love it, and it sums me up perfectly...

quote:

Do you really know Assembly? or you just want to code everything in Assembly?, sure if properly written is the fastest code that can be, but writting a whole game in pure ASM? not even the pros do that


Hey, I''m not a pro, so I''m allowed.
No, seriously, I am beginning to agree with you. It is hard work, but then, how am I going to learn if I shrink away from doing stuff that isn''t easy? The fact is, I want to make a game and understand how it works, and I want to learn how to implement things in assembler. Why not combine the two?

"I may be crazy, but at least I''m good at it!"
(Not mine either, but I like it too. )



"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
Doing a whole game isn''t bad, it''s just looooong.

Software engineering studies show that a given programmer will usually average the same number of lines of code per hour, regardless of which programming language he or she is working in.

(You also generate the same number of faults (errors) per line of code)

That means you generally get more done in a day with fewer bugs when you use a higher-level programming language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by goober
[No, seriously, I am beginning to agree with you. It is hard work, but then, how am I going to learn if I shrink away from doing stuff that isn''t easy? The fact is, I want to make a game and understand how it works, and I want to learn how to implement things in assembler. Why not combine the two?

Noble but naiive.

The design of any program should be independent of its implementation, meaning that you''ll spend most of your time expressing exactly the same things in a mor convoluted and terse language if you use assembly throughout. For most of what you want to do (or what you can do at this stage), using assembly makes no difference and no sense. Use assembly when it is appropriate and when it gives you an actual advantage.

Reply if you need further clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ahhh what the heck, you might be a brat, but somehow I can relate
for me Visual Basic Programmers are just amateurs (no offense guys!)

I dont blame you for wanting to learn the hardest there is just for the challenge, I have made a couple of dumb programs in assembly just so I know I can, but trust me, you dont want to make a whole game entirelly in ASM, use C/C++, and inline as much ASM as you want, you will see things like game loops, animation loops, counters, AI functions better in C/C++, than you will in ASM.

I see you like TASM too much, seems more like an identification with borland (or anything NOT MS) than actually liking it I can relate there too (I wouldnt buy any electronic which is not a SONY! unless they dont make it at all), however TASM is quite old, no body uses it anymore, you could try GAS, but that would mean learning the AT&T syntax, on the good side, if you decide to learn C/C++, you dont have to use MS, use MingW32, which is GCC, and if you compile with the -S switch guess what? it will create the ASM source for the program you wrote in C/C++, then you can have fun optimising if you insist in ASM.

Anyway, good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Oluseyi
[quote]Original post by goober
[No, seriously, I am beginning to agree with you. It is hard work, but then, how am I going to learn if I shrink away from doing stuff that isn't easy? The fact is, I want to make a game and understand how it works, and I want to learn how to implement things in assembler. Why not combine the two?

Noble but naiive.

The design of any program should be independent of its implementation, meaning that you'll spend most of your time expressing exactly the same things in a mor convoluted and terse language if you use assembly throughout. For most of what you want to do (or what you can do at this stage), using assembly makes no difference and no sense. Use assembly when it is appropriate and when it gives you an actual advantage.

Reply if you need further clarification.

I do. You might like to back up what you said about convoluted and terse, too...

"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Edited by - goober on October 26, 2001 5:14:35 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Kwizatz
ahhh what the heck, you might be a brat, but somehow I can relate
for me Visual Basic Programmers are just amateurs (no offense guys!)


Aw, shucks. Thats the first time someone has called me a brat in such a nice way!
quote:

I dont blame you for wanting to learn the hardest there is just for the challenge, I have made a couple of dumb programs in assembly just so I know I can, but trust me, you dont want to make a whole game entirelly in ASM, use C/C++, and inline as much ASM as you want, you will see things like game loops, animation loops, counters, AI functions better in C/C++, than you will in ASM.


I see your point, but that is assuming I am always going to use the loops that can be implemented in c/++. What if I want just that little bit more power?
quote:


I see you like TASM too much, seems more like an identification with borland (or anything NOT MS) than actually liking it I can relate there too (I wouldnt buy any electronic which is not a SONY! unless they dont make it at all), however TASM is quite old, no body uses it anymore, you could try GAS, but that would mean learning the AT&T syntax, on the good side, if you decide to learn C/C++, you dont have to use MS, use MingW32, which is GCC, and if you compile with the -S switch guess what? it will create the ASM source for the program you wrote in C/C++, then you can have fun optimising if you insist in ASM.

Anyway, good luck.


You say that TASM is old and noone uses it anymore. I know a few people who use TASM 5, and they are the ones that teach me everything I know about assembler. Besides, old isn''t necessarily bad. After all: I am going to make a DOS-based game, what does it matter if it is an old assembler?

Tell me more about this MingW32...



"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by goober
I do. You might like to back up what you said about convoluted and terse, too...

Assembly = convoluted and terse. It''s hardware-specific, syntax dependent (AT&T differs from Intel syntax, even for Intel processors). Logical structures is not as immediately apparent as it is in a higher level language. A loop, for example, becomes a linear portion preceded or succeeded by a comparison and a jump. Add in fetch-execute cycle optimizations (on pipelined architectures) and the jumps may become totally confusing...

High level languages, OTOH, provide immediate visual feedback on such things. Sure, you can write obfuscated code in any language, but it takes effort in some. Besides, C is a first cousin to assembly, and many compilers can "compile" your C source to assembly, allowing you to then optimize by hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
for Mingw32 check www.mingw.org

if you use TASM I dont think you will mind not having an IDE, as for the ASM generated by Mingw/GCC, it uses the AT&T syntax, which is not hard, but is different than intel's which everyone is used to, a place to look is the Linux Assembly HOWTO, look under GAS, there is a title about the AT&T syntax, by the way, if you like chalenges, you might want to try Linux (grin)

oh yeah, GAS comes with mingw, if you are looking for it.

(YAY!!!! RedHat 7.2 is OUT!!!!)

Edited by - kwizatz on October 26, 2001 9:46:30 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oluseyi:
Very limiting point of view.
Yes, assembler is hardware dependent. So is the end result created by any language. Note: think of exe files for Windows vs exe files for Linux.
Syntax dependent? Name one language that ISNT!!!! If you mean something that wasn''t so bleeding obvious you should be ashamed to say it, please specify.
Logical structures should be designed when the game is being designed. That means that any language capable of making executable code will be able to implement them(the complexity being at this stage unimportant), except for the ones that can ONLY be done with assembler...
wtf is OTOH and what do you mean "High level languages...provide immediate visual feedback on such things. "? No more than a good assembler environment...
Obfuscated code is actually easier in C than assembler, as anyone who has seen a piece of complex code crammed with double-symbol operations, {}s, ()s, *s, <
Feel free to give me some REASONABLE arguments at any time...

"Of all the things I''ve lost, I miss my mind the most."
Goober

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by goober
Oluseyi:
Very limiting point of view.
Yes, assembler is hardware dependent. So is the end result created by any language. Note: think of exe files for Windows vs exe files for Linux.

But the interim form? The code itself? I can take a well-written piece of C/C++/FORTRAN/BASIC/COBOL/add_your_languge_here code, and with minimal changes recompile it in its entirety on another platform. Can't do the same assembly - even with GAS on both platforms. That's what I meant.

quote:
Syntax dependent? Name one language that ISNT!!!!

C. C++. Java. The syntax is the same, irrespective of which platform you're developing/compiling on. Not so assembly. MIPS is very different from 68k, which are both very different from IA-32 and IA-64, which are all very different from SPARC (which has minor variations between its 9 or so versions), which are all very different from Alpha - even using the same assembler on all the platforms (note that I haven't mentioned the whole string of IBM mainframe, etc).

You tell me why C and C++ are so popular. You tell me why UNIX was rewritten from the ground up so only about 10% of the code required the use of assembly.

quote:
Logical structures should be designed when the game is being designed. That means that any language capable of making executable code will be able to implement them(the complexity being at this stage unimportant), except for the ones that can ONLY be done with assembler...

I meant logical structures in the language - things like loops, recursion, comparison and their various nested combinations. Those have nothing to do with game design.

Here's a hint for the future: I never discuss programming within the exclusive purview of gaming. I have no intentions of joining the wage slave game development industry. It's a hobby, it's a pastime, it's fun. But I have other types of programming to do as well.

quote:
wtf is OTOH and what do you mean "High level languages...provide immediate visual feedback on such things. "?

OTOH = On the Other Hand , and it's such a common part of net lingua that I assumed you'd be at least conversant with it. And I didn't expect you to get all flamed up like this either. High level languages show logical structure (such as loops/comparisons) either through the use of special delimiters - a block in C/C++/Java is enclosed in curly braces; or whitespace - Python, BASIC, FORTRAN, etc all encourage (actually Python requires ) that you indent nested statements. In assembly (pick a version) the language itself does not have any way of indicating a nested loop or comparison.

quote:
Obfuscated code is actually easier in C than assembler, as anyone who has seen a piece of complex code crammed with double-symbol operations, {}s, ()s, *s, <

()s is not legal. Neither is <-s (s() and s-> are though).

Obfuscation in C takes effort. And C is easier for a casual programmer to grasp than assembly. Case closed.

quote:
Feel free to give me some REASONABLE arguments at any time...

Okay, here's where I get mine on. You are free to disagree with me; heck, you can disregard everything I say, but to imply that my points are totally "unreasonable" is just your own self-imposed myopia. Writing an entire application at a very low level when such is not necessary is either idiocy or false machismo. Compiler technology is so advanced today that only the most critical inner loops need to be hand-optimized in assembly (provided, of course, that you can actually write decent C/C++ code). Why do we bother to have higher level languages? To make programming accessible to "sissies"? No. It's to allow us to focus on higher problems and make us more efficient - it takes less time to write most identical routines in any higher level language than in assembly.

Speaking of inner loops, go read Inner Loops by Rick Booth. It gives very practical advice on when to use assembly and when not to. I'd love to see your player structures for a football game (with full stats) in SPARC V9 assembly.

Edit: formatting.

Edited by - Oluseyi on October 28, 2001 5:07:47 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Goober, I think you may be overestimating the difficulty of pure Assembly language programming. Tell me, what exactly does this program do, and is it more obfuscated than the C version?
.file "test.c"
gcc2_compiled.:
___gnu_compiled_c:
.text
.p2align 2
.globl _main
_main:
pushl %ebp
movl %esp,%ebp
subl $24,%esp
movl $1,-4(%ebp)
movl $1,-8(%ebp)
movl -4(%ebp),%eax
movl -8(%ebp),%edx
leal (%edx,%eax),%ecx
movl %ecx,-12(%ebp)
xorl %eax,%eax
jmp L2
.p2align 4,,7
L2:
movl %ebp,%esp
popl %ebp
ret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites