dzeligman

Members
  • Content count

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

122 Neutral

About dzeligman

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Seeking portfolio and resume critique

    Thanks for the feedback, I'll consider reordering my work experience.
  2. Hello everyone, I figured its been a while since I've done this so I'm interested in seeing everyone's feedback on the layout, wording, aesthetics, etc of my resume and portfolio. I'm seeking a gameplay or engine related programming position. Portfolio Resume html with links to pdf/doc Resume google doc A few notes: On my resume I've decided to do a related/focus oriented layout instead of one that is chronologically. Thus, my work experience is not in order. Also I have a skills section to show level of competency as well as knowledge not shown through projects and experience. Thanks in advance.
  3. There's a planet gravity example in Havok demos that shows the math involved.
  4. You can definitely do this. An example that would work nicely is using the Ogre3D engine and Havok Physics content tools. You can export a Ogre graphical scene as a .scene and the physics scene as a .hkx
  5. Quote:Before somebody points out some exception to the above general rule, I acknowledge that there is, indeed, an exception to every rule. And that also goes for this paragraph. Thanks for your thoughts. I guess I'll already point out then that I was the exception to this rule last summer when I interned for EA. (I went to the July/Aug IGDA meetings in LA and saw you. I guess I was too busy talking to other people to talk to you). Quote:As an aside: did you attend KU, KSU, UMKC, or ??? I'm about to graduate from UNL, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Overall I guess my main takeaway from this thread thus far is simply to scavenge individual company sites more and mention relocation in my cover letter emails.
  6. I'm about to graduate and am seeking full time employment. While I realize this is probably the worst job market in the state of this industry, I am still going to actively look for an opportunity. I've followed the large job boards and have notice that there are next to none entry level positions posted (associate/junior level programming). This is probably because so many people apply to companies without seeking a specific position. I'm curious about the best way of approaching this process. Many companies do not publicly list recruitment emails or alternative forms of contact so I was seeking some advice on how to approach sending in my resume blindly to companies. I'm going to GDC for the second time this year and will speak to many recruiters in person to up my chances of getting a job. I live in the midwest which is not near a hub and may move after I graduate, but currently that is not an option until this summeer. I'm aware of the importance of location. I am aware of the importance of networking and am doing my best with the people I know.
  7. Universities not teaching C++?

    Go to Irvine. Networking/Location/Career reps coming to your school is huge. CS degrees should be teaching you the theory and foundation behind computers and their software. Java is typically used as the initial language for teaching fundamentals and then another language is used for teaching data structures and algorithms. At Nebraska it was C++. I have later taken an AI course where we were had to use LISP. A language theory course where we used Java, Haskell and Prolog and a few systems level or below classes where we used C and X86 Assembly. I believe these sort of classes/languages is typical of most modern public Universities in the US. You won't get in the industry through simply going to a good school that has related classes nor will you not get in by going to a average school with no related classes. It's what you put it and learn on the side.
  8. XNA content pipeline

    I'm no expert, but I think the content manager for XNA caches everything it loads, so when you try to load two instances of the same texture, file, w/e it will just return the first instance. I would just make a copy constructor in your particle system.
  9. **slaps himself in the face** Yeah I really should start thinking more instead of just typing .... That should def speed up my game some seeing as how I iterate through many objects that way. Thanks
  10. for each object1 in objects for each object2 in objects if intersect(object1, object2) callback(object1, object2) end if end for end for I fail at optimization and better algorithms in general so how would one make this only check for collisions between a particular pair only once instead of twice since it iterators through the same object in both the initial and nested for.
  11. I originally tried a more actual visitor pattern approach, but I didnt like the results mostly because regardless of whatever I tried I still had to check against the type of the passed in gameObject. For example, if I were to make a Enemy vistor it would either need to check if the passed in gameObject to its visit method is a projectile, player, etc. OR the alternative I can think of right now would to create a specific visitor for each individual collision case which is similar to what I have now with the multiple methods I guess. That approach would probably be a little more clean and better for a multi-man project, but I'm still not sold. I'll def redo my collision detection, thanks. edit: @Sneftel, Thanks for the reply. I guess the relationship really is bi-directional, just trying to experiment and see what I like. I will probably try the inner interface approach first and then experiment with some event handling.
  12. Thanks for the response. Quote:I just want to point out that the way you're doing it does alot of superfluous checking which would result in double handling of collisions plus it's O(x^2) speed which doesn't scale well with increased amounts of game objects. Yeah its a relatively small 2d shooter in XNA. I have code that makes sure it doesnt do detections if the two objects are the same, not active, etc. I could probably minimize tests using quad trees or some other optimization, but I'm not hurting at all in performance so I dont think I should worry about optimization. I originally had separate lists for the different kinds of objects, but I like having all of them in one because it makes maintaining them easier. Quote:I also want to point out that what you're doing is not a double dispatch (atleast the part that you've shown) but rather a normal single dispatch. Nothing wrong with that, it just doesn't provide typesafety the way a double dispatch does. More information can be found here. I guess it really isnt since C# doesnt support it, but what I do exactly is I use reflection to put all the collide methods and their methodinfo in a static hash for the gameObject so at runtime the proper collide method is called, so code like this works : public void Collide(Shot shot) { HitPoints -= (int)(100 * shot.Damage); if (HitPoints <= 0) { isDead = true; world.doEnemyKillAction(this); } } public void Collide(PlayerShip playerSet) { isDead = true; world.doEnemyKillAction(this); } My original question has to deal with not having to perform the world.doEnemyKillAction. I guess I will just look into C#'s event handlers with delegates and use some form of the observer perhaps with the OnDeath event. I included all the original code to attempt to give context such that I wouldnt have to change that code ever if I added new kinds of objects.
  13. I just recently redid a lot of my design and am currently puzzled about the better way of accomplishing my current task. My world contains a list of all my game objects.(Currently my gameObjects contain both the view and the model since this is kind of a small game). It updates them like so : foreach (GameObject gameObject in gameObjects) { gameObject.Update(gameTime); } I use double dispatch for collision handling : foreach (GameObject gameObject in gameObjects) { foreach (GameObject gameObject2 in gameObjects) { //...do detection stuff gameObject.Collide(gameObject2); gameObject2.Collide(gameObject); } } And I remove them like so... foreach (GameObject entity in gameObjects) { //... if entity is dead or marks itself as needing to be removed, or isnt on the screen gameObjectsToRemove.Add(entity); } foreach (GameObject entity in gameObjectsToRemove) { gameObjects.Remove(entity); } Now my dilemma is how I dynamically create new objects that needed to be added to the gameObjects list when another object dies. For instance, when a alienship is destroyed there needs to be a chance that a powerup is created. I was thinking that one way would to have some sort of alien death event that the alien notifies the world of, but wasnt exactly sure on how to perform this. Currently as a hack way of doing this I pass a reference to the world to each alien and within the collision handler I call createPowerUP on the world object. Down the line I will have a separate system for creating and intializing the gameObjects in some sort of level class, but I will need to support the dynamic addition of new objects.
  14. So I've spent most of today reading up the various theorycrafting on component-driven, data-driven systems and am curious about a simple implementation. I started reading : http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=463508. I also read about the more inheritance driven behavior imp : http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=492938&whichpage=1� There were a lot of ideas thrown around in both threads and its a lot to try to comprehend for someone with little architecture experience. The main issue that I'm really unsure about how to accomplish is bullet number 2 here : 1. Sometimes components in the same entity need to be able to access each other. 2. Sometimes components from different entities need access to each other. (I'll be doing this in C# but that doesnt really matter that much) Say I have an "alien" and a "player", both have either a weapon component or a shooting component such that they have shots fired. The corresponding component would have the list of shots and they're positions would need to communicate against the player's position which in my design I would probably keep at the top level for simplicity sake. So for the actual talking I assume the weapon component or projectile would need to register with a collision component of its parent. The collision component would then also need to know about the position of another object. That part I cant really wrap my head around right now.
  15. Implementing "mind control"

    hrm yeah that does sound a lot better, I'll mess around on it tomorrow. Thanks