trasseltass

Member
  • Content count

    208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

123 Neutral

About trasseltass

  • Rank
    Member
  1. I don't have any more time for this, but it's always nice to discuss Singletons. Lots of strong opinions. TBH, I never use singletons for game development. I have however seen it used for embedded software projects that are strongly linked to using UML.
  2. [quote name='trasseltass' timestamp='1352402902' post='4998989']We're not designing and delivering a composite of multiple cars.[/quote] And when you need to instantiate multiple cars in your test harness, what then? Try telling an automotive engineer that he is designing a car of which only a single will ever be built, and no prototypes either... If your test subject for a black box test is the entire system, e.g. the car, in what situation would you need to create multiple instances of it? Sounds like something that is dependant on the design of your test harness / test environment. I think you're confusing design with production - it should be perfectly fine to design a single system and then produce multiple instances of it.
  3. > But how many [b]cars[/b] are there? For there to only ever be one steering wheel, there would also have to only ever be one car. Sorry, I forgot to mention that the system of interest in this example is the car. We're designing a single car and eventually the goal is to deliver instances of this car, maybe in larger numbers. We're not designing and delivering a composite of multiple cars. [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]
  4. [quote name='Telastyn' timestamp='1352401263' post='4998976'] [quote name='trasseltass' timestamp='1352400093' post='4998968'] If a car has one (1) steering wheel it does not mean that the car has an arbritary number of steering wheels, or that it sometimes has one steering wheel - it always has one steering wheel. [/quote] Exactly.[b] It does not mean there is only one steering wheel in the entire universe[/b], which is what a singleton enforces. [/quote] If you are designing a universe I could see how that would be true. If your "system of interest" is a bit smaller, for example a car, it perhaps only exists one steering wheel.
  5. <p><p>[quote name='Telastyn' timestamp='1352398521' post='4998955'] [quote name='trasseltass' timestamp='1352397571' post='4998948'] This means that, during run-time, the software itself would NEVER want to destroy or re-allocate this single object instance. [/quote] No, it means that there's a 1 multiplicity of the object (in relation to others). That you're only referencing one object. It [i]sometimes[/i] means that you only have one object. It does [b]not[/b] mean that your software cannot (and will [b]never[/b]) deal with two. [/quote] Sorry, I do not follow at all. "The UML representation of an association is a line with an optional arrowhead indicating the role of the object(s) in the relationship, and an optional notation at each end indicating the multiplicity of instances of that entity (the number of objects that participate in the association)." If a car has one (1) steering wheel it does not mean that the car has an arbritary number of steering wheels, or that it [i]sometimes[/i] has one steering wheel - it [i]always[/i] has one steering wheel. If the produced car would have no steering wheels or 5 steering wheels, then it would probably not be the car that we were designing in the first place. I'm not saying that the singleton pattern is for everyone, just that it solves the design problem of encapsulating a single object instance.
  6. Sometimes, when you do top-down systems engeering using a language like UML to describe the software, singletons pop out when an association between objects is found to have a multiplicity of exactly one (1) in either direction. [url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_diagram"]https://en.wikipedia...i/Class_diagram[/url] This means that, during run-time, the software itself would NEVER want to destroy or re-allocate this single object instance. Using the singleton pattern for the implementation ensures (through encapsulation of the "instance pointer" or whatever) that it is not possible to destroy/re-allocate the object instance during runtime.
  7. Coding

    Do you have any "special requirements" other than it being a game engine? For example, what platform(s) would you like to develop for? I personally don't like Unity (find it somewhat non-intuitive to work with). However, it does support deploying to multiple platforms with no or minor fuzz. If you're valuing cross-platform deployment greatly then it is probably one of the best choices out there.
  8. Hi all, I looked through the pinned threads in Visual Arts but couldnt find the answer i was looking for.. I'm looking for a tool that lets me draw [b]vector graphics and create vector graphics animations[/b]. I would also like the tool to be able to export the animations to a series of raster images (textures), in order to be used for a game. Which is the current "professional solution" to do this? What tool(s) do you recommend? Do you recommend using a pen + tablet for the drawing part, or is it better to go with a mouse? I've been drawing on paper for a while and would like to try my skills out on a computer. I have not attempted animation yet, but it's something I'm looking to learn. The final goal would be to produce some kind of simpler game. [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img] I'm looking to draw simpler and not extremely detailed stuff, and to animate it. I've got money to spend on pen + tablet and software to get a "professional tool" that is easy to work with, good maintained (active community) and produces a good result. Thanks!
  9. Making a Game

    [quote name='gm-noob' timestamp='1345281492' post='4970778'] I do want to learn a language, but Im not sure which one. Can you recommend one? [/quote] To be as politically correct as possible: Start out by learning C#. You could then move on to use C# and XNA for prototyping your 2D game.
  10. Writing your own scripting language isn't *that* hard, but as always it depends on who you ask.. Here's a good tutorial that got me off the ground: http://www.flipcode.com/archives/Implementing_A_Scripting_Engine-Part_1_Overview.shtml GLHF!
  11. Using Blender

    I am working my way through this tutorial as I am writing this. I think it's just awesome. :) It's on Blender 2.4. If you're using the new beta the interface will diff a bit, but so far it's not been a problem to figure out where to find things.
  12. UML For Hobby Projects?

    Quote:Original post by The Communist Duck Do many other people do this for small hobby projects? I guess something like this would be standard for big, industry applications. To my knowledge, it's not that common among indie developers to use UML. Quote:Original post by The Communist DuckAlso, can anyone recommend any material about going from UML diagrams to C++ code? I found one tutorial here, after googling. UML should be seen for what it is; a standardized language for modelling systems. It's a tool to identify and document stuff, all the way from requirements right down to software design. The UML in turn does not state in which language you shall implement the software design. When we write documentation, we always have to think about who the intended consumer of the documentation is. As an indie developer, you (often) don't have a customer with whom you have to discuss and agree upon requirements. You (often) don't have a validation and verification crew to whom you have to transfer an understanding of the requirements. You play the roles of the developer, the manager, the tester, the customer, etc. all at the same time. Thus, there's is no real need to communicate information on requirements and design between different roles through documentation. If you are only two people working in your project it's not necessary to go with UML. You will probably be fine writing a so called "Game Design Document (GDD)", putting a scope on the requirements you have on the game for your own sake (so that you don't forget). That said, I'm not saying you shouldn't go with UML for the project you're working on, I'm just saying it's not in any way necessary. However, as you wrote, if you want to try UML for the sake of learning, by all means go with it. It's useful knowledge when you are thrown into a larger project utilising UML. :)
  13. If I were to program games without XNA, what would I need?

    Quote:Original post by joshuanrobinson2002 Well, I'll echo others in this thread who said that XNA can be used to target more than just the 360. I'll append the mandatory link as well: http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page C# and XNA is really easy and kind to use for client applications (I've never tried C# for server side apps).
  14. New Game Engine Discussion

    You can try making an unique engine all you want, but in 99.99999....% of the time when you come up with a new idea someone will still be one step ahead of you. "Ideas are plentiful." The rule of thumb is that the most _obvious_ things you can ever think of when it comes to engines have already been tried / developed / you name it. If there's such a thing as multiple cores, then you'd better believe someone has thought about increasing the world detail and distributing the computational load.. Still, when you get an idea it doesn't take too much energy to run a background check. It may turn out noone have done it before, and you may also win the lottery one day. [Side-note: There are loads of game engines out there, and most of them implement the same stuff.. They have the rigid body dynamics, component based entity systems and the what-not, but still, people can't get enough of making "their very own" of this stuff. It's always like that. The thing is, everyone sometimes need to feel that what they are doing is unique and "never before tried", and that's why people keep at it. It makes people feel good. They slap labels on the games saying that they use "revolutionary" or "breathtaking" technology, which is pure bogus as to my definition of the terms.. but hey, misuse of the language is not so bad, as long as they are happy with what they are doing - right?] Anyway, if you want to make something really unique and "revolutionary", I'd put my money on making a game instead of an game engine. Some of the classic game designs are getting pretty worn out by now, but once in a while fresh new ideas pop up.. Also, with game design it's a bit like art or music - people tend to forget. This is a good thing when your children's children (who may also have the need to make unique stuff) invents a new "revolutionary" 2D platformer about a plumber called Lario.. If you want to be unique in the field of game engine design, I would either put my money on making a good and intuitive IDE for an existing engine (better than the ones currently existing), or look at the horizon for new technology. Real-time raytracing hardware is finally becoming cheap(er) to produce, so you might want to look into that and write an engine interfacing the SDK..
  15. Future of C# and XNA

    XNA may be good or it may be bad, but the fact the Microsoft is still backing it up says quite a lot.. I can't see that they would like to cancel the development anytime soon. Because of it being so simple to work with a lot of people are using C# and XNA. Many people using C#/XNA means many people running into similar problems (such as porting to different platforms, etc). Many people running into similar problems means there's a high probability that some of these people will address the problem and try to solve it, which is exactly what is happening. Observe, this does not mean that C#/XNA is the "best" at anything, it only means that a lot of people are using it and are happy with the way it works. You choose what language and library based on many credentials, such as what requirements you have, your current knowledge, time of development, etc.