• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.

Patrik Malk

Members
  • Content count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

100 Neutral

About Patrik Malk

  • Rank
    Member
  1. [quote name='swiftcoder' timestamp='1332261154' post='4923671'] [quote]The other problem is that it wouldn't be just rendering, Windows, sound and input are all using different APIs. Right now for Window creation I am using Win32/SFML, do you think I should just use SDL?[/quote] SFML should handle pretty much all of that for you. [/quote] Yea but it seems like it would be cheating to not use Win32 to handle DirectX. It wouldn't seem as natural I guess. I think that's it. I finally understand it and I did get it working. So, thank you for your help.
  2. [quote]You can use factory methods to choose which API at runtime, or preprocessor defines to choose at compile time.[/quote] Why "or"? The preprocessor defines means it can compile on Linux by ignoring the DX/Win32 stuff, the factory methods mean that Windows users can choose at anytime between the three. I'm just wondering if you think that it might be a bad idea somehow. EDIT: If I don't hide the DX11 code stuff when I compile for Windows, then it won't run for XP users right? The other problem is that it wouldn't be just rendering, Windows, sound and input are all using different APIs. Right now for Window creation I am using Win32/SFML, do you think I should just use SDL? Also do you think it would be worth the effort (is it a good idea) to put the rendering code into a separate DLL? EDIT: I have been trying to get it to work. So far it's been working but I have come across a problem: [CODE]Window *win = new W32Window(); or Window *win = new SFMLWindow();[/CODE] That's how it works so far. But when I tried to get the DX11 rendering class to work I found a fault in the design. DX needs a window handle. So I thought I would just make a function to return the handle and pass it to the DX class: [CODE] HWND W32Window::getWindowHandle() { return hWnd; } [/CODE] But the current setup doesn't allow it. Because I am using /Window *win/ instead of /W32Window *win/ I can't use any classes not defined in the base class. But I don't want the base class to have this function because Linux/Mac/anything not Windows, wouldn't know what to do with the type HWND.I could use preprocessor definitions to hide it when compiling for Linux, but won't it start looking ugly when they are all over the place? I could just use W32/SFMLWindow and just manually change between them, but then it's impossible to change at runtime. What should I do?
  3. It depends on what you want. Flash is the current standard for all major browsers. But of course it doesn't work on the iPad/iPhone and won't work on IE10 (Metro). If that is important to you then you can either build directly for that platform or you can certainly use HTML5+JavaScript. You could port your games, but don't underestimate the work that could turn out to be. If you are more concerned with iPad/iPhone, then directly might be your best bet. HTML5+JavaScript is widely supported but does have its own disadvantages.
  4. OpenGL

    I get it now. Thank you for your help.
  5. Instead of transforming mouse coordinates into 3D, try the other way around: Convert the 3D into 2D, simply disregard the Z-axis and do regular 2D collision checking..
  6. OpenGL

    [quote name='Chris_F' timestamp='1331594112' post='4921499'] You really shouldn't be using any of those formats with your game. OBJ, 3DS, COLLADA, etc are good formats for distributing models to artists and working on them, but they are no good for distributing with a game. They are textual formats, which means they store the information inefficiently. Even if you compress them, you still have to parse them when loading, which is a slow process.[/quote] Isn't 3DS a binary format? [quote name='Ravyne' timestamp='1331595453' post='4921508']Chris makes a good point -- those formats aren't preferable for "retail" builds.[/quote] That's what I figured. When I was first starting out years ago I remember wondering why I couldn't find .x or .3ds or any other model files in the Program Files folder for games. I thought it was because they put them into resource data files. But I guess they do both. [quote name='Chris_F' timestamp='1331594112' post='4921499'] You shouldn't be processing any of your assets during run time. They should be processed once and then packaged with the game in a format that can simply by copied into memory and used directly.[/quote] [quote name='Ravyne' timestamp='1331595453' post='4921508'] If, for convenience, you want your in-production code to be able to load those file-types, that's reasonable, but don't ship your final game that way. You can use the Assimp library in your code during production, but before you ship you should switch your game to a custom format, and create tools to convert your assets to that format. You can essentially just copy & paste the code from your in-production game (using Assimp) into a new code base to create this tool -- you just need to write the data out to a binary file instead of creating buffers and such with it.[/quote] So custom format it is then. By binary you mean use iostream ios::binary then create a struct/class and just dump/read it all at once, right? [quote name='Ravyne' timestamp='1331595453' post='4921508'] This will keep load-times for your customers to a minimum, and also make better use of bandwidth if you are distributing digitally (or trying to fit onto a disc for that matter).[/quote] That's always a good thing! [quote name='Ravyne' timestamp='1331595453' post='4921508']That said, you want to get your pipeline in place sooner than later so that you've got a chance to test it -- you don't want to just be converting all your assets for the first time a month before you release.[/quote] Exactly, that's why I'm asking now. [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img]
  7. [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]*[/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]By the way, while this thread is still fresh and relavant, if you don't mind[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]I'm trying to visualize how a multiAPI engine would work, or even how to build a "perfect" engine. There are so many possibilities.[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]Last time I tried creating three folders, one for each, and modding the classes to use the different APIs while trying to keep the function calls as similar as possible. That way It to change APIs all that is needed is to change the directory, libs and dlls. No code is actually changed because all three have a main engine class that is used the exactly the same way.[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]Next time I plan on build off of that. I'm looking at it like this: API->Graphics->Engine->Game. The directory would be organized like this:[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]Engine[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4] DirectX9[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4] DirectX11[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4] OpenGL[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]Then in the "Engine" dir, could be placed Engine and possible Graphics as they should be exactly the same. The API class and some others would go in the folders. (this way I don't need to have three (or more) copies of Engine.h/.cpp that I need to keep updating. ( I would go nuts! )[/size][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][size=4]What do you guys think? Is that a good plan? Am I (under/over)thinking it?[/size][/font][/color]
  8. [color=#000000][font=Arial][quote name='bollµ' timestamp='1331615642' post='4921579'][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]To answer your question, Build it as a 3d engine, because 2d is just 3d without the z-axis. I'd suggest keeping the base classes that do the rendering as abstract classes so that you can switch between 2d and 3d renderers easily.[/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial][/quote][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][quote name='Corefanatic' timestamp='1331597191' post='4921515'][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]A 3D engine can handle both 2D and 3D without any problem. As you said, you will be drawing in 2D for your hud etc., so there isn't much of a problem with rendering.[/quote][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]That's a relief.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][quote name='bollµ' timestamp='1331615642' post='4921579'][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]I'm assuming you're using an object oriented programming language, such as C++ or Java. I have almost no idea how C# works, so I might be a little amiss here.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][/quote][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]The topic title says "[C++]" [/font][/color][img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img] [color=#000000][font=Arial][quote name='Corefanatic' timestamp='1331597191' post='4921515'][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]However, engines are much more than rendering, and making a universal engine is no easy feat, especially when you are making your first. I recommend having a game in mind and create an engine for that. Then iterate or write a new engine.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][/quote][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][quote name='bollµ' timestamp='1331615642' post='4921579'][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]I'd say start with what you *need*, and then expand to what you want. Once you get the most basic classes up (states, renderers, physics classes), the sky's your limit. So I'd suggest begin by drawing a cube / a basic textured sprite, getting the core engine up and running, and then adding whatever you want [/font][/color][img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img] ... [color=#000000][font=Arial]At the risk of sounding cliched- "build games, not engines" (please don't flame me for bringing it up). It certainly is a valid point, and I'd say just build the engine as you go along. make mistakes. redesign the whole system. Refactor it again with comments and/or cool looking templates that don't serve a function ;) And also, most importantly, have fun while doing it.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]Cheers![/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial][/quote][/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]I totally agree with both of you.[/font][/color] [color=#000000][font=Arial]At the moment I am just getting back into game programming (took about a year off writing websites, it was a shock to me that C++ doesn't have echo! [img]http://public.gamedev.net//public/style_emoticons/default/smile.png[/img][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial] )[/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial] I did have an engine that could use DX9 or DX11 or SDL+OGL.* But I think I will abandon this and just pick one and focus on that. I think it would be better to have a decent engine using only, say, DX11 (which I could later port to other APIs anyway) compared to a useless engine able to run on everything.[/font][/color] Right? I am trying to build for games, as you both suggested. An engine by itself is unsatisfying, so to be productive I am planning on building the engine up "naturally" in steps: 2D Simple Platformer 3D SImple Platformer (2.5D maybe) 3D Slightly More Complex Platformer Final 3D Platformer Game (I don't know why platformer, guess I was feeling nostalgic. I do intend to work on a wider variety of genres, but I feel it would be detrimental to jump between them now.) I don't even have an artist or an engine yet so to aim for the final thing is a bit unrealistic. Even if somehow I managed to keep interested (I wouldn't) the final product would probably be poor and full of hacks. So this way I just focus more on the features and slowly build up. If the games end up playable great, if not I still learned and gained something from it anyway. (I am going to try to make them at least complete, I haven't finished anything yet so that would also be some good experience for me I think.) What do you guys think? Does it sound practical?
  9. I am currently working on my own Game Engine. I plan on making both 2D and 3D games (though as time goes on I think I will end up focusing more on 3D). What would be the best way to implement this? Two separate engines: one 2D and the other 3D or One engine that can handle both I am afraid of over-generalizing the engine and making it worse by trying to cram them both into one engine. On the other hand, it would be a real duplication of effort. Worst of all, wasted if I abandon one or the other But I am leaning toward the latter anyway. I think it would be easier to develop and to switch from one to the other. And a 3D engine needs 2D anyway for HUDs and stuff, so I'm not sure if a separate engine for it would even make sense. What are your opinions on this?
  10. I am currently playing around with creating a game engine of my own. I have, until now, used .x models. It was quite simple with the built in functionality DirectX provides. But recently I have been moving towards OpenGL. I have also started noticing that .x popularity and support is down. So I am looking for a new model format. Even with libs such as 3dslib, 3ds loading is a pain. I tried Collada, that was a nightmare. (I realize now that it was not meant to be used directly anyway, oh well) But I have seen some advocate a custom format. I am (at first) just planning on creating a really basic testing game, composed primarily of cubes. As such, I don't think that I will need anything more complex than a .obj. My problem will arise when I need something more complex, such as animation. So: What is best? Using an established format, or rolling out my own? (First by using plain .obj but then slowing adding my own functionality to it) (Sorry for the long post without much of a question, I guess what I really want is just some reassurance from the community and to see if there is a general consensus on what is the best course of action)
  11. [quote]Also, if you really want to ( reinvent | Improve ) the wheel i suggest you first craft an OS independent graphics abstraction layer, and then build your text editor on top of it. Currently, I only work with Direct3D & GDI , although i guess you can use very easily OpenGL for this task. Then you can embed it wherever you want.[/quote] Although that's quite an interesting idea, it's a bit more than what I'm aiming to do for now. I think I'll use wxWidgets and either wxTextCtrl or Scintilla/SciTE. (Still haven't decided...) Thanks for the help guys!
  12. I looked at both Qt and wxWidgets, it looks like Qt is easier but wxWidgets is faster and more powerful. Which means I am leaning toward wxWidgets. They can both create the natural menus and text boxes. My problem is that Qt and wxWidgets have pretty much full text editors in one function, Scintilla and all. But the point was to start with a basic one like what Win32 gives you and build on it myself. (Unless I'm wrong of course and they provide more basic alternatives, but I didn't find that.) Is there any other way, with or without a windowing toolkit? Something that gives you a basic natural-looking text box that I can improve on myself, like Win32/MFC would give, but platform independent?
  13. I am trying to make a cross-platform text editor. I'm really just in the initial design stages but I think I already hit a problem. Using Win32 to create the menu items and text box would be relatively easy, but it kills platform independence. I could use SDL, it would be much simpler to create window, I could also remove the frame, create my own menu, and make it look all sexy. The problem is the actual text editor. SDL_ttf wouldn't work so great compared to native Win32. What's my best option to do this? Is it possible to use Win32/MFC for the text editing with SDL for window management and stuff? What would replace Win32/MFC on Linux/Mac?