JanCorazza

Members
  • Content count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

113 Neutral

About JanCorazza

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. I am looking for the simplest possible Java 2D graphics library.   The only feature I need is drawing geometric primitives: mainly rectangles that have been rotated, and circles. I also need some essential features, such as setting the FPS, creating the window and detecting when it was closed.   I will be using it for drawing a simulation that is running. It has to allow me an update() method that I can call like LWJGL, and not like Slick2D that takes this mechanism away from me.   Please suggest something for me, better yet, post tutorials! It has to be simple because I have like two days to create a graphical frontend for my application. A great example is the Pygame Python library - simple, intuitive, and well-documented.   I have tried: LWJGL: definitely not. OpenGL is too complex for what I need and I don't know it. Slick2D: too restrictive, doesn't fit my model. Java 2D API: too complex, I don't have time to learn what JPanel, JFrame, JApplet, JWhatever are and how and when I should extend them, also it's very unintuitive, and with very bad tutorials. Thanks!
  2. [quote name='speciesUnknown' timestamp='1340641132' post='4952692'] Try out box2dweb, its the as3 version of box2d converted into JS. The way they work is that you put bodies into the physics world, and then step the physics simulation - it will resolve collisions and things to give you the new position of your rigid bodies. Let your logic entities put rigid bodies into the physics scene when they are added to the world, and remove them when they are removed from the world. When you update, update the physics system first, and then let your logic entities get their new positions from their rigid body or bodies. This will all make sense once you have done it for real. [/quote] So basically the physics engines don't and shouldn't work with real game entities, but abstractions? I'll look into the API, because that would be great!
  3. I posted this on GDSE as well, but it might be "too discussiony" for that site... I'm making a game engine, but I would like to have the physics part handled by professionally built physics engines, because I couldn't do it my self. My engine supports Scene handling, Cameras, and has a Renderer. Also, it has a class called Drawable, which has the positions and the picture of an object. The picture property has width, height, rotation and a draw method. All game objects are supposed to inherit from this Drawable class, and are added to the Scene, along with a Map (collection of Tiles, that also inherit from Drawable), lights, and so on and so forth. I am considering adding a shape property (user-defined polygon) to the Drawable class as well, which would be used for shadows and such. I am asking this question with a premise that most physics engines work in a similar way, and impose similar limitations. Is there anything I can do to make my engine more compatible wuth those physics engines? Edit: what exactly do physics engines need to control? For example, if a physics engine supported a way of creating objects with position and shape(bounding box?) properties, that would be in obvious collision with my model, where Drawables had their pos and shape properties.
  4. Jamal i Masle, jeb'te se.
  5. Virtual Console gaming

    And what stops them from doing just that on a "real" computer? Actually, what is your motivation for that? Because outside the Notch's game spectrum, it doesn't really make sense, you can do all those things in C, but with much more memory and a higher speed! Also, you might want to check out this indie gaming console, [url="http://the-nd.com/"]the nD[/url].
  6. Hello fellow game developers. I am in the process of designing a multiplayer, top-down (2D), match-making mecha game. The technology that will be used is HTML5 canvas on the client side, node.js on the server side and socket.io for communication over TCP (although I will probably switch to UDP, as it is more common for multiplayer games). I am not a designer, but a programmer, and this will be a relatively small game made just by me (although I might get other people to draw some sprites for me later). I'm still designing the game (trying to, at least), and I'm stuck on a progression system. By "progression system", I mean things like levels, experience, achievements, ranks, and that sort of thing. I've already decided that I will implement achievements in the game, but I'm not sure about the rest. Here are several models: [b]A.[/b][list=1] [*]Money is awarded for kills [*]XP is awarded at the end of the match [*]People buy upgrades and new weapons with money, and each level they get a "skill point" which they can spend on a small boost (+10% speed, for example) [/list] [b]B.[/b] The same as A, but XP is awarded for kills, and money is awarded at the end. [b]C[/b]. No money or XP, kills give you [i]honor[/i], and the only means of progression are ranks. All weapons are free at the start of the match. [b]D.[/b] Only money, no skill points. You have to buy weapons and upgrades. [b]E.[/b] Only XP, everyone is free to chose the weapons (as in C), they upgrade through skill points. I'm simply clueless as to which one is the best and why! I really don't want to separate the new players from the older ones, and things like levels and new weapons that are unlocked would do just that (especially if I have a small player base)! But then again, if I were to remove them, there would be no progress in the game, and it feels like the weapons would lose their value (not to mention the amount of balancing I would need to do to make all the weapons equal). Could you help me decide about the best progression system? I'm completely willing to change the current ones. I remembered Quake Live and Q3A while writing this, and it seems like they had a solution to this: the players don't progress at all, but they find weapons on the maps. I doubt that going in this direction would do me any good, though, because I think that I will not be able to make such big maps. It's a 2D top-down game, so space if kinda limited (not technically, but having big enough maps to hide weapons all over could probably mean that players would never find each other). [b]Edit:[/b] [url="http://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/30252/alternatives-to-a-leveling-system"]a relevant question on GDSE[/url].
  7. Bilo bi zakon da Tribes ima ne motionblurr, ne UNREAL IN YOUR FACE i hardware cursor support verziju klijenta...
  8. Object Oriented Jedi Luke: "You used to program." Ben: "I was once a software engineer the same as your father." Luke: "My father wasn't a software engineer. He was a custodian at Lockheed-Martin." Ben: "That's what your Uncle told you. He didn't hold with your father's ideals. He thought he should go to work, not get a degree." Luke: "I wish I had known him." Ben: "He was a cunning object-oriented analyst and the best systems programmer in the galaxy. I u...
  9. [X] Told [X] Really Told [X] TOLDASAURUS REX [X] Cash4told.com [X] No country for told men [X] Knights of the told Republic [X] ToldSpice [x] The Elder Tolds IV: Oblivious [x] Command & Conquer: Toldberian Sun [x] GuiTold Hero: World Told [x] Countold Strike [x] Legend of Toldgoon [x] Unreal Toldament [x] Stone-told Steve Austin [X] Half Life 2: Episode Told [x] World of Warcraft: Catoldclysm [X] Roller Coaster Toldcoon [x] Battletolds [x] S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shatold of Chernobyl [X] Toldasauraus...
  10. "You know he's got emotional problems, man!" "You mean like, beyond pacifism?!"
  11. Gledao sam Chasing Amy barem ?etiri puta, i tek sam sad skužio da se Jay i Silent Bob pojavljuju tamo. God damn it.
  12. Dobijemo ogromnu kartu svijeta u hodniku, i prva stvar koju randomly ?ujem je: "Hurr ima neko marker ajmo nacrtat kur?'nu na Srb'ju!!1"
  13. Where can I find free 3D models and other game assets?

    They all seem to be quite pricey.