• 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.

Christian Thorvik

Members
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

174 Neutral

About Christian Thorvik

  • Rank
    Member
  1. This is not such a good solution, though. With this method you can't adjust the speed of something. Of course, if you have no need to adjust the speed, like in a runner, this would be fine, but otherwise you would have to have all objects moving at a static speed, and you would have to set the right offset for every object. One way you could solve this is to have a ray cast between the current and last position and check if the ray collides with anything, and if it does, just set the position of the object to where the collision occured and resolve your collision from there.
  2. Each ship part would have a transform that specifies its offset from the ship's local origin. With a suitable vector/matrix math library, it should be relatively easy to overlay the additional parts onto the base enemy structure - which itself might just be a part, just with a transform that does nothing! Just to expand upon this answer, if rotations are not needed, you could just specify the center of your ship as an origin point, and then draw the parts of the ship at an offset from the origin. For example: If you have your origin at your ships center, then you could draw a part of the ship at origin - part.offset. This way the parts will always be drawn at the offset specified for any given part.     The other way you could this is to create the Objects with the ship, by for example including them in a list in your ship class,  and then just update the positions of the Objects with the origin and offsets. The advantage of this would be that you could have each part behave differently and animate while still being attached to the ship, so just having more customization really. I think the method you described would be faster, but I don't imagine either method will make much of a difference performance wise unless you're thinking of having thousands of ships on-screen.   Good luck with your game
  3. I assume the video is not from your game?   You could make your ships have multiple hitboxes, and when one has lost all its health it triggers the event that makes the ship lose the part the hitbox was hitboxing (?) for. Then the easiest way would probably be to make the ship consist out of multiple animated sprites (just make a class, like ShipPart or something like that) that you can easily make fall off. Or you could have multiple ship sprites for different damage conditions, and then when the wing falls off just create a new game object where the wing was.   I probably explained that quite badly, but I was a bit confused by the question. If you could elaborate a bit, that would be great :)
  4. Yes, that is my plan. I haven't had time to start yet, but I think I'm gonna use this opportunity to properly learn hlsl shaders. I've been meddling a bit with them, but not enough to properly understand them, so it'll be fun :)
  5. I'm pretty certain that I'm drawing everything correctly. I've found out that I can draw aound 100 000 sprites on my test project before it slows down, though. There must have been some slowdown on my computer when I tested.   Here is the draw code on my test project: GraphicsDevice.Clear(Color.CornflowerBlue); // TODO: Add your drawing code here spriteBatch.Begin(); for (int i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { spriteBatch.Draw(pixel, rect, Color.ForestGreen); } spriteBatch.End(); base.Draw(gameTime); Rect and pixel are created in the initialization, and are never changed after that.
  6. Thanks for the answer, I'll look into that then. If I want collision detection etc, I'll just have a seperate list for collidable particles and do them normally on the cpu, I guess :)
  7. Yes, but I'm using additive blending. I didn't get any difference in FPS from other blend modes, or just plain spriteBatch.Begin(), though, so that doesn't seem to be the problem.
  8. I'm trying to make a particle system, but I'm having problems when drawing. At around 30 000 particles the program slows down. So I tested by making a new empty program with only a for loop drawing a single pixel texture. I found out that when drawing around 60 000 times it slows down drastically from 60 to 30 FPS. Yet theres videos of particle systems that can handle up to a million particles (not my goal, but at least 100 000 would be nice). How is that possible? Do I have to use pixel shaders or something? And if so, isn't spriteBatch already a shader, and should I just write my own spriteBatch instead then?
  9. I got it working! Thanks a lot for your help!   I'm going to try to explain what I did, so that others trying to achieve the same might benefit from it   First I create a child object I place it at the mousepos entity.childObjects.Add = new Rectangle(ms.X, ms.Y, size.X, size.Y); Then I store the distance between the childObject and the Base of the parent (I use a list for this at the moment, but you should probably create a class for childObject and have all the information you need there) entity.ConnectionGap.Add(new Vector2(ms.X - entity.Base.X, ms.Y - entity.Base.Y)); In my entity class, this is what I do to get the right position. As I mentioned, it's probably better to create a childObject class, so that you won't need lots of different lists. for (int i = 0; i < childObjects.Count; i++) { Vector2 newPos = GetPositionOfSatellite(new Vector2(Base.X, Base.Y), new Vector2(ConnectionGap[i].X, ConnectionGap[i].Y).Length(), Vector2ToRadian(new Vector2(ConnectionGap[i].X, ConnectionGap[i].Y)) + Rotation); //I changed this method a little, because it inverted my coordinates for some reason childObjects[i] = new Rectangle((int)newPos.X, (int)newPos.Y, childObjects[i].Width, childObjects[i].Height); } private float Vector2ToRadian(Vector2 direction)         {             return (float)Math.Atan2(direction.Y, direction.X);         } I hope I explained the well enough, and that someone will benefit from it
  10. Thanks for the answer :)   I don't have time to code anything at the moment, though, but I think can figure it out from here, so thanks for the help :)
  11. I'm trying to make an entity system where the entity can have multiple components, like arms and legs, or weapon attachments, but I can't figure out how to get all of the components to stay in the right position when the entity is rotated.   With the code I currently have, the rotation works, but I can't place the components where they are supposed to be. When I try to place the component at the mouse position it doesn't go where it is supposed to, and rather seems to stick to a circle path.                   Vector2 newPos = new Vector2(Base.X, Base.Y);                 newPos.X += (float)(PositionRelativeToBase.X * Math.Cos(Rotation - MathHelper.ToRadians(PositionRelativeToBase.Y)));                 newPos.Y += (float)(PositionRelativeToBase.X * Math.Sin(Rotation - MathHelper.ToRadians(PositionRelativeToBase.Y)));   This is code that I found elsewhere, though, so I don't understand it entirely, so I can't really explains my thoughts behind it.