• 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.

CRACK123

Members
  • Content count

    750
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

235 Neutral

About CRACK123

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Or you could try using something like the following :- bool DirectInput::keyDown(char key) { if(!isPressed) { isPressed = (mKeyboardState[key] & 0x80); } return isPressed; } bool DirectInput::keyUp(char key) { isPressed = (mKeyboardState[key] & 0x80); }
  2. Quote:Original post by Scrut lol can i make a game cmon man would i post this if i could not. how can you not make a game with a user interface\Physics\AI\Script\Graphics\Input\Sound\Networking then just add ur own game specific types well then yes u can make a game easy. ok i see what ur all saying without posting my code or more details ur not ganna get where with such a high level view so ill come back when i have some projects done showing how its used and ill just let you download it and reference the games code, but ill leave the engine code out of course nnot ganna give that away i dont care if it sucks i dont let people see my code ever Seems like you don't understand. Basic reason to make a game engine is to simplify making a game. Once you understand that, writing a game engine makes more sense. Lets take a few scenarios :- Can I make a game in which I would need to trigger events, activate doors, press buttons in a level, pick up objects, animate characters, blend animations, have different kinds of cameras. Or do I have to write the code for all this? What is the difference between AI and script. What does AI do and what does script do. Can I do things like path navigation or does the AI mean simple finite state machine AI. Does your user interface support breaking the image into smaller segments of data or does it only work with few single images. What kind of font system is supported in your user interface? Is there a way to create my own font style in your code. Other than that does it support only bitmap fonts or does it also support true type fonts. What kind of networking do you support. Can I have 200-300 clients connected at a time. In a client server model, how are you supporting prediction or is it left up to end users to worry about it. What kind of lighting models do you support? Simple vertex lighting, light mapping, HDR etc. If the answers to most of that is - I have to write it myself, might as well write the game before making the engine and then make it more generic and evolve that into an engine.
  3. I have a million dollar question - Can you make a game with this? If the answer is no - you are doing it wrong. And yeah please improve your English if you want some serious answers. A lot of professionals from different countries visit these forums so trying to speak too cleverly can jeopardize your chances of getting them to take you seriously.
  4. Quote:Original post by zerotri So if I were to call the constructor in a child class like so: *** Source Snippet Removed *** It would call the abstracted base version of initialize rather than the child class' version? Interesting. Gotta fix the design of that class a bit then. Another odd thing to me is that if I prefix the original line to call initialize with 'this->' it won't give me the warning anymore, but also won't link if I try to build using a child class. EDIT: the linker error may have been due to me not prefixing the virtual functions in the child class with the word 'virtual'. Can't test now because I've changed the code a bit to fix another problem in the design. Thanks! The child class need not have virtual in the function prototype. It will be considered virtual if the base class only has it as well. However avoid calling virtual functions in a constructor. Its a bad design. Secondly as the previous posted pointed out why do you have initialize as a virtual function and aren't just doing things in the constructor.
  5. There are ways - one way is a singleton class. But it brings with it its own set of problems as well. Another option is as you said don't create more than one which also brings its own set of problems. There probably are a few more but I will let you search for them :). All have certain pros and cons - in the end you should make an informed decision on what you choose and why.
  6. I would suggest using windbg and getting familiar with it. WIll help you track down memory issues
  7. Quote:Original post by LessBread Quote:Original post by CRACK123 Quote:Original post by LessBread Yelling is doing something. It's not always the most effective thing to do, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. In a representative system, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Right now in the US the squeaky wheel is the tea party people and with the election of Scott Brown, they're getting heard. I will agree yelling is doing something. But at the same time if they aren't doing anything but yelling means they are doing nothing. On the same note - do the ones yelling understand what they are all yelling about? Does anyone who give out fliers understand why they are protesting from a scientific viewpoint. From my understanding after talking to them I realized they don't even understand basics of why global warming happens. They asked me - do you know about global warming, frankly I did say - no and I would like to know why. I was asked to go to a website. Your logic is self-contradictory. If yelling is doing something, then doing noting but yelling is still doing something. I don't know if leafletters understand what they are protesting from a scientific viewpoint but the notion that they must is vapid. A person doesn't need to understand the chemistry of combustion to ring a fire alarm bell. Just because they referred you to a website doesn't mean they didn't understand the basics of global warming. Quote:Original post by CRACK123 Yelling without knowing the reason as to why you are yelling is analogous to monkeys experiment of coporporate policy I see a different analogy at work in that joke, where you are the experimenter spraying water on an organization you disapprove of because such disapproval is the way it’s always been done around here. I think you missed the point I was trying to make. However I was making the same analogy that you see in that joke i.e. green peace always did it this way (we don't know why they do it this way), but because we have done it this way we will follow suit. However I am not that much against their protest as such as I did say before. What I am against is i) their way of protest and ii) protesting without any scientific basis. The person who was actually giving out the leaflet probably did not know and was just getting paid some thing to do the job and probably wasn't a green peace activist. But the so called activist who are getting paid to go to companies and promote greenpeace have no clue about it whatsoever. Now I do see a big problem there. And no I don't want to go to website if the activist talking about global warming has no clue as to why it happens/how someone can help solve it. I don't expect them to have all the answers but I do expect them to have some understanding of what/why they are trying to do whatever they are doing.
  8. Quote:Original post by Rydinare I think there was some good advice in this thread, so I'll try to avoid repeating those points too much, but just add my experiences. First, there a few things to keep in mind is that there's different levels of non-optimal code code. One level is simply not following best practices. Another is okay code which is not efficient/optimal, but achieves the purpose (e.g.: all variables passed by value, even large classes with expensive copy operations). Another is outright spaghetti/Machiavelli style code -- where "it works" sometimes and with care, but it's disgusting and a big ball of mud that is hard to maintain. In the third scenario, bug fixes sometimes take a week, because the code was not architected correctly. Obviously, depending on which has a factor in how you should react. The next thing to consider is what you have power to change. Are you simply "a" developer, or are you a lead? If you're a developer, the best thing to do is to take it slow. You need to build up allies and slowly bring about change. Note that no matter what, you'll never get the ultimate result and vision that you have; this can just never happen and is not a team oriented point of view. But, with some work, you can achieve compromise. Wait until a specific problem comes up that you or another member discovers and suggest a solution that fits your vision. Some of the time your vision will fall on deaf ears and sometimes it won't. One way to guarantee it falls on deaf ears is to insult something that that person finds dear, such as their specific code or a C-like programming style. The thing here to remember is you don't have the power to make the change, so simply put, it's not your problem. Just try to work within your bubble and improve things where you can. Now, if you're a lead, you may be surprised, but it is actually more difficult. Just because you have the power to change things, doesn't mean you should do so recklessly. I speak from experience. Eliminate the ridiculous, but do so with care. If you change things too fast you'll probably lose your team. So, pick the three biggest problems and ignore personal style. Your goal is to integrate with the team. Your temptation will be to fix more at once, but doing so won't work out. Fix small things one at a time, and aim for collaboration, only putting force when people are being stubborn. Back up all arguments with evidence and specific instances where they would help. Small things, just a few at a time. But, honestly, the more teams I work on, the more I realize that a lot of developers write crappy code. The fact is that we all have different skill sets. So you might find someone who is an MFC expert, but because of that expertise doesn't follow C++ best practices at all. The more I work, the more tolerant of it I become, even though I secretly know that they're not coding as well as they could. I think you ultimately learn to work around code and slowly help fix it in specific instances. I think the purist in me wants to fix everything, but the pragmatist knows its not possible, and so you just learn to deal with it and wear your code beer goggles, where everything looks workable and move on. I've only worked with a minority of developers who were well read enough to try to follow best practices whenever they could. That's my take, anyway. Best of luck. I wanted to add to this and hence have quoted you fully again. Wherever I have worked i.e. in all software companies at least one person has always been of the view that code should be rewritten as its a pile of junk. And this has always been the lesser experienced ones. Rewriting code is not a solution most of the times - either you are locked onto a deadline which won't allow it or there are other pragmatic reasons why you are not allowed to do it. However if you did rewrite it - someone will hate the rewritten code. Good programmers always want to fix things, but good and experienced programmers always know that its a huge task and should be done in subtle and slow ways. Not just jump at the code and say it is shit and we are going to rewrite it. Now coming to published games - this is how I see it. I worked on two published games in one company - one which had a very good look and feel but had shit code. Many of us wanted to rewrite a lot of it - we did rewrite many parts which were horribly buggy, however what was workable was left it as it is. But when you have a deadline looming over your head, its not too much you can do. And the other game was which looked bad but the code was absolutely a beauty. Very minimal bugs. Which was accepted more heartily by the publisher and customers? The answer is obvious. Now ideally it would be useful for it be both but more often than not its just a balance.
  9. Quote:Original post by LessBread Yelling is doing something. It's not always the most effective thing to do, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. In a representative system, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Right now in the US the squeaky wheel is the tea party people and with the election of Scott Brown, they're getting heard. I will agree yelling is doing something. But at the same time if they aren't doing anything but yelling means they are doing nothing. On the same note - do the ones yelling understand what they are all yelling about? Does anyone who give out fliers understand why they are protesting from a scientific viewpoint. From my understanding after talking to them I realized they don't even understand basics of why global warming happens. They asked me - do you know about global warming, frankly I did say - no and I would like to know why. I was asked to go to a website. Yelling without knowing the reason as to why you are yelling is analogous to monkeys experiment of coporporate policy
  10. Quote:Original post by Gorg I personally think the word refactoring does not need to exists. We always write bad code. It's almost impossible to have all the right names,function, class when you are writing something. It evolves as you add things and it will most likely end up as somewhat of a mess. The key is once you are done with a piece of code, then *immediately* go back and clean it up. i.e. Break up large functions, rename things that have bad names, create classes for group of functions that works on the same data, etc. The longest one to do is extracting classes because it requires a more in-depth analysis of the functions, but all the others are simply cosmetic. It usually takes no more than 10-20 minutes for the quick polishing. So to me, refactoring *is* software development and as such the word is unnecessary. If you inherit bad code and if management refuses to give you some time to improve it then you are screwed, but it can be slowly revived if you get the opportunity. The key is just doing little things, mostly cosmetic, not trying to change the entire structure. This is how I usually approach this. If you have a function that's too big, then I first read through the function linearly and take every 5-10 lines of code, guessing what they do and create a function with those lines. The beauty of this approach is the code still runs perfectly , especially if you use the "extract method" option in visual studio. After it's all done, you end up with more manageable functions and it is easier to understand what it does and move code around to give it a better structure. If you have a mess of interacting classes, then what I do, is merge them all So if function Y from class A, calls function X on class B, I simply take code from function X and put it inline inside of function Y. If some member variable of B is used in X, then I copy it in A. Also, if function X calls function Z on class C, then I also move the code to class A. It's a judgement call how deep you should go. Once that done, I take the newly created gigantic function in class A and just break it down again. This whole process is much easier if you have tests, because you can do all that and still have the code fully functional by tweaking the tests, but I had success without. That is how most experienced programmers approach this issue. Fix a part of the code, move on, Fix another part of the code and move on. However first thing to fix in any new code base you inherit is - any random or frequent crashes (fix the source of the crash). However this might be much harder than it looks because it simply is a new code base which you have little understanding of.
  11. Quote:Original post by Lode Uhh, in your list, aren't 1, 2, 5 and 7 exactly the same? 1 is about their talk of increasing people awareness, 2 is about how they think about local government policies, 5 is about their thinking and 7 as you say is probably a redundant statement. Quote:Original post by Lode Personally my problem with "Green" people, is that they don't understand technology, and propose solutions that would make it worse instead of better or solutions that cost way too much to the economy for what they're worth. My point exactly, how do you solve a problem when you never understood the problem itself.
  12. Quote:Original post by LessBread I think Greenpeace does god's work. I like that they are anti-nuclear. They don't support eco-terrorism (a term dripping with Orwellian overtones). Quote: 1. They are only interested in the global world. They will not work at the grass roots level nor at the local city level to increase awareness or whatever they are trying get everyone aware about. 2. They want to save the environment at the global world level. But they will not do anything about the government cutting trees in their own cities. 5. Apparently in their eyes the world is global village and is not an amalgamation of various countries/cities/villages put together. 7. Apparently they want to change the world, but don't care about trying to change the small things and environmental issues and whatever they talk about right in their own surroundings. These complaints all appear to be the same. Greenpeace is focused on exposing global environmental problems. So unless your local environmental problems are global in scope, don't expect them to be organizing block parties to fight local government or business. If you're angry with the local government for cutting down trees, or what have you, join a local opposition group or organize your own. Don't expect Greenpeace to carry your water for you. Quote: 3. They will only do things in the way of campaign and protests. Their way is the only way of doing things. 5. Criticism is not accepted. You are not allowed to criticize them for showing that if you can't take care of your own backyard, you can't take care of the world. 6. Although they want to educate the public in terms of whatever they do, when asked what is it that you actually do and what is this global warming you talk of. They stare at you with a blank face and say I don't know. So they are educating the public of what exactly ?? And they also refuse to educate the public on a one on one basis. Basically they refuse to go on a campaign from house to house (i.e. selecting one district at a time) but want to do a campaign. Some politician should really show them how to do a successful, good and non-violent campaign. These complaints all appear to be the same - and similar to the above group of complaints. You appear to be upset that they won't follow your advice and do what you think they ought to do. Why should they listen to you? Have you been fighting the local fight? the global fight? Have you been giving them massive amounts of cash for years? I think you are angry with them for tweaking your conscience and instead of getting involved in whatever local issues anger you, you would rather turn your bad conscience into resentment that you can focus on them in an online rant. Quote: 4. Their non-violent way protests are i) Dumping the dumped waste in front of government office. ii) Going on top of the UK parliament iii) Throwing the scrapped PC's in front of the office of a manufacturer. In my opinion this is violent and basically aggression which I would not have taken lightly. In their opinion it's not violent. For them violence is intentional injury or damage done to human beings or animals. So unless the dumped waste lands on someone's head on purpose, they don't see it as violent. It appears that you would have the police respond to their protests with violence. Do intermittent disruptions to the normal social order disturb you that much? Quote: 8. Lastly what got me really pissed was - they claim that a normal human being who drive a tuk-tuk/Truck/Taxi in India don't understand this topic. Apparently its too complicated for the ones who do such things for a livelihood to understand. From my experience with most of the guys who drive tuk-tuk/truck/taxi in India are forced to do it for a living. Its not that they do it by choice. Many are even educated but life played a bad trick on them and they are forced to use that as a means of livelihood. And they do understand a lot of these issues and take measures however small to solve it in their own way. Life played a bad trick on them? Was that in a card game or something? [grin] What small measures do Indian taxi drivers take to solve this topic (presumably global warming)? I'd like to know more about that. Well, frankly when they come down to my office and then expect 5 minutes of my time and get criticism from me and then I get a response that "Well, you are only criticizing our way of work, so we don't have the time to talk to you.(this was said literally - I am giving it you verbatim), then I have little respect for whatever they do/want to do. I don't have an issue with what they are trying to do, but telling me local people do not understand is not a failure of the local people, but the failure of the people trying to educate them. How is it that green peace people are unable to make these people aware but simple non government organization have been able to get the same local people that green peace claims don't understand to plant tress, help in plantations, help building parks, help keep certain areas clean and more. Now regarding their way of working - as far as I know parliament area, military and defence areas etc are very high security zones. Doing a protest in the way they are i.e. climbing up a parliament building etc are high security risks and I don't see anything wrong if government decided to take drastic action there. How can you care about environment when you don't care about normal human safety. Now coming to dumping, simply put how would it feel if I dumped all my garbage in front of your house just to protest that you are throwing garbage in some river? What would you do if I did that. Obviously not stop throwing garbage in the river - but definitely call up the local authorities and complain. Also, it would make me no different than you. By the way I could push that into a zone of intentional mental trauma. That is clearly intentional injury although not in the physical sense. Intermittent disruptions to normal social order hardly is an issue anymore - I have seen mob lynching, people being burnt alive in their vehicles due to religious wars, a city being turned into a war zone, public vehicles being destroyed for the idiotic reasons like we want our own state in this country stupidity. I have got used to this social disorder or whatever you feel like naming it. Coming to what these taxi drivers have done - okay maybe not too much, but most of them do help in tree planting, they do keep flower pots and maintain them in their houses, sometimes help in removal of trees when they are thrown all around on the roads in huge rain, sometimes help in cleaning a drain, and most of all they actually try and keep the surroundings around their house a bit clean (and no I am not talking about slum dwellers - I am talking of those who live in some small concrete house). You might be alarmed/amazed to know that most of them at least try. And many actually understand this problem. They aren't ignorant fools who won't listen if you explain it to them. Coming to me and my conscience - yeah I have been fighting the local fight of people throwing rubbish on the roads. It started with my relatives itself where sometimes they asked me to do such things or throwing rubbish just like the rest do. After explaining it to them countless times, they follow suit and throw it in areas stipulated for trash. I have also explained to countless colleagues in various companies where they have followed. Neither do I care for anyone knowing about it nor will I bother you with a piece of paper telling you I did this. I don't need the fame and noise about all this - nor do I expect people to give me money for doing it, nor do I need to go in campaigns to protest against people doing it. Rather I will go around educating as many as I can about it and hope that they will do the same and maybe in 10-20 years a lot of people will be doing it. There are lots of NGO's who are doing work for climate change, global warming or whatever you want to name it. Why don't these same green peace guys work with them and see how exactly they manage to solve/get these politicians and people to look at the so called problems without ever having to resort to this stupidity called protest.
  13. Well my biggest issue with them was they think protesting is the only way and anyone who criticizes them does not understand anything at all. Coming from a clean, green city myself and knowing a lot of people who are/were scientists for wood and science and environment and with a few known ones in government, all I can say is it was a saddening to see these idiots down at office who have no clue about environment or climate or whatever they are trying get people to sign up for. Having spoken to a few in the government, its not that they don't do anything, its just that it takes a lot more time than normal.
  14. I am probably opening a can of worms here but there were a few green peace activists that have come down to our office. In my opinion they shouldn't even have been allowed into the building but the administration department let them in anyway. So I was going my way signing and walking into office and they were at the door and asked me to spend 5 minutes of my time. Thinking I should be nice to people in office and in general, I gave them the 5 minutes of my time and came out with the following impression of greenpeace. The list is the following and is pretty long considering I spoke to them only about environment and their way is not acceptable to me. 1. They are only interested in the global world. They will not work at the grass roots level nor at the local city level to increase awareness or whatever they are trying get everyone aware about. 2. They want to save the environment at the global world level. But they will not do anything about the government cutting trees in their own cities. 3. They will only do things in the way of campaign and protests. Their way is the only way of doing things. 4. Their non-violent way protests are i) Dumping the dumped waste in front of government office. ii) Going on top of the UK parliament iii) Throwing the scrapped PC's in front of the office of a manufacturer. In my opinion this is violent and basically aggression which I would not have taken lightly. 5. Criticism is not accepted. You are not allowed to criticize them for showing that if you can't take care of your own backyard, you can't take care of the world. 5. Apparently in their eyes the world is global village and is not an amalgamation of various countries/cities/villages put together. 6. Although they want to educate the public in terms of whatever they do, when asked what is it that you actually do and what is this global warming you talk of. They stare at you with a blank face and say I don't know. So they are educating the public of what exactly ?? And they also refuse to educate the public on a one on one basis. Basically they refuse to go on a campaign from house to house (i.e. selecting one district at a time) but want to do a campaign. Some politician should really show them how to do a successful, good and non-violent campaign. 7. Apparently they want to change the world, but don't care about trying to change the small things and environmental issues and whatever they talk about right in their own surroundings. 8. Lastly what got me really pissed was - they claim that a normal human being who drive a tuk-tuk/Truck/Taxi in India don't understand this topic. Apparently its too complicated for the ones who do such things for a livelihood to understand. From my experience with most of the guys who drive tuk-tuk/truck/taxi in India are forced to do it for a living. Its not that they do it by choice. Many are even educated but life played a bad trick on them and they are forced to use that as a means of livelihood. And they do understand a lot of these issues and take measures however small to solve it in their own way. So well, this was the same response got from 8 people of green peace who had come down. So, I was just wondering what do you guys think of green peace. [Edited by - CRACK123 on January 28, 2010 11:30:48 AM]
  15. Quote:Original post by Yann L I don't really like spending a lot of time in my car. I used to enjoy driving, but that kind of vanished. I just want to get from point A to B in minimal time. The place where I live is about 160 km from the next major 'city' (so to speak - pop. 300k). The next large international airport is 550 km away. My workplace is about 85km from my home. It's a misconception that everything in Europe is close to each other. While it is true in some more tightly packed areas, it's certainly not everywhere. Just ask the Scandinavians. Now, while these are still not really huge distances, they're large enough to be annoying to drive. Oh, and I don't have a small car ;) 85 Kms to work and the distance is not large ?? You obviously haven't been to my country(India) where 10-15 km's to work is far by all magnitudes. It would be a nightmare even to dream of driving 85Kms for work here everyday. Even freddie won't be required to make your dream a nightmare if I even have to ponder about such a thought.