• 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.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

282 Neutral

About matrisking

  • Rank
  1. Thanks for all the help/feedback.  You guys have given me a lot to think about and consider when designing this.   As far as Hodgman's point that there are different reasons to pursue ECS, I'd have to admit that my reason seems more basic than any of the ones he listed.  It simply seems like a nice, clean alternative to rigid inheritiance heirarchies or potentially problematic multiple inheritance situations.  Does this seem like a strong enough justification for the system in and of itself?   Also, in light of this fairly general goal, what are the pros and cons of storing the components within entities as opposed to in containers or structures that exist outside of the entities?   I'll keep hackin away and update this thread if more questions surface.
  2. Hey everyone, I've been reading up on the Entity Component System paradigm ( http://www.gamedev.net/topic/643095-good-articles-on-entity-components-systems/ has been very helpful) and I think I understand everything I need to implement it except for one thing: Where do the components "live"? Getting into implementation specifics, I'll be writing this in C++. So, for the sake of example, let's say I have a position component, a velocity/movement component, and a motion system which acts on both components. Would it make sense for each entity to have a data member container consisting of pointers to components? If so, how would the motion system keep track of which entities have position and velocity/movement components? Or maybe a better way of phrasing the question is: How does the motion system keep track of which components it needs to iterate over when it runs? When I look at diagrams and read articles about ECS, everything seems to make sense to me. But when I sit down with a pen and paper and try to map out the class relationships, my level of understanding starts to break down. Thanks! Edit: I've thought about this a little bit more, and maybe the a good approach would be to have each system contain a container of pointers to entities that contain a matching set of components. This would mean that every time an entity adds or removes a component, it would have to be examined by each system to determine if it contains the right components to be used by that system. However, this also means that each system doesn't have to go through and check EVERY entity to see if it has the right components in every iteration of the game loop. Thoughts? Am I heading down the wrong path?
  3. What is the long term goal of this series?  I'm in the process of learning Win32 and DX11, so I was excited to see the headline of this article.  However, as I'm skimming through it, it looks to me like the format is geared more towards providing a code sample for people to look at rather than writing a comprehensive explanation of the concepts.     The only explanations I can find in any level of detail are in the code's comments. While some may find that useful in its own right, I don't know if I would really call this an "article" as much as I'd call it a "code sample"
  4. It's tough to say without knowing a little bit more about how things are structured, but my first thought would be to do something like this:   Set a variable that represents the odds a bot should appear in a given game frame, let's say it should be 0.1%, so:   BOT_SPAWN_CHANCE = 1   Then, somewhere in your main game loop, just run pick a random number between 0 and 999, let's call it "r", and spawn a bot if r is less than the spawn chance:   if ( r < BOT_SPAWN_CHANCE )   spawn_bot()   This is a pretty basic way of doing it but maybe it will work for you. 
  5.   In my opinion, this is somewhat subjective advice and should be taken with a grain of salt.  Programming languages are tools, and I agree with the sentiment that if you already know how to use a tool to accomplish your goal, it might be a good idea to just go ahead and start hacking away.  Game development is difficult enough without throwing the complexities of C++ into the mix at the same time.   However, if you're thinking long term and you have the patience, building super basic games in C++ as you learn the language might not be a bad way to start.  It's a pretty powerful tool to have in your belt for a number of reasons.  Just my 2 cents.
  6.   I'm the words of Bill Lumbergh: "Yyyyyeahhhh... I'm going to go ahead and sort of disagree with you."   It's interesting advice, but highly subjective and probably better suited for a thread on game design than one on game programming.  Not every game is meant to be highly immersive, so unless immersion is your top priority I personally would just go with whatever's most fun.   (ugh and sorry, I just can't help myself: sure it makes sense for a thief to attack you with a rusty dagger if that's the only weapon he knows how to use and/or is able to equip  )
  7. I prefer the first one as well.  Like you said, I think it's much easier to quickly visualize how blocks are nested.  I tend to use curly braces even for one line blocks just because I find it easier to read.  The biggest counter-argument I've heard is that you can fit more lines of code on your screen using the latter.     However, as you seem to be aware, it's a highly subjective topic that will cause a flame war as often as not.  Here's the most "objective" answer you're going to get:   If you're programming by yourself, use whatever is easiest for you to read. If you're creating something new that involves other people, agree on a set of standards when you're planning the project and stick to them. If you're working with an existing code base, adapt to the existing code standards for that project.  
  8. No offense to the OP, but the premise of this thread seems a little strange to me.  As someone already mentioned, if you're just looking for a change of pace or if you're not enjoying C++, then by all means start fresh with something else.   However, don't discount the lessons that you learned by going through learning something the "wrong" way (however you define it) and then starting to correct the course.  You probably learned more than you realized and if you know enough to realize that there was a better way of doing things,  then you probably gained some valuable insights in making those discoveries.   I think statements like "I really don't want to go through C++ again." are a little off.  It's not like anyone "goes through" a language and then is "done."  With whatever language(s) you decide on, just remember to approach learning as an ongoing process and not something you "finish" with.