*New freebasic.net BASIC Gamming Issue is out.

edited in Projects

Comments

  • Is this from the past?
    Thanked by 1mikegeyser
  • Issue 8 is from Sept 2012 (this month). I havent seen people using BASIC forever though.

    The articles could easily be used for learning and getting people started
  • edited
    :edited for anti nazi purity.

    There are many awesome examples ,demos and source code.

    Also FreeBasic and QB64 still gets used today.
    Many of them being enhanced and built up for the era.
    There are still huge communities out there that support it.

    http://games.freebasic.net/
  • Firstly: I have to point out that apostrophes (those weird ' things) are used to denote possession not plurality.

    Now not to feel like a grammar nazi dick.

    There isn't much point to using, or learning, BASIC. You might say that there are a substantial amount of games being produced in this format, but how many of those are products that earn their creator an income? I ask this simply because I have never heard of this happening.
  • edited
    Ohh.. sorry I thought this was Make Games SA.. not Make Money SA.
    I must have registered the wrong website.

    You see I can be a douche too... give me a reason to escalate this.
    I have done nothing to deserve this constant shit storm.
    I'll let you know there is a lot more skill involved using basic these days.

    For starters QB64 has taught me to make my own basic commands in C++ to extend QB64.

    GAME MAKER NEVER TAUGHT ME ANYTHING... EVER.

    Many many years ago.
    QB4.5 taught me how to use ASM to expand using lib's
    That got me a job programing micro controllers.

    The issue those days were memory limits due to the aged DOS code it was limited to 640KB program memory.

    Today those limits are in the past, it takes a lot more skill than what that BASIC word makes you think, you cannot compare it to duck tape development of GM for example.


  • Legion said:
    Ohh.. sorry I thought this was Make Games SA.. not Make Money SA.
    I must have registered the wrong website.
    I completely agree with this, I think this forum should be open to anyone that is willing to make games in all shapes and forms.
    Legion said:
    You see I can be a douche too... give me a reason to escalate this.
    I have done nothing to deserve this constant shit storm.
    I have to ask if you have attended one of the meetups yet(if you are lucky enough to live near one of the locations). The thing is that it is very difficult to convey passion and emotion through text alone, especially if the person is anonymous to you. If you know the people personnaly it becomes a lot easier to understand what they are trying to say.

    I get the feeling that people tend to talk past each other on this forum(sometimes). I believe it's because everyone is so passionate about games that whenever someone disagrees they feel rejected in some way. I don't know maybe I'm reading too much into this but please don't escalate. Rather retort or state your opinion so that we can have a productive discussion. :)
  • edited
    [quote = legion] Today those limits are in the past, it takes a lot more skill than what that BASIC word makes you think, you cannot compare it to duck tape development of GM for example[/quote]
    I didn't see your edit until after I posted, but I needed to mention something. From the posts you made on the forum I get the feeling that you are a very techincal minded person. But i have to stress the fact that making games does not equal writing software. Board games, card games, made up child games are all forms of games and if you make one of those then you have made a game without even touching an electronic device.

    So the reason people prefer GM over a lot of other tools is because it can get you to produce a game faster. It teaches you how to design games, not code them.

    Do you think that a game is less a game because it is not techincally excellent and sometimes creates situations were the excecution of the code is sub-optimal? If you do then I suggest you also try to find a community were optimal game code is a big drive. Not leave this one mind you, just find some other people that have a passion for optimal game code as well.
    Thanked by 1Tuism
  • +1 to making games for everyone
    +1 to making games with anything
    +1 for we're not here to "escalate", it's really not about kakking on some people and not others here, it's really just about making games.

    +1 for this community cares very little for "technical excellence", this one cares for "making excellent games as quickly and easily as possible". And if you understand that point of origination, you'll understand that people haven't been kakking on you, they've just been expressing their lack of care for "code skill", which you seem to care about a great deal.

    It's not personal, and it certainly isn't "this is right that is wrong", it's just a different focus. It's like going to a magic convention wanting to talk about chess.

    Sure, technical excellence could get you to a game eventually, but making a game gets you to a game quicker, which we like :)
    Thanked by 2Elyaradine dislekcia
  • @Legion my apologies, I did not intend to offend you. But I added something to the thread that I felt was necessary. Why?

    If some young aspirant were to wonder across and find BASIC, and think that this were a good way to get into making games I hope time had warped, and this webpage was in the 80s.
    Karuji said:
    I'm not trying to dissuade you from making your game. If it pleases you to make the engine than that's simple, you're happy.

    I shall, however, issue you a challenge to complete a fun game. In all honesty one of the greatest experiences I have had is seeing a person have fun playing my game. So as fun as making an engine may be seeing a person having fun with your game is a scale of magnitude greater experience.
    I said the above quote to you on the 26th of July 2012. My stance is still the same.

    But this is not a technical community, and you know this.

    The philosophy that is trying to be imparted is "Get it done, and make it fun."

    As someone who make's their income from making games, and cares about the growth of it in this country. I want aspirants to use the best tools to get things done, and make them fun. Because if games are not fun who will play them? And if no one plays the game then why make it.

    Disclaimer: Not all games need be fun. Games can be deep and wondering experiences that cast upon all spectra of human emotions and feelings. I believe the philosophy of the community is to make games with feeling, and give that to the player. Get it done, and make it fun just felt like a rather succinct way of saying that, and it rhymes :D
  • edited
    @Legion said:
    GAME MAKER NEVER TAUGHT ME ANYTHING... EVER.

    Many many years ago.
    QB4.5 taught me how to use ASM to expand using lib's
    That got me a job programing micro controllers.

    The issue those days were memory limits due to the aged DOS code it was limited to 640KB program memory.

    Today those limits are in the past, it takes a lot more skill than what that BASIC word makes you think, you cannot compare it to duck tape development of GM for example.
    I have no idea why you're so touchy. In fact, I don't get you at all... First, you go on and on about technical achievements that aren't actually achievements at all, seeing as anyone who can read can implement them. Next you start pilfering resources from Doom websites to use in a game that sounds so huge in its scope that I have no idea how you're going to finish the thing, especially if you need to "borrow" other people's art to do it. Finally, you have this weird fetish for a language that doesn't seem to have moved towards modern practices much... I had you pegged as an angry 15 year-old, given your previous thread, now you're telling me you're older, but you're not acting it. Calm down, dude.

    If you think that GM is "duct tape" coding, then it's obvious that you don't understand GM at all, so why should your opinion on BASIC be any sounder? I learned how to integrate assembler in Turbo Pascal, yet I don't use Pascal variants these days because they don't offer the suite of tools that I want my games to have access to. Sure, I could use Delphi, like many of my friends have, except so far only 1 of them has managed to make actual games with it and even then that took him years and years of struggling with engines and other waste of time code when I was lobbing out prototypes all the time thanks to more useful tools.

    So you like BASIC. That's cool and all, but I don't understand why you're not using DarkBASIC or one of its variants, which have been a lot more successful in terms of creating games - several huge casual games were built in DarkBASIC. Although maybe it's too much like "duct tape" coding? Which is kinda funny, considering QB64 outputs to C++ code first ;) Also, DarkBASIC does anaglyph too.

    Dude, if you'd just calm down and say something like "Hey, QB64 can let you re-play Nibbles and Gorillas, check it out!" then cool. Good luck with your game. And your tools. And your anger ;)
    @Karuji said:
    As someone who make's their income from making games
    @Karuji said:
    who make's their income
    @Karuji said:
    make's
    @Karuji said:
    make's
    Tut tut, yo.
  • @dislekcia I owe you a cookie — or confectionery treat — of your choice for that.
  • edited
    I'm not angry.
    I feel discriminated against for using what i like, I'm actually deeply depressed and disappointed.
    As I feel knocked in the crotch for doing what I thought was adding content to a games development website.

    But as I can see dislekcia just has beef with me because of a stupid miss posted PM on the NAG forum.

    It's best I leave and let everyone else enjoy them self's.



  • edited
    @Legion said:
    I'm not angry.
    I feel discriminated against for using what i like, I'm actually deeply depressed and disappointed.
    As I feel knocked in the crotch for doing what I thought was adding content to a games development website.

    But as I can see dislekcia just has beef with me because of a stupid miss posted PM on the NAG forum.

    It's best I leave and let everyone else enjoy them self's.
    I don't have beef with you, I said I don't understand what you've been doing. Those are two different things. Then I responded rationally and calmly to points you'd raised, asking you for an equally calm response. Saying you're depressed and threatening to leave isn't calmness. You know that, right?

    Look, if a couple of forum posts that you don't like are enough to seriously fuck with your mental state, perhaps you should be more careful about the internet in general. Chances are that someone, somewhere, no matter how well meaning, is going to say something to you that you could get bent out of shape about. That's not conducive to producing cool shit.

    Bottom line: It's best you make games.

    P.S. I even took @Karuji to task for an incorrect apostrophe, what more do you want? See how he responded to that? (With bribes? That's how we do in SA)

    P.P.S. DaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarkBAAASIIIIIC.
  • @legion
    I don't know why you're singling anyone out for saying they don't like what you like, myself, karuji and rigamortis all aired the same kind of opinion. And that's all they are, opinion about something you like.

    Why did that happen? Because you aired something about something we like.

    Which is making games, and you seem to equate making games with "being skilled" in a coding language. Which some people then begged to differ.

    And that's not saying you're wrong, some people just don't share your interest. If so this would probably be makecodesa not makegamessa. Different focus.

    So I guess this community just wants you to show us games, not show us code. And if people advocate this code is cooler than that code, we will ask "is it easier?" and not "does it take more skill?"



    Believe me when I say I've actually not read anything from anyone directed at you that I would consider personal insult, attack, or anything to get angry about.
  • Legion said:
    I feel discriminated against for using what i like
    This will always be the case when somebody critisises something you like. But if you ask someone with a Mac what they think of Intel you'll always be dissapointed with the answer.(I hope the anolgy works)

    The point being that if you post something here people will analyze it with a "make games" lens. So does the information help me to make games faster than other options, no? Well then it's slower. Even if it is better in another sense.

    Also, you fail to realise that people have actually responded to your posts with great enthusiasm. You intepreted it as aggresive because you felt discriminated against. But most of the stuff was just general points raised for discussion. When someone has a different opinion than you, you are allowed to rebut and try to figure out what the actual best answer is.

    So you don't have to leave. You do however have to change your expectations about the site.
  • edited
    Thanks guys.
    You guys are also trying to eliminate chances of non successful projects.
    I understand that.

    I'll just keep my mouth shut and work on a beta demo release.

    But I do encourage that that users do look at other development communities.
    And also see what interesting things other people are up to.
    A lot of inspiration can be drawn from odd places.

    Also.
    It's not like I have never accomplished anything in my life.

    Here's a site I helped put together with Logan the admin.
    http://www.deviationgaming.com

    My website with just a few of my projects.
    http://www.recall.co.nr

    Any that junk is irrelevant I'm here now working on my project.
    If I could afford all the tools and Items I'm comfortable using then I may have chosen a different platform or language.

    Currently I'm using QB64 to try retain compatibility across multiple platforms.

    Windows, Mac, Linux
    -Already supported.

    Android
    -Development has begun

    iPhone and iPad
    -Coming up next it seems.

    ARM(RaspberryPI) and other OS's
    -In the works.



    Now I may be able to do some of that with another language.
    But how many of them plan to support a huge array of devices and is a ever evolving.

    I know it's not the best language.
  • Rigormortis said:
    I get the feeling that people tend to talk past each other on this forum(sometimes).
    Which I think is exactly what is happening here.

    I do think Legion is completely correct when he asks if this is Make Games SA or Make Money SA.

    I think the question all of us should be asking is why does Legion do what he does? Does he do it because he wants to get a game out as quickly as possible so that he can make $0.50 per transaction selling it on an online market place? I think all of us would agree, if that is his goal, he is barking up the wrong tree.

    It sounds like Legion does what he does with QBASIC because he enjoys making games as a hobby, and has obviously spent a fair number of years doing it. Technical challenges can be hugely satisfying to overcome! All of us programmers know that. So to say he is wasting his time using QBASIC is missing the point - he is only wasting his time if he wants quick market success (or maybe market success in general).

    If Makes Games SA aims to promote independent video game development, what aspects of video game development is it wanting to promote? Is it limited to certain creeds and philosophies? Is it limited to certains goals and aspirations? Does every indie developer need to aspire to commercial success? Is it limited to certain favoured development platforms?

    Or is it wider than just that?

    I sincerely hope it is a lot wider than that. Yes, Legion got defensive, but I find it easy to see why. Had you just said, thats cool that you are into that, its not really my thing but its a curious case of history, that would be fine. For example, some people love classic gaming so much that they spends thousands of Rands on acquiring old console hardware and old TVs. Me, I play those games on an emulator, with lovely blitters and savestates. Its much cheaper (although of questionable legality) and I would say more enjoyable. Does that make the fan of the real deal misguided and wrong? No, and I'd be a fool to say so. His goals are simply different to mine.

    Myself, I didnt use tools such as Unity and Game Maker precisely because I was scared of being trapped in one software ecosystem with one way of doing things and one way of solving problem X. What is problem Y comes up and the software has no way of dealing with it? I'm stuffed. With C++, I rip out the problematic component and replace it. Sure, thats not easy either, but at least its possible.

    There is never only one way of doing things.
  • I also feel if I can complete this project.
    Perhaps then future projects people may have the need to join developing it.

  • edited
    Myself, I didnt use tools such as Unity and Game Maker precisely because I was scared of being trapped in one software ecosystem with one way of doing things and one way of solving problem X. What is problem Y comes up and the software has no way of dealing with it? I'm stuffed. With C++, I rip out the problematic component and replace it. Sure, thats not easy either, but at least its possible.

    There is never only one way of doing things.
    You're right, there's always more than one way to do something. As such, it helps if you have solid ways to decide between those different ways of doing things, because the worst thing you can do is waste time and effort. I say this because the priority 1 goal is producing something, games. Like I said in another thread, you're always trying to optimise the following equation: Time learning + time using (skill/tool/system/limb) = finished game.

    Personally, I haven't seen anyone that's capable of skillfully using a specific toolset get "stuck" with only that tool. That seems to be a myth. Knowledge carries over, especially between fundamentally similar systems: A 3DSmax artist will figure out Maya pretty damn fast if they're any good, Blender too if they have enough fingers; A Unity wizard will be able to poke away at any console SDK in C++ pretty easily, etc.

    The argument I'm making is that you need to be sure that the thing you're worried about is actually a larger time-waster than the time saved through not having to write things yourself, that's all. The fact that people consistently fail to estimate the time load of not-having-to-do-things means that I often sound like a broken record on this... Sorry.

    There's also a very strong argument for the power of focus: If you don't have to write everything around a game, just to get to the "this is now actually gameplay-relevant code" bit, not only can you learn way more about gameplay, but you also get to write unique systems that solve problems in interesting ways. I mean, I went from writing a network synchronisation system in Game Maker, to writing the multiplayer code for a PSP game in C++ (via Xboxes on the way while we waited for PSP dev-kits). I got offered the job because I had this fully-functional multiplayer game. People could see I'd already made the mistakes you need to make in order to properly understand multiplayer coding, learned from them and gone on to make something cool.
  • edited
    The problem is sometimes it might not be a case of getting stuck, it might be the case that the SDK in question simply does not support what you want and has absolutely no way of allowing for such support. Maybe it would be impossible to extend the way you would like to extend it? Maybe performance wise it cannot scale to your demands of it? Maybe their Android or iOS support is patchy, and there is nothing you can do about that either.

    The problem is that most software projects, especially things are new to the developer, involve a lot of unknown unknowns. When I started writing my game, I didnt know exactly in which direction it would go. So, I didnt know what questions to ask of the SDK (figuratively speaking) in order to find out if it would support what I wanted to do. Because I had some ideas, but nothing concrete until I got further.

    So its difficult to establish whether a particular SDK/IDE/platform will support what you want to do, when you arent quite what it is you want to do. And you might only hit a block some weeks or months into development. Which is why I usually tackle the most difficult things first, but as I said, often you dont even know what they are.

    Yes, skills are transferrable, but code is not. If I had spent 2 months working on a game maker project, not much of it would be transferrable to anything else.

    I would say, platform of choice should be dictated by, in no particular order, 1) development goals, 2) target platform goals, 3) length of time available for development, 4) knowledge of platform/sdk, 5) personal preference, 6) cost concerns.

    In my case, C++ using Ogre as my rendering engine, Bullet Physics for physics, and libRocket for GUI made the most sense because they are all free and open source, can target multiple platforms, execute fast, and are completely customizable in that it is I who have to integrate them, not the other way around. Sure, its been a lot of work, but I havent regretted it. My previous choice was the jMonkeyEngine 3, which, although free and easier to use, I stopped using due to the terrible GUI (nifty GUI) and concerns over whether it would ever run at an acceptable framerate on Android. Plus iOS support was just impossible due to it being Java.

    EDIT: Some concrete examples off the top of my head.
    niftyGUI does not support z ordering of GUI elements. You cant define one window to be on top, its physically impossible. I think you have to make sure you add them in the right order! There are also a lot of constraints regarding the definition of one screen in one xml file, and I dont think its possible to add a custom element with custom functionality. These are hard blockers which could take weeks of effort to resolve through custom code.

    libRocket didnt have great support for custom databinding in XML files. Luckily due to it being designed to be extensible, I was able to add it. What if I had used an SDK with a gui that I could not extend? I'd be stuck or looking for a new GUI. However, in some SDKs, its not possible to use a different gui.
  • @Ancalogon, This is how we conduct ourselves

    Or try to at least. And most of what you are saying is why people are disagreeing with Legion. Not beause what he is using is wrong, but because there are tools you can use to do it faster/easier. You wouln't use a hammer to drive in nails even though you could right?
    Ancalogon said:
    Technical challenges can be hugely satisfying to overcome! All of us programmers know that. So to say he is wasting his time using QBASIC is missing the point - he is only wasting his time if he wants quick market success (or maybe market success in general).
    I can confidently say that he is wasting his time if he is trying to make a game and using QBASIC instead of GameMaker(unless he is really profecient at QBASIC). That is, if his goal is to make a game, as a hobby or for commercial release.

    Techincal challenges are not games. They might be fun to overcome but never will solving a technical challenge directly result in a game.

    The correct response to someone telling you that you should just use Game maker(or other tools) when your super awesome at coding in C++ is : "I can actually do it faster in C++ than in Game maker." and not : "Don't say what I use sucks please."Also, how would you know that you will or might get trapped in some kind of software ecosystem when you haven't used them? Why don't you go don't to assembly code?
    Ancalogon said:
    If Makes Games SA aims to promote independent video game development, what aspects of video game development is it wanting to promote? Is it limited to certain creeds and philosophies? Is it limited to certains goals and aspirations? Does every indie developer need to aspire to commercial success? Is it limited to certain favoured development platforms?

    Or is it wider than just that?
    It is wider than that. It's wider than video game development even. It's so wide we even try to help people to get to use the tools that provide them the best chance of success.

    Success(for me at least) is when you complete a game. You are proud of your game. You let someone play your game. And you have to walk the fine line between bursting out in laughter or in tears when you see them enjoy it!

    I'm sorry if the post sounds a bit ranty, but the thing is that if it's worth doing...it's worth doing good. The people here not only want people to make games, they want them to make great games and feel proud of their games. And just telling people "cool that looks cool", when you can actually give constructive(keyword) critisism is very condescending. So don't do it. Which is what you suggested we do...

    Also @Legion, +1 for sticking around. It might be a slow process but I sincerely think that you can learn a lot from this community. And do you know about the community meet ups? Like I said it helps if you know the guys and is really awesome to attend.
  • edited
    @Ancalagon: See, that just sounds like a lack of prototyping experience. If you don't know what your game is going to be, prototype it in some rapid environment that lowers the time you need to spend before you find out what the game even is, AND that then also lowers the amount of time it takes you to hit possible implementation problems.

    I agree with the general philosophy you've got going, but it really shouldn't take you weeks or months to get to the point of knowing what you need to do in order to make a particular game idea work. Find out those unkowns as fast as possible!

    Two months of working on a GM project mean I have 1.5 months of player feedback onboard and know exactly what systems I need to spin up in whatever API/SDK/whatever I want the final game to come out on. I probably also have implementations for most of the gameplay-specific code already (case in point, the DD dungeon generation was copy-pasta'd from GM into Unity and working in under an hour - 90% of your GM code should be reusable because it's this high-level, gameplay-only, effect rich stuff, there's little to no low-level gumpf in it) and, in some cases, I'll already have a file format for levels/puzzles/physics/stuff I need to load and a bunch of levels good to go, plus it's pretty easy to then turn the GM project into an editor for the game as well. I'll also have a good handle on the graphics and sound resources required (in some cases even ALL the graphics and sound nailed down already). To top it off, I'll have something that I can show press, win awards with and people can get excited about.

    Or maybe all I have is a prototype that took a weekend of my time and isn't fun. That gives me the rest of those two months to find something better ;)

    P.S. I'm not being all GAMEMAKER OR NOTHING ELSE, GRAAAAAAAAAAAH! I'm just talking about that because it's useful. Note that I asked @Legion why he wasn't using DarkBasic, which is to QB64 what Unity is to Ogre.

    P.P.S. I think it's kinda worrying that people often seem to want to learn a new system AND produce their first game at the same time. Sure, learning things by building games is great fun, but those aren't going to be your best games. A doctor's first stitches aren't going to be the tightest, and nobody would go to a new doctor for heart surgery... Do the learning first, then build that awesome game. Sometimes you need to learn ABOUT THE GAME as well, not just the tools you're going to try to use.
  • @Rigormortis

    I disagree that he is wasting his time. What matters is that he enjoys what he does.

    Again, is speed of development the only concern? Is that all that matters?

    Just because you can develop something quickly, does not mean you will complete it. Oh sure, if you spend months battling with C++ linker errors you probably wont complete anything, but personally I think completion has more to do with perseverance and personality than it does tools.

    There was that guy who spent 3 years - 3 frikken years!!!! - working on an HD 2D game which is only now coming out for XBox Live. It looks frikken amazing. Should I go tell him he is a failure because it took him 3 years?

    @dislekcia

    I was referring to implementation specific details more than gameplay specific details, so I dont know how prototyping would have helped with that. Sometimes the line between the two is blurred.

    A specific case would be the terrain system that I am using. When I first started working on the game, I was using Ogre's terrain component, which takes in a heightmap and produces a beautiful piece of terrain. But I had concerns with it - a number of forums mentioned performance problems, and given that I was aiming to port to mobile at some point in the future, this was a major red flag. Also, I worried that it didnt thematically suit my game in that the terrain looked too realistic. So I wrote my own terrain system, which wasnt easy, but does exactly what I need it to do. It is fast, customizable and has the right look.

    So, looking at it from a prototyping point of view, what should I have done? Lets assume platform/sdk X has a terrain system, just like Ogre's. Its easy to use and spits out great looking terrain quickly. Now, at that stage in development, I had not decided exactly what kind of terrain I wanted. I knew there was terrain, and that the terrain needed to be divided up into a square grid, but I didnt know much else. I think of that as implementation details, because it doesnt affect the gameplay that much. So, during prototyping, I probably would have been fine with whatever terrain system the game had. Later on in development, I might have changed my mind with regards to the actual implementation of said terrain. Not really a gameplay decision as I said.
  • @Ancalagon: Kinda feel like we're all talking past each other here ;) Yes, speed of getting to playable is the most important thing. If it's not playable, it's not a game. If it IS playable, you can start iterating on making it better. That's where you have to be, so the quicker you get there, the better.

    I think your argument about a guy taking 3 years to build an XBLA game is kinda weird... Firstly, why does it matter that it's a 2D game? Secondly, I can bet you that the game went through prototyping and was playable very early in that 3 year cycle. (Which game is it? If it's Spelunky or Retro City Rampage that would be rather ironic, plus I could ask both devs for their input on this topic) Finally, that's not the speed of development that we're talking about. I've been working on the same game for over 2 years now...

    Your terrain example is totally something that should be decided by gameplay! If you're spending time solving problems that you don't know you actually have, you've fallen foul of the easiest trap in game coding! Stop. What do players think of your terrains? Do they complain that it's slow on their phones? Do they wish the terrains were more detailed? Do they have collision problems with terrain seams? Those are the kinds of things you need to be spending your time on - real problems, not extrapolated imagined stuff... If the actual terrain implementation doesn't matter to gameplay, get some temporary thing in there and get to stuff that matters to your players! You can always, always rip that temp thing out and fix it later, as you so rightly pointed out above. Chances are you won't need to though :)
  • http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/08/dust-an-elysian-tail-one-animators-3-5-year-quest-to-create-his-dream-game/

    Doing what he did, taking 3.5 years to make a game, even though it was playable 3 years ago, is not quick. Its not fast. According to some members here, he should have done whatever he could to get it out the door faster. He could have used 8 bit graphics. He could have made another mine craft. He didnt have to spend 3.5 years making this game.

    Also using XNA means he probably wrote a lot of it from scratch.

    If he had posted about his plans here, I think you guys would have laughed at him, for his huge ambition and his choice of platform. And for the thought that he could actually finish the game, even if it took him 3.5 years.

    Imagine:

    "I have zero programming experience and I want to use Microsoft's XNA to create a hand drawn and animated HD game with absolutely enormous scope. I estimate it will take years to finish."

    What do you think the crowd here would have said? Use Game Maker? Use Unity? Hire a programmer? Do it in lower res?

    And thats what I find sad - judging people on their platform choices. Sure, you can recommend something, but if someone doesnt take your advice, leave them be. Shouting down their throats to take your advice just makes you look arrogant.

    Yeah I probably could have done it differently. I dont know. You hear about the dangers of premature optimization, etc. Still, I'm happy with what I've done, and I think it was the right decision going forward.
  • @Ancalogon, Yeah sorry, I need to rephrase what I said. He is not wasting *his* time, he is just wasting time. I mean it is probably going to take longer to learn a programming language and then make a game, than just making a game. So if the goal was to make a game, it would be less time wasted to just skip the programming and make it.

    And I totally agree that perseverance plays an enormousness part in completing a game. Not so much is starting one though. I have a game. People can play it...I'm not proud of it yet because it's not complete. I have to persevere, and I do mean that, to complete it.

    If tried to do it from scratch there would have been too many things I would have to learn and I never would have started. Come to think of it, I actually know about Ogre and Bullet physics because I wanted to use them to make games...and got really discouraged and depressed because of the learning curve. So I didn't start at that time, I had to discover game engines and all those things on my own. If someone told me about Unity or game engines sooner I would have started a lot sooner. Heck, I would even recommend map editors to people as pseudo game engines if that helps them create mods(minigames).

    As for that 3 year guy...was it his first game? Did he prototype anything? Did he work on the stuff alone? What background did he come from? And how does his situation apply to this one?
  • He did it all alone except for voice acting. He taught himself programming during the writing of this game, so it probably was his first.

    My point is exactly what I said above - had he come here 3.5 years ago, he would have been laughed at and told he is wasting his time. But look where he is now.

    Compared to this situation, there are some things in common. XNA is a framework but not an engine and does not provide a complete solution, unlike Game Studio and Unity. It doesnt appear to be what this community would recommend! He had no programming experience prior to doing this, didnt have or want a team, and seems to have done his own playtesting, judging by the quote "Iteration went very quickly since I only had to consult myself". So he didnt even get other people to test it early on in its life, although hopefully he has by now. Violating the commandments in other words. Yet his game turned out okay I think?
  • edited
    @Ancalagon, Then he really is an individual I would like to meet.

    And yes, if he did come here 3.5 years ago people would have probably recommended something else. And I want to argue that he would have completed it sooner if he used those tools, but I guess that because he wanted to create something specific that it could have been too limiting and he would have had to change which in turn would have made him take longer that 3 years.

    Even so, I still think that using GM/unity/generic engine to start with is a quicker way to get into making electronic games. And I can't fault anyone for suggesting it. It is however true that it's not a solution for everybody but it's still great general advice.

    And I just realized that I might be the one missing the point this time...so for the sake of proper communication...are you trying to say that the community is ostracizing people based on the tools they use?

    PS.I have to point out something. Nobody is laughing at anyone. And I hope that there wasn't anything said to make it seem so. If someone disagrees it's not the same as laughing at them.
  • For what it is worth, I am fairly certain that it wasn't meant to be an argument of "using X vs. using Y". (My own comment was meant in a sense that I honestly have not personally met anyone that uses BASIC, and I have not seen the need to use it, it is mostly foreign to me).

    @Legion you have good points as to why BASIC is a good language to use, and it is definitely true that each person works better under any certain condition. Game maker may not have worked for you, but BASIC may have had the same problem for others (C++ was the poorest choice I could have made for my "first language" but I have now overcome that even though I still dont enjoy C++, it is probably the reason I took so long to learn to program). Im sincerely sorry if it seemed like I was bashing your choice of language, I meant it more as an exclamation of surprise.

    I dont feel I can properly contribute to the tangential discussions that have spawned, but I do feel I need to point out that despite the negative image that people seem to give off of their thoughts on peoples projects there are several things that need to be remembered when making games, the people that end up playing and enjoying your games will be more critical than we are, also even if your goal is unrealistic it is always reachable (any advice to the contrary is 9 out of 10 times cautionary rather than demotivational), and more.

    Everybody is welcome here, and if you dont like what certain people say ignore it, make voodoo dolls of them and torture them in their sleep, that is up to you, there is honestly no reason why you cannot just let things you dislike be water under your proverbial person bridge.
  • Maybe he might have finished it sooner and maybe he might not have. He could not have won that $40 000 Microsoft prize that he did had he used anything but XNA though.
    And I just realized that I might be the one missing the point this time...so for the sake of proper communication...are you trying to say that the community is ostracizing people based on the tools they use?
    Can you honestly say that no one has been rude to Legion in this thread or in other threads? That no one has tried to prescribe particular methods, goals and technologies and poo poo'ed anyone who says there are other methods, goals and technologies?

    As I say, give advice by all means, but learn when to just nod your head and smile. Legion is not going to drop his work and start again in Unity, no matter what anyone says. That should have been clear from the start. You can give advice but not force anyone to take it.
  • edited
    I thank you all for a deep and honest discussion.
    I'm sorry if this caused a bit of a up roar.
  • edited
    @Ancalagon: This is an internet forum. Nobody can force anyone to do anything, that's pretty much par for the course, what with the lack of physical interaction and all. I don't understand what you're saying: Are you implying that reasoned, logical arguments which try to be as objective as possible are somehow bad to be having? Are you saying that instead of trying to find objective points of comparison to judge things by in order to determine possible best courses of action, we should instead pander to defensiveness? (I mean, come on, it's not like there was any actual "discrimination" going on, nobody said that @Legion is a shit human being, or that he should use separate beaches and only be allowed to live on the other side of a wall, lest his inherent evil infect us all)

    I don't understand the point you're trying to get across here. You've also completely not addressed my points about getting to playable as fast as possible. I think you might be under the impression that your reference to Dust is a counter argument. It isn't, here's why: I was on the Creators Club forums (that's what they were called then) when Dean first started working on Dust. Unsurprisingly, he had a playable concept demo up and running really fast, which he posted on the Creators Club for people to download and comment on. He then polished and polished and polished the game from there, learning new coding techniques and having access to experienced devs on those forums. Then he kept adding more and more content, eventually winning that year's DBP challenge. Then he kept adding more and more and more content, making sure the game was what he wanted to produce.

    I don't think anyone here would have said anything different to him, other than "Get something playable ASAP, then work on polishing that", which nobody NEEDED to say. He started out with an animation, if I recall correctly (which is fucking brilliant - he prototyped before he could even code anything), asking how to get a game working like that in XNA. People pointed him to XNA tutorials and shared code, other people suggested he learn C++ if he was really serious about learning to code. He said he'd rather stick with XNA, which meant he had less to do. He didn't have to code all sorts of systems AND he had access to the platform he cared about most: Xbox 360. I feel like he evaluated his options very well, I don't remember him being defensive or having fights with anyone on the CC forum, I also don't remember him being fussy about feedback - he was pretty damn good, actually.

    So he was smart, picked as fully featured a tool as he could for the system he was working on, released a playable version of the game as soon as he could for feedback, worked hard and secured funding before devoting years to the content the full game needed. That sounds like the approach I've been advocating all along, especially the part in the article you linked about the game appearing almost exactly the same to the 2009 demo. And the part about him constantly getting his time estimates wrong.

    I feel like if he had been convinced to code everything he needed from scratch in C++, the game would never have seen the light of day in 2009, let alone be completed now. I don't think anyone here has said that games should be completed quickly, they just need to be playable as quickly as possible to prevent interminable tech navel-gazing. History keeps showing which approach is a lot more effective, that's all.
  • My point is that you can have debates and reasoned arguments without sounding elitist, which is exactly what much of this debate sounds like to me. With quotes like:
    "Is this from the past?"
    "There isn't much point to using, or learning, BASIC. You might say that there are a substantial amount of games being produced in this format, but how many of those are products that earn their creator an income? I ask this simply because I have never heard of this happening."
    "I can confidently say that he is wasting his time if he is trying to make a game and using QBASIC instead of GameMaker"
    "Sorry, but I don't see how this is a game..." (other thread)
    "Thought I was done with this topic, seeing as my feedback was kinda not wanted"

    None of these "arguments" offer anything reasonable to him. And they fail to take into account his goals. And they assume Game Maker is a one size fits all solution for everybody - I dont think it is! And even by the time this thread was posted, it should have been obvious that Legion is not going to switch. He is a QBASIC enthusiast. Why not just encourage him to make games in QBASIC instead of deriding his work? Would it kill you to encourage somebody instead of tear them down?

    Yes, I wouldnt choose QBASIC either. I would probably advise him against it. And rapid prototyping does help. But I wouldnt take offense if he chose not to accept my advice, and I wouldnt be so arrogant as to assume that there is only one way of doing things and I know what that way is.

    But then I am not Legion. I have my reasons for using C++ and Ogre, and so does he have his own reasons for using QBASIC. I think part of the creativity in making a game is actually in the selection of tools and engines. Not for the audience - most of them dont know squat - but for the creator. Do you enjoy making games? I do! Why should I not enjoy programming those games and taking pride in my achievements while doing so?

    Making games is more creative than that just following a set of bullet points - Step 1 Use GameMaker, Step 2 Rapid ProtoType, Step 3 Profit. Why should everyone use the SAME engine and the SAME language? Why cant he just make something fun that he enjoys making and wants to play? Oh yes, guidelines help. But when someone doesnt follow the guidelines, they shouldnt get the reaction that they tend to! Just leave them be.

    Oh yes industry experience and common knowledge and statistics all say that there is a 100% chance that he will fail. So? This is entrepreneurship, lots of us are going to fail! That doesnt mean we all have to follow the same route.

    Some comments on the thread of Ceberon Gate actually got over this whole debate and started talking about some actual game mechanics - isnt that shocking? Chroma depth vision and all that.
    I feel like if he had been convinced to code everything he needed from scratch in C++, the game would never have seen the light of day in 2009
    For a new programmer I wouldnt have recommended C++ either. In fact I wouldnt recommend it to most people! But it makes sense for me - isnt that enough? Let me choose what tools I want to use and bear the consequences for those actions. If I fail, you can rub it in my face. If I succeed, maybe think about not being so critical of members who choose to use something other than Game Maker.
  • edited
    I'm going to try keep it short to try break this trend of wall of textism.
    it should have been obvious that Legion is not going to switch.
    I don't think anyone saw this thread and Ceberon Gate thread together. No one tried to make Legion "change his tool of choice", people were saying "this tool is outdated if you're trying to make a game with it". If Legion was entitled to his opinion about his tool, surely everyone is entitled to their opinion about that same tool?

    Saying that "stop being critical about that thing cos that person likes it" is likening that thing to a religion. I don't agree with that mentality. Nothing is infallible.
    But I wouldnt take offense if he chose not to accept my advice
    I really think anyone but Legion took offense. And even then I didn't see why he needed to, cos there was nothing directed at him. And that's the point I've been trying to make:


    Why are people taking personal offense?

    This is a discussion about a certain thing. That thing is not you, QBASIC is not you, Gamemaker is not you. If they get criticized, so what?

    If I had to get derailed every time someone tells me Unity is better than Game Maker, my life would probably suck. But it doesn't suck, and I'm using game maker.
  • If Legion was entitled to his opinion about his tool, surely everyone is entitled to their opinion about that same tool?
    Is it too much to ask that opinions be aired constructively?
    Saying that "stop being critical about that thing cos that person likes it" is likening that thing to a religion. I don't agree with that mentality. Nothing is infallible.
    I never said you couldnt be critical, just dont be so harsh!

    Not only is Legion taking offense, but other members of this board are taking offense when their advice is not heeded. Why? As you say, its just a tool, so why get angry when someone doesnt use the tool you suggest? What do you care?
  • Tuism said:
    This is a discussion about a certain thing. That thing is not you, QBASIC is not you, Gamemaker is not you. If they get criticized, so what?
    This is true, however people don't react that way. When you criticize something I like, I will probably feel personally offended. Not saying it's productive or correct. Just something we should keep in mind.

    In the end we aren't only working with tools we work with people. So maybe we should be a little more attuned to when to press a point and when to back off. Otherwise I fear that we may seem elitist.

    I want the community to produce games. And I want those games to be absolute best they can be. But I don't want to make someone feel ostracized or intimidated, especially people new to the industry.
    Thanked by 1Ancalagon
  • http://jason.rohrer.usesthis.com/

    A wild Jason Rohrer appears.
    Jason Rohrer uses 10 YEAR OLD HARDWARE!
    It's super effective!
    Everyone's arguments are rendered invalid in this thread.


    Personally, I'm mucking about with javascript libraries and pygame but my motives for making games are questionable.
    Thanked by 1Rigormortis
  • edited
    Not only is Legion taking offense, but other members of this board are taking offense when their advice is not heeded. Why? As you say, its just a tool, so why get angry when someone doesnt use the tool you suggest? What do you care?
    But I really don't think anyone is getting angry other than people who think they're being discriminated against. I'm not angry, I don't think dislekcia is being angry, that's just how he communicates.

    Maybe it's cos I'm used to it.

    I don't think Karuji was being angry, I don't think I was being angry, I don't think Rigamortis was being angry. Nor edg3, etc.

    So who's angry? Who's taking offense?

    And if it sounds like I am, Er, I'm not. Dunno how to communicate that. Maybe I should say it with cookies.

    And on that note, I extract myself from a discussion which has become rather pointless (Im also to blame for that partly)
  • @someone_else

    That dude is cool. If you read all the way to the end youll see something which makes sense of it all, too :p
  • edited
    People being critical and harsh is a good thing, and I am saying this as someone who had a person posting in one of my game threads saying he thought he was being too critical and harsh, and I wanted him to be more critical and harsh, because it helps development.

    Simply patting each other on the back, and going "that nice" will lead to a culture of mediocrity. Speaking critically will lead to a culture of excellence.

    Recently I read an interview with Keiji Inafune. He said he really enjoyed working with western developers because something he could explain really succinctly to a Japanese developer he would have to elaborate is great great detail why he wanted a certain feature; in this extrapolation he realized that his own cultural bias led him to believe in something that was inferior.

    I think I am going to join @Tuism for a cookie now.
  • Indeed, it makes perfect sense to use high-level middleware like Game Maker when all you want to do is prototype your game design. Even more win for you if you can squeeze out production quality stuff from it.

    I dislike using proprietary tools and a lot of them are very slow to support Linux so I tend to stay away from them. Just a personal preference wrapped up in OCD I guess.
  • edited
    @Ancalagon I'm sorry if you and @Legion are feeling a little persecuted I know that's not the intention of the responses.

    I just wanted to chip in that I don't think "Step 1 Use GameMaker, Step 2 Rapidly ProtoType, Step 3 Profit" is what @dislekcia and the rest are trying to say.

    I think its more along the lines of:
    Step 1 Use GameMaker or whatever makes you iterate fastest.
    Step 2 Rapidly ProtoType and get something out that can receive feedback.
    Step 3 Use the existing idea prototyped to create a releasable version. Let this be polished using the existing system, porting to another game engine that adequately satisfies the feedback or by building from scratch the components/engine to satisfy the ideal releasable version (also according to the prototyped version).
    Step 4 Profit/Fame/Satisfaction, whatever your goal is.
    (Correct me if I'm wrong)

    In the end, just make sure you know what you want/need before you start building the engine from scratch. The best way to do this seems to be by prototyping and getting something fun before the heavy tech work begins.
    Thanked by 1Tuism
  • Great summary. The point that was being made was to make a game first and make tech second. If you can make a game first using your tech of choice, you're awesome.

    If you're stuck on tech and cannot show me the game ("SHOW ME THE GAME-Y!!" Terry might have said), then there might have been a better way to go about it.

    But if you enjoy tech first and game second, that's cool for you, even if that's not what this community is about in the first place (maybe we should have some kind of vision and mission put up somewhere that clearly states this kind of stuff people will continue having this "discussion" forever.
  • edited
    Why do I have this argument, every time it happens? To try and dissuade newer members from making the mistakes that have historically killed more game development efforts than anything else. This "I have chosen a technical perspective and will not make my own life easier" attitude is not new. It has also never been successful.

    I am incredibly confused by this argument. It always crops up and it's always the same: It essentially boils down to people who've made specific choices based on poor information or little experience, getting defensive about those choices when asked why they made them and being offered experience-based advice that suggests different choices might have been better.

    We have this argument because it's where we all started. So many of us wasted far too much time on an attitude that's doomed to continual failure, until we eventually changed our minds and started making games. Everyone needed to be convinced to adopt tools to make their lives easier, then they're all amazingly happy and more productive after they do. The best part, the part that the people "fighting" have to understand, is that even if you enjoy tech for the sake of tech, the best way to learn that tech is to make yourself intimately familiar with every implementation of it, only then should you write your own. Only then will you be able to come up with something actually novel.

    @Ancalagon, @Legion: Nobody has been criticising you as a person! Get the fuck over yourself! You are not your ideas, you are not your tools, you are not your code output! Fucking hell, the ego on some people! (Sample of what it looks like when I'm gearing up to be angry, for future reference, does that help?)

    Is it too much to ask that opinions be aired constructively? Every single post I've written here has contained new information that you didn't seem to have before. Every single post has tried to explain not only why I advocate what I do, but the decision criteria that I evaluate the eventual results by as well. Yet you've ignored nearly every one of those criteria, never acknowledged any new information (Now you suddenly dismiss the new info on your example, Dust, as people being forced to use GM and having to use the same engine? Not good enough, especially if you're demanding MORE from me.)

    Not only is Legion taking offense, but other members of this board are taking offense when their advice is not heeded. Why? Because you're not actually engaging any of the points being raised. It doesn't have to be heeded, followed, worshipped or anything, just engaged. I'm annoyed at your glib statements that are actually useless, which you completely fail to support when engaged on: "I have assumed that one person did this the way I'm doing it, even though I don't actually have proof of that, thus all the historical failures that used this same approach must simply have been doing it wrong. I will do it right, despite only basing things on assumptions." How does that FUCKING WORK, guy? Even entrepreneurship (which is ironic given how people were annoyed about the MakeGames/MakeMoney thing earlier) has the principle of mentorship and learning from mistakes. Previously failed entrepreneurs are more likely to do better next time around. That means they learned something. That means there's something to learn. That means listening to them might be useful - simply dismissing their input is probably not a good idea.

    Step 1 Use GameMaker, Step 2 Rapid ProtoType, Step 3 Profit. If that's what you're taking from the position that I and others have been taking, you're sorely, sorely mistaken. Perhaps you should try this instead:

    Step 1 - Build playable prototype.
    Step 2 - Receive feedback and iterate. Return to Step 1.
    Step 3 - If game idea proves fun and has a large, enthusiastic following, consider investing more into polishing it. If game feels unrewarding or not interesting, return to Step 1 with new idea.
    Step 4 - Polish.
    Step 5 - Polish.
    Step 6 - Polish.
    ... Step n - Release full game. Profit? That's up to you.
    (Edit: Hah! Ninja'd by @creative630, win!)

    That's a general model, which says nothing about tools or technology. The argument you're advocating seems to demand something like this:

    Step 0 - Arbitrarily decide on tech.
    Step 0a - Re-implement that tech without gameplay, return to Step 0.
    Step 0b - Once you have a sufficiently implemented platform that you can change all the parts of at will, start working on gameplay.
    Step 1 - Build playable prototype.
    Step 1a - Run into problem with your implementation, return to Step 0a.
    Step 2 - Receive feedback and bug reports, decide to fix implementation, return to Step 0a.
    ... I don't even know how you get to Step 3 in this model. I have personally never seen it happen. I have hardly ever seen it hit Step 1, to be dead honest.

    The thing that we're talking about is a change of attitude - the unwillingness to pre-emptively return to Step 0. To keep pushing ahead with making the game more and more playable, instead of wasting time with implementation tweaks.

    Ah fuck it. I'm just being an asshole anyway, apparently. I have a game to make better.
    Thanked by 1EvanGreenwood
  • Why do I have this argument, every time it happens? To try and dissuade newer members from making the mistakes that have historically killed more game development efforts than anything else. This "I have chosen a technical perspective and will not make my own life easier" attitude is not new. It has also never been successful.
    You dont understand and apparently I cant make you. I didnt choose the technology I chose to be difficult or because gameplay doesnt matter. I am making a game, not a technology demo. But yeah, not that you will understand this - you seem to think that anyone who uses anything other than GameMaker would prefer to handcode everything in assembler.
    Nobody has been criticising you as a person! Get the fuck over yourself! You are not your ideas, you are not your tools, you are not your code output! Fucking hell, the ego on some people! (Sample of what it looks like when I'm gearing up to be angry, for future reference, does that help?)
    Its you who has the ego! Its you who thinks he knows everything and anyone who does not take his advice is an idiot! I dont claim to know better than anyone else - I only claim to know what works well for me.

    Oh you are getting angry? Oh noes, please help. Really.
    "I have assumed that one person did this the way I'm doing it, even though I don't actually have proof of that, thus all the historical failures that used this same approach must simply have been doing it wrong. I will do it right, despite only basing things on assumptions." How does that FUCKING WORK, guy?
    Because I'm not the only person who has ever done what I'm doing! Its not like I'm the first person to ever think of using third party open source free technology to make a game. I'm not the first to write a game in C++. Believe it or not, there was a time before GameMaker when people wrote games using other languages. I know, its hard to believe. I know what you are going to say - that GameMaker and Unity have made all other approaches essentially old fashioned and redundant. I'm sorry, I dont agree. Yes I agree rapid prototyping can be of benefit, but that doesnt mean you NEED to use GameMaker.

    As for Dust, he rapid prototyped, good on him. But I still think people here would have been unsupportive of him given his choices.
    That's a general model, which says nothing about tools or technology. The argument you're advocating seems to demand something like this:
    Um yeah thats not what I'm saying, but then you dont even know what I advocate because you've never cared to listen. I advocate making a game based on an idea, a passion that you have, in whatever language or platform seems the best fit to you. There are no one size fits all solutions. Yes, rapid prototyping is universally accepted as a good idea. That doesnt mean you NEED to choose Unity or GameMaker. You can use whatever the hell you like. And you say I have a big ego?
    The thing that we're talking about is a change of attitude - the unwillingness to pre-emptively return to Step 0. To keep pushing ahead with making the game more and more playable, instead of wasting time with implementation tweaks.
    Another argument says that most people never finish their first few games because they lack the perseverance and get bored. Oh yeah, if nobody enjoys playing it then it needs changes, for sure. I'm not advocating going ahead with something that isnt fun. But then I dont agree with just dropping a project at the first bit of trouble.

    Ah fuck it. I'm just being an asshole anyway, apparently. I have a game to make better.
    With an attitude like that, yeah I think you are. There is no one best way to do ANYTHING, let alone game development, and just because you have had success with your methods, does not mean it is the only way.

    You know what, I'm done with these forums. dislekcia, you have yourself a nice day.
  • edited
    Im going to lock this as it is already out of hand. I would just like to point out that the degeneration to being "about Game Maker", or "about the technology I use" was rather unnecessary. If you take talk about your chosen tools personally dont talk about them. Make games. Show us your games.

    One of the people involved would rather not leave this on an angry note, so Im going suggest to split off the tangential discussion rather, and this thread can stay open to discuss the magazine.
    Thanked by 1Bensonance
  • Hey everyone,

    I am sorry to carry on in this thread. I was kind of relieved to see that it was closed this afternoon. But I had to come and post something here because I'm really disappointed at the moment. The following threads are all threads about making one game or another:

    Stingray Incursion
    Bladeslinger
    Darkout
    Dino Joust
    Book of Blood

    All these threads together do not have the same amount of comments, or even nearly the same amount of text that this thread has. I know I'm also guilty of neglecting these threads. But shouldn't it be the actual game threads that deserve this kind of attention? If we are all about making games, why aren't we talking about the games being made?

    I understand the topics discussed in this thread, and they are important. But surely those other threads can really benefit from the amount of effort that has gone into this thread?

    Like I said, I'm a bit disappointed, probably in myself more than anyone else. But I don't feel like we helped to make games today.
  • @Rigormortis: It's 10:37. You still have 1 hour and 23 minutes to work on game stuff. ;)
  • @Elyaradine, I just got all my humble bundle games downloaded and was going to give them a play. But your idea is so crazy it might just work :P
  • edited
    I supplied a small E-zine that deals with game development.
    And just because the human pre text is "oh look it's basic"

    How did this happen to this thread?
    Understand each other.
    Respect each other.
    Help each other.


    So I won't lie sometimes a get a bit on the defense...
    90% of the time online I have to play this tower defense thing where I have to ward off hundreds of user related abusive posts. "trolls, lolz and assholz"
    It's a job I have to deal with.


    But lets instead find someone's E-mail address and tell them their language sucks, "I know who you are, you have no life" lets try a more calm approach by comparing tools and seeing if they can accomplish the required job first.

    Just look at the stunning art styled programming of SYN9
    http://syn9.thehideoutgames.com
    He started in QB and still uses it

    Everyone is allowed a opinion.
    It's when that opinion is abusive.

    I'm done defending... now I want to make games.

    -Edit:-
    Step 1 - Build playable prototype.
    Step 2 - Receive feedback and iterate. Return to Step 1.
    Step 3 - If game idea proves fun and has a large, enthusiastic following, consider investing more into polishing it. If game feels unrewarding or not interesting, return to Step 1 with new idea.
    Step 4 - Polish.
    Step 5 - Polish.
    Step 6 - Polish.
    ... Step n - Release full game. Profit? That's up to you.
    I have no issue with this.
    I just need more time.

    Now lets leave this thread to fall off.
    And focus on the games guys.

    I'm happy to be here.
    It's been oddly difficult.. maybe my fault in someway.
    But lets have more fun.
Sign In or Register to comment.