Moderators: Despellanion, Dr. Best

Bazza
Forum God
Bazza
Forum God
Joined: April 29th, 2008, 6:18 am

July 4th, 2008, 3:57 am #41

well could u spruce up the part effects in a update : / maybe one thats a little more flexible?
My instinct is to hide in this barrel, like the wily fish.
Quote
Like
Share

Dr. Best
Forum God
Dr. Best
Forum God
Joined: March 16th, 2005, 8:47 pm

July 4th, 2008, 8:42 am #42

Eanbro wrote:
benny wrote:@Eanbro - Code::Blocks doesn't really appeal to me personally. I understand however that it is a choice. But to use Havok for instance, you have to use the microsoft C++ compiler ( yes, Code::Blocks can use it, as I have gotten it to before, as it natively supports it ).

And it is platform independent I believe, seeing as it does not rely on a certain compiler ( however I believe you can download Code::Blocks with the MinGW compiler if you like ). But I personally prefer Visual Studio, as I like to keep everything constant ( For example, I'm wrapping Havok to .NET languages, and I test in C# ).

And why do you not like any windows software? Just curious :think:
That's why I don't like Visual C, because of the reliance on the .Net framework. There shouldn't be such a overwhelming dependancy on software that can only install on very few operating systems. My legal copy of Windows XP will not upgrade to Service Pack 2 without a complete system failure (the only way to reverse the effect is through a system recovery.)
It is no problem to use Visual Studio to create applications, which do not require any .net version at all.

@ bazza games
I bet you would get what you want with the system as it is, if you would understand it.
Quote
Like
Share

Mauro
Elite Member
Mauro
Elite Member
Joined: October 16th, 2006, 1:28 pm

July 4th, 2008, 9:19 am #43

i tryed same TGC softwer >>>realy bad -_-
i think c++ is a good choice,and the most of world's computer have xp, then where is the problem?
Programming c++ and directx
Quote
Like
Share

Allong
Newbie
Allong
Newbie
Joined: January 19th, 2008, 12:09 pm

July 4th, 2008, 11:53 am #44

*Allong appears and gives the first post a read*

Oh Sh*t! This will rather suck. It doesn't concern me as much coinsdering i'm switching to Enigma anyway. But Dr. Best please do give Josh @ Dreamland a talk to, you could be a great saviour to me if Enigma had as great graphics such as U3D.
Quote
Like
Share

Despellanion
Forum God
Joined: March 26th, 2006, 8:41 pm

July 4th, 2008, 3:08 pm #45

benny wrote:@Despellanion - Many things are wrong with it in my opinion. Its tremendously slow compared to other engines ( that are FREE and OPEN SOURCE ), it has poor functionality, some functions do not actually have a use, the shader support is poor, meshes are limited to *.x and *.dbo ( very poor implementation of *.3ds ), impossibly hard to access vertices through faster methods, as they hide it in many parent structures ( that the SObject struct inherits ), so that in turn makes it hard to implement physics. And on the top of physics, their "Dark Physics" implementation is terrible, and they haven't supplied much support for it. They still have features missing from PhysX, and as well, charge for an otherwise free sdk ( PhysX is free ). Really, everything they do is to get money, and to scam people who are otherwise not educated in that area. And yes, Dark GDK being free is not a move of a money hungry company, but if you dissect why they would do such a thing, I believe it would come down to they want more people using, therefore more people to be tricked into buying their "easy to use" "plugins" for gdk, however easy it is to implement one of the countless physics engines available ( Havok, PhysX, Bullet, Newton, ODE, Tokomak ( however I believe work on this has been halted ). The company just provides very poor support, and overall I have had a very bad experience with them. The only good thing that ever came out of me using their products was realizing if you want something done correctly and fast, you must do it yourself in C++. Or buy a $10,000 sdk. Your choice.
I think I am going to create my own opinion on this first before scraping the idea completely. Else I will just go back to Delphi. C++ is just not that appealing to me. Thanks for information.
Quote
Like
Share

Ben
Advanced Member
Ben
Advanced Member
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 8:39 pm

July 5th, 2008, 4:59 am #46

@Despellanion - Fair enough. I do feel it is rather stupid not to try something, so by all means try. I feel you will notice that it is faster than Game Maker, but do realize you can accomplish much more with something else :)
Quote
Like
Share

Bazza
Forum God
Bazza
Forum God
Joined: April 29th, 2008, 6:18 am

July 5th, 2008, 6:14 am #47

@dr.best
well ya maybe if i did understand it.... i have a topic about me trieng to create a dynamic trail of particles to follow a rocket and it not working but it kind of died. no one post any more, it is still unanswered if u want to give it a crack ^^
My instinct is to hide in this barrel, like the wily fish.
Quote
Like
Share

Despellanion
Forum God
Joined: March 26th, 2006, 8:41 pm

July 5th, 2008, 10:54 am #48

benny wrote:@Despellanion - Fair enough. I do feel it is rather stupid not to try something, so by all means try. I feel you will notice that it is faster than Game Maker, but do realize you can accomplish much more with something else :)
I understand. I did notice that it wasn't very much faster than U3D with GM when I tried some sample demos made with DGDK. I won't waste my time with it so I will go back to Delphi instead, which is equally easy to learn and understand and much more faster.
Quote
Like
Share

luenardi
Forum God
luenardi
Forum God
Joined: December 29th, 2007, 8:53 pm

July 5th, 2008, 2:10 pm #49

So GM + U3D "Dead..." :sad: ,But are we gonna code c++ now?
It would be cool if Dr.Best could create some thing similar to GM. and Dx10... :clapping: Too awesome.

My god! it's huge... :thumb_up: :) ,but what will happen to 2.1... :sad: ,But it's gona rock , :)
Please make the manual easy to use:

For your perception no.
But my universe has no such limits.


www.recall.co.nr
Quote
Like
Share

harkathmaker
Forum Leader
harkathmaker
Forum Leader
Joined: May 2nd, 2007, 12:34 am

July 5th, 2008, 7:49 pm #50

So when can we expect to see the new C++ sub-forum? :clapping:
Quote
Like
Share