next »

[Parthon]

I used OpenGL and SDL because it gives you cheap and easy things like scaling, rotating, alpha and effects that SDL has problems with.

If you plan on extending it for other projects, it's a good idea.

[Alec]

I used OpenGL and SDL because it gives you cheap and easy things like scaling, rotating, alpha and effects that SDL has problems with.

OpenGL is great, but I don't see how it helps for a pixel perfect retro game like Balding's Quest. Allegro is a great library, its pretty portable. SDL might be more portable, but it might be a pain to switch to it. (it lacks a lot of Allegro's functionality)

I think now would be a bad time to start switching the engine over to new libraries. People are just starting to make levels and content for it. It would be better to focus on adding necessary features, fixing bugs and organizing the community so that the game can be finished. Then, when its done, maybe it would make sense to change up the underlying code if you decided you wanted to port it to the GP2X or something. But at this stage, it seems like the engine is really tight and breaking it up just seems like a lot of unnecessary work.

Also I'd recommend releasing the BQ source so that other folks can port it to Mac and Linux. (when you feel its ready)

I've seen you working on this project for a long time, B... and hearing that you want to redo the engine makes me cry a bit. I really want to see it finished and released.

 

Now in terms of engine writing... what I learned by trying to write an engine that could do anything is that its pretty pointless. There are already game making tools out there specifically for the purpose of making any type of game. (Game Maker, Unity, etc) I think what's more valuable is having some CPP files that contain classes that you can reuse in whatever project you want. Its like the idea of components in Unity, you can just take the stuff you need and combine it where necessary.

After seeing Petri and Jon Blow talk at IGF and MIGS, and from my own personal experiences I definitely believe that prototyping is key. And when you're prototyping you don't really want to deal with the overhead of picking apart an engine you wrote for something else. You usually just want to throw some sprites on the screen with some input and game logic. Unity and Game Maker are good for that, but I know Petri has a library of code lying around that he can piece together.

Maybe that means having an entire scene management system, an input system, etc. It might even be useful to keep them together and call it an engine. But I don't really see the use of having a code base that can do both retro pixel art games and Braid/Aquaria-style OpenGL stuff. It seems like those are separate things. (unless you're making some crazy game that switches between those styles!)

Anyways, its up to you, but in my opinion the best bet would be to make BQ open source - then take the knowledge and experience from it to create a new code base for your new project.

[Alec]

Another point, but something I've noticed by releasing Aquaria... OpenGL has really bad driver support on Vista. A certain percentage of video card drivers will just shut an opengl game down partway through randomly. I don't think this happens with straight 2D stuff?

Just something to be aware of.

Also, if you think the SDL + OpenGL + BQ thing is a great idea, I'd say go for it. I've just posted my reactions based on what I know. Maybe you know stuff I don't.

[BMcC]

Whoa.

I think you're misunderstanding what I mean... I agree with you on most points:  I would prefer pure 2D for BQ, the OpenGL compatibility thing worries me, and I definitely don't wanna get stuck in a rut with engine-building.  (C'mon, man, you know me!)

But I only use Allegro for timers, blitting, and input.  From what I understand, it'd be fairly easy to replace that with SDL.  It'd hardly be redoing the engine!  (Ugh, that makes me shiver just thinking about it!)  I probably did a more complicated rewrite when I put the moving platform stuff in.  (Again, this is not for BQ directly.  I need to make my own games and I need (at least, I think I need) OpenGL to do what I want to do.  My hope was that by integrating OGL and whatever else directly I could simultaneously improve BQ while working on this other stuff.)

I hear what you're saying re: engines, though!  I was pretty surprised when you first told me that.  So... I should start from scratch on new stuff?  (Or, at least take out the parts from this engine and write the rest?)  What worries me about that is my code, while modular to a degree, may not be that modular.  (I guess while I'm reworking it for BQ, I could work on that.)  And I only need a few certain components to take it to a point I'd be really happy with.  (The lerp stuff, OGL, and the new FMOD, specially.)

Oh yeah, also, it's super quick to add content with this engine as-is.  When I get to prototyping, I'd probably use it instead of something else.  (Being so familiar with it makes a big difference, though, I'm sure!)

Alright, off to the county I go!  (Five hours 'til my wife's home!)  Thanks for the input.  I'd like to figure this out and get rolling on new stuff ASAP.

... (unless you're making some crazy game that switches between those styles!) ...

... Maybe you know stuff I don't.

Unlikely!

Edit:  Haha, I used nested parenthetical statements!  I need to read less Saligner.

[Alec]

Aha, sorry I think I misunderstood what you were planning on doing. (at least partly)

 

Yeah, engines can work if they are loose-enough frameworks. It also depends what type of games you're doing. (obviously)

[Gravious]

I still say you really should go for SDL+OpenGL for future projects, but reading Alec's reasoned response has me in agreement, just get BQ out the door first!

I've refactored my codebase and thus lengthened development on my own projects enough to want to scrap one game at the verge of release (Atoms) and even give up on 3 others before i started in earnest.

now i have a new codebase that though its nowhere near complete, does what i want, i'm happy to carry on.  I'd hate you to abandon BQ because its too much effort to get something working mid-conversion...

[BMcC]

Grav:  No!  Not an option.  I need to get to my own games ASAP.  It's been too long!

And there's no way I'm going to abandon BQ, believe me.  Especially not now.  (Honestly, I don't think it's even possible for me to get that stuck on something.)

Alec:  Hm, so... what should I do?  I imagine that adding to this engine would be easier than having a separate codebase for new projects, but I might be (likely am) wrong.

Would you be willing to help me piece together the new components?  I find no pleasure in engine building, but I need certain things to move forward.  (Halp, plx!)

[BMcC]

News:  I think I'm going to split up the To Do list for the next build and get an update out soon.  Smaller, more frequent updates is the way to go, I think...

Also!  I found a solution for my Big Engine.  So BQ is going to become a super-fleshed-out 2D-only engine.  This will be good.

[Snakey]

I'll add in my 2 cents, for what its worth, there would be quite a number of problems shifting to OpenGL at this stage anyways. For a start, the dimensions of most bitmaps right now are weird sizes.

So even if you were to change all that and make all bitmaps powers of two, it will be a pain in the ass for everyone else.

If you were to load bitmaps, then cut them up in memory to power of two chunks, you would wind up with a lot of texture handles (Some of the large tilesets may produce a hundred or so texture handles!) and this isn't really an efficient way of doing things.

Texture sampling is also going to be an issue. Ideally with the way OpenGL works and so forth, you will probably see a lot of bleeding issues. I generally give a 1 pixel border on a lot of my OpenGL resources so that I don't get this problem, although you can some what fix this by using different sampling methods.

I don't believe the switch to OpenGL is going to add much, and will probably be a big gigantic head ache for you. I can understand why, you may have liked to do it ... but certainly it would have been better to have done it from the start.

My next 2D engine for my game (which is still in documentation planning) will be using OpenGL however, so feel free to chat to me about it at any time!

 

[BMcC]

Word, yeah.  I had decided to keep BQ a purely 2D engine and make a new OpenGL engine from scratch.

I may still need help with that, yeah.

[Gravious]

How's the OpenGL stuff going Bran?

[BMcC]

I haven't directly worked on it since I talked to you last (been making records and working a small 2D game), but I don't think it'll be too much trouble once I get back to it.  Just need to buckle down.

[BMcC]

Good news everyone!  The Scripting Guide has been filled out!

Now there's no excuse for not creating new and exciting objects and enemies. 

If you need clarification on anything, or if you think I should add anything to the guide, just say so.

Happy scripting!

[BMcC]

UPDATE: Making this game with Kyle "Savage" Pulver has forced me to add scrolling and camera controls, make some optimizations, allow multiple display layers for particles (which I used to get a parallax effect), and, best of all, add the almighty SCREEN SHAKE effect.  (!)

Today I think I'm going to work in adaptive audio.

Since the map size is static, you can't scroll in BQ (sorry!), but it is now fully supported by the engine, with the in-game editor and all.  You will be able to access all the other neat stuff once I update the build, though.  Also, none of this breaks BQed, thank goodness.

P.S. I was this close to calling the BQ engine the Monocle Engine, but since that's now a (better) thing, I think it'll be called the CHARM engine (for reasons all my own).  So the expanded version of the external editor could be called CHARMed, which is awesome.

[TideGear]

UPDATE: Making this game with Kyle "Savage" Pulver has forced me to add scrolling and camera controls, make some optimizations, allow multiple display layers for particles (which I used to get a parallax effect), and, best of all, add the almighty SCREEN SHAKE effect.  (!)

Careful, BMcC! Many a lesser soul has become a hollow shell of what it once was by working with "The Pulver-izer"!

[BMcC]

Too true.  (That's why I'm dressed in layers.)

Tangent: I admire how regularly he showers.

[eerr]

why .rar?

[BMcC]

Why not?

[Phasma Felis]

Why not?

'Cause Windows doesn't know how to read it by default. And all the programs it recommends are nagware, I think.

Is there a good free .RAR reader for Windows?

[Wahooney]

Google '7zip'. It's free, open, nag free and it supports the brilliant 7z format.