next »

[Matt Thorson]

Yeah, the ONLY time I've had speed problems in GM is when I did some large scale 3D stuff, which I really shouldn't have been doing in GM anyway.

Why not?

It's not your fault that Game Maker takes up over 9000x more memory for a game than the same game written in C++. Stop blaming yourself and restricting yourself, there is nothing that you "shouldn't" be doing. It's simply Game Maker's fault that what it's doing does not work as well as it should. With all due respect, your opinions are one of the most closed-minded and obsessively politically correct I've seen on this forum. I'm not going to further discuss this, I'm not going to post any examples because it's more of a subconscious attitude thing you have which is hard to point out, and I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings, but it feels SO good just to let this out in one post. Your posts have made me pent up rage for you in me, and I just wanted to get that out. Thank you.

Also, on top of 3D, Game Maker doesn't handle physics and inverse kinematics well either.

I lol'd at the tiny text part - I think Architekt is a pretty cool cat despite disagreeing with him on quite a few posts he's made.  He is always a very open-minded guy who is very accepting or criticism and others' opinions and I would much sooner apply the "your opinions are one of the most closed-minded" part to you.  I especially love the fact that you started it with "With all due respect" :D

Anyways, yeah, all those GMites should get off their high horses and learn real manly man programming so they can avoid limitations that don't affect the projects they're working on anyways.  They're all just "restricting themselves" to an engine that allows them to be exponentially more productive when really they should be sacrificing productivity for the untold riches of speed and memory gains which would result in... the exact same finished product.

Honestly, if GM forced me to compromise on my vision for a game, I wouldn't hesitate to drop it and search for something more appropriate for the project.  So far this has only happened once.  Real game designers don't care how "hardcore" their code is - they just want to create an awesome finished product.

I know what you're taking about. The two engines I've posted aren't anywhere near efficiency and power over productivity, especially compared to Game Maker when it comes to 3D. Game Maker doesn't make 3D programming as friendly as it makes 2D programming, so why not use something that can actually do 3D relatively well? I posted minimalistic/Python-coded 3D engines instead of OGRE/pure C++ and OpenGL/DirectX for productivity reasons, not to be hardcore. Otherwise I would've suggested writing it in machine code.

For 2D games I openly admit that Game Maker is great at quick prototyping, but with 3D that is simply not the case. You're better off just using something else if you're going to be primarilly utilizing three dimensions.

Oh GM sucks at 3D.  Always has.

Honestly I've never even thought of using GM for 3D... it's just terrible at it.  The creator of the program even admitted this when the functionality was first added.

So yeah, I guess we agree there?  Game Maker itself admits it isn't a viable option for 3D - as far as I gather it's just there for the curious to get a taste of 3D programming concepts.

[GregWS]

I think Architekt is a pretty cool cat

Dude, you should see me in my Obligatory Architect Black Turtleneck.  :D  I bought it as a joke, but I actually wear it sometimes now.

Honestly, if GM forced me to compromise on my vision for a game, I wouldn't hesitate to drop it and search for something more appropriate for the project.  So far this has only happened once.  Real game designers don't care how "hardcore" their code is - they just want to create an awesome finished product.

This is my sentiment exactly.  I'm quite satisfied with GM, and as long as it isn't holding me back, why switch?  I guess that's how I view a lot of things in life really, no point switching things up just for the sake of it.

For 2D games I openly admit that Game Maker is great at quick prototyping, but with 3D that is simply not the case. You're better off just using something else if you're going to be primarilly utilizing three dimensions.

I think it depends upon the type of 3D game and the level of detail you're going for.  Like I'd said before, 2.5D would definitely work well in GM (funny we don't see more of those), and very simple 3D games are quite doable too.

I've been messing around recently with using my Wii BalanceBoard as a PC input through GlovePIE, and I'll admit that I've been pretty tempted to whip up a really simple jet-skiing b-game in GM (basic side to side obstacle dodging with some jumps here and there).

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

For those who want a 3D equivalent to GM, where you can make 3D games without much coding (although it allows you to code if you like) check out this: http://www.3dgamestudio.com/

It's a tad expensive, but not outrageously so. And it's the closest thing to a 3D version of GM as you're going to get.

[KniteBlargh]

Well, I've been pecking around at other projects on my own so far, but by doing so, I've taken the term "trial and error" to a higher level. LOL Still having fun though.

Anyway, I finally followed your tutorial Derek, so now my "awesome art game that explores the inherent emptiness of human existence" is all set up for your next tutorial, which I'm still eagerly looking forward to. Oh, and by following the tutorial, I kind of came up with a new idea and stuff for the finished product, so yay.

[GregWS]

For those who want a 3D equivalent to GM, where you can make 3D games without much coding (although it allows you to code if you like) check out this: http://www.3dgamestudio.com/

It's a tad expensive, but not outrageously so. And it's the closest thing to a 3D version of GM as you're going to get.

Any experience with it rinku?

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Some, not much. I want to make a low-poly RPG (like FF7, but even uglier models) in it one day. Not that it can't do much, much better (it's capable of PS2-quality graphics or better from what I've seen), it's just that I like the low-poly style.

[GregWS]

Some, not much. I want to make a low-poly RPG (like FF7, but even uglier models) in it one day. Not that it can't do much, much better (it's capable of PS2-quality graphics or better from what I've seen), it's just that I like the low-poly style.

Now that's something we can agree on! 

Low poly games ftw! 

I'd like to make a low poly flight game like the original Star Fox at some point.  More recently I got thinking about that, accept now with hoverboards and optimized to use with my Wii Balance Board and GlovePIE, because it actually can be quite fun as a method of control, believe it or not; hard though, very hard.  And because of that difficulty the game naturally has to be a bit easier; can't win em' all I figure.  Haha, on the intro screen: "Do not use a joystick or analog stick to play this game or you find it very easy and loose all respect for me!"  :D

So, also out of curiousity, what would you use to create said low-poly models?  (Were it me I'd probably fall back on my SketchUp skills, but that's not exactly good for people and "organic" forms, more buildings/vehicles/etc..)

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

I don't know yet; I only have experience with Blender and ZBrush, so probably Blender.

[GregWS]

Well, due to the sheer easiness/speed, I'd recommend trying SketchUp.  And given that you're thinking low poly, it would be even easier.  The free version contains everything you'd need, assuming that you export as .KML (google earth model file) and open that in Blender for further converting (the free version lacks all the model exporters).

Oh, wait, no, I'm being silly: you can't use the free one for commercial use, so I guess you'd actually have to buy it if you wanted to use it (I'd say it's worth the $500 but still).  Eh, give the free one a go and see what you think, there really is something incredible about it.  Probably would work wonders for level design too.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

$500 is a bit out of my range right now, but it's possible. I don't find Blender or ZBrush difficult to use, though, so I'm not sure I'd benefit by trying an easier to use modeling program.

[GregWS]

It's not so much about the difficulty, but the sheer speed at which you can do stuff.  I was working on a design project with some classmates yesterday, and I quite literally modeled (a very rough form) of the building while we were throwing ideas around.  Speed is definitely something we can all benefit from, so that's why I'm so in favor of it.  It is the closest thing I've seen to sketching in 3D, which is incredibly useful in my industry, and great for low detail stuff.

Here's the link to the free version, try it out for like 10 minutes and see what you think; no loss I figure: http://sketchup.google.com/

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Will try eventually, when I get around to making that game. By then maybe they'd have lowered the price or something.

[GregWS]

The price thing is because it's mostly marketed towards architectural firms that are already used to paying out of their asses for Autodesk and Adobe products; by our standards, $500 is a steal.  Though as a student I can get a 1 year license (as opposed to always having it) for $50, still has the non-commercial use stipulation though.

Interestingly, Google has started marketing it towards game designers as a tool that lets more artisty people like Fish, who may not do a lot of highly technical modeling, still create nice stuff (as they already do with photoshop).

[Skofo]

It's only for Windows and Mac...

How shite. 

[Mir@k]

Is it coding stuff with C++ really that hard/complex/time consuming?
All of these small five years i've spent in the world of game making has been focused in music composing and art, i'm coming to the point i will educate myself in the art of programming since up until now the only thing i've made related to that has been using Game Maker and adding small bits of self written pseudo code there to make the game "not so drag and dropped".

I got a couple of e-books i will print about game programming on C++, but after visiting these forums for a few days i've been crossing with some negative comments about C++, which i though WAS the best programming language for games so i don't know what to do anymore.

In the field of 3D, i've only tried it once with a freeware program called "Anim8tor", needless to say that program is extremely easy to use, but limited. It can only export in very few formats and it can't do high quality models.

Then again, i'm a begginer in the whole "high poly/low poly" model thing.
My first goal is to be able to make good 2D games with code made by myself, then be able to model things like this and use them in game programming to do some basic platformers first, then move on to bigger things. I only tried game maker for 3D once, but i never got too far on it.

[Neo1493]

I just started learning C++ and its about 2 thousand times harder than gml also for 3d modeling for free I recomend blender how ever some people dont like blender.

[Hideous]

I find C++ easier than GML, but that's probably because I don't understand GML at all.

[GregWS]

But GML is so easy!

[Neo1493]

Okay then in my experience C++ is harder due to the fact that it has you do all the work while gml does a lot of work for you. I hate how hard it is to draw stuff to the screen in C++ unless there's a easier way than the one I know.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

It's not about which *language* is harder. Coding in C++ is no more difficult than coding in GML. It's what Game Maker *includes* that makes making games faster and easier in it: all kinds of systems are included.

As an example, let's say you wanted to make a 2D top-down RPG. In C++, you'd have to code the entire tiling engine from scratch. In GM, it already had a perfectly functional tiling engine, so you don't have to code it. If you coded a tiling engine in GML it'd be just as hard as coding it in C++, but the point is that if GM's tiling engine works fine, you don't need to spend 2 months coding the tiling engine (and more months for all the other things you'd need) before you could get to work on the game.

So don't think of it in terms of the difficulty of the languages, think of it in terms of whether you really want to code all that low-level stuff from scratch, perhaps spending a year coding before you get to the actual coding of the game itself and its gameplay, or do you not mind usable but less customizable pre-made low-level stuff.