Search Results

Search found 31319 results on 1253 pages for 'source engine'.

Page 1/1253 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Importance of scripting engine at Cocos2d Game Engine

    - by Mahbubur R Aaman
    Each Game Engine is different and solves different problems in different ways, so the engine design does vary greatly from engine to engine (even though a lot of principles are shared from engine to engine). Cocos2D is a great product on it’s own, but it doesn’t expose engine functionality to a scripting Language like Lua, JavaScript etc. My Question: How much important to integrate a Scripting Engine at Cocos2d?

    Read the article

  • Getting a Database into Source Control

    - by Grant Fritchey
    For any number of reasons, from simple auditing, to change tracking, to automated deployment, to integration with application development processes, you’re going to want to place your database into source control. Using Red Gate SQL Source Control this process is extremely simple. SQL Source Control works within your SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) interface.  This means you can work with your databases in any way that you’re used to working with them. If you prefer scripts to using the GUI, not a problem. If you prefer using the GUI to having to learn T-SQL, again, that’s fine. After installing SQL Source Control, this is what you’ll see when you open SSMS:   SQL Source Control is now a direct piece of the SSMS environment. The key point initially is that I currently don’t have a database selected. You can even see that in the SQL Source Control window where it shows, in red, “No database selected – select a database in Object Explorer.” If I expand my Databases list in the Object Explorer, you’ll be able to immediately see which databases have been integrated with source control and which have not. There are visible differences between the databases as you can see here:   To add a database to source control, I first have to select it. For this example, I’m going to add the AdventureWorks2012 database to an instance of the SVN source control software (I’m using uberSVN). When I click on the AdventureWorks2012 database, the SQL Source Control screen changes:   I’m going to need to click on the “Link database to source control” text which will open up a window for connecting this database to the source control system of my choice.  You can pick from the default source control systems on the left, or define one of your own. I also have to provide the connection string for the location within the source control system where I’ll be storing my database code. I set these up in advance. You’ll need two. One for the main set of scripts and one for special scripts called Migrations that deal with different kinds of changes between versions of the code. Migrations help you solve problems like having to create or modify data in columns as part of a structural change. I’ll talk more about them another day. Finally, I have to determine if this is an isolated environment that I’m going to be the only one use, a dedicated database. Or, if I’m sharing the database in a shared environment with other developers, a shared database.  The main difference is, under a dedicated database, I will need to regularly get any changes that other developers have made from source control and integrate it into my database. While, under a shared database, all changes for all developers are made at the same time, which means you could commit other peoples work without proper testing. It all depends on the type of environment you work within. But, when it’s all set, it will look like this: SQL Source Control will compare the results between the empty folders in source control and the database, AdventureWorks2012. You’ll get a report showing exactly the list of differences and you can choose which ones will get checked into source control. Each of the database objects is scripted individually. You’ll be able to modify them later in the same way. Here’s the list of differences for my new database:   You can select/deselect all the objects or each object individually. You also get a report showing the differences between what’s in the database and what’s in source control. If there was already a database in source control, you’d only see changes to database objects rather than every single object. You can see that the database objects can be sorted by name, by type, or other choices. I’m going to add a comment such as “Initial creation of database in source control.” And then click on the Commit button which will put all the objects in my database into the source control system. That’s all it takes to get the objects into source control initially. Now is when things can get fun with breaking changes to code, automated deployments, unit testing and all the rest.

    Read the article

  • Does it matter to you that a software is "available source" but not "open source"

    - by ccpod
    You probably know the list of open source licenses officially approved by the OSI. Most notably I guess would be the GPL, MIT, [insert your favorite license here]. I recently ran into a project which although was open source (the creator made all source code available), was not officially open source under one of those official licenses. It released the source, but made no promise to release the source in the future. It allowed modification suggestions, but made no promises to accept patches and disallowed external distribution of externally-patched versions. It allowed the use of the software in commercial or paid projects, but disallowed the sale of the software itself. I suppose it could be called "available source" not open source as we like to think of it. I can see why the management team of a company wouldn't want to do business with this software. They can't fork it, they can't sell it, they can't create their own version of the software and distribute it or sell it. But would it matter to you as part of a software engineering team who's just using this software? I can still get my work done with it, I can use it in a project for which I'm paid (but I can't sell the software itself, which I'm not in the business of doing anyway), and I can make changes to the code to make it behave differently for my needs (but I can't make those modifications public), and if I do want those modifications officially made available to others, the approval is up to the project itself and they choose whether to incorporate them in an official release or not. So we know that a company that wants to base its business on this "available source" software can't do that, but as someone from the software engineering team, would those differences matter to you or do they seem less relevant? Curious what others think of this.

    Read the article

  • Does it matter to you that a software is "available source" but not "open source"

    - by ccpod
    You probably know the list of open source licenses officially approved by the OSI. Most notably I guess would be the GPL, MIT, [insert your favorite license here]. I recently ran into a project which although was open source (the creator made all source code available), was not officially open source under one of those official licenses. It released the source, but made no promise to release the source in the future. It allowed modification suggestions, but made no promises to accept patches and disallowed external distribution of externally-patched versions. It allowed the use of the software in commercial or paid projects, but disallowed the sale of the software itself. I suppose it could be called "available source" not open source as we like to think of it. I can see why the management team of a company wouldn't want to do business with this software. They can't fork it, they can't sell it, they can't create their own version of the software and distribute it or sell it. But would it matter to you as part of a software engineering team who's just using this software? I can still get my work done with it, I can use it in a project for which I'm paid (but I can't sell the software itself, which I'm not in the business of doing anyway), and I can make changes to the code to make it behave differently for my needs (but I can't make those modifications public), and if I do want those modifications officially made available to others, the approval is up to the project itself and they choose whether to incorporate them in an official release or not. So we know that a company that wants to base its business on this "available source" software can't do that, but as someone from the software engineering team, would those differences matter to you or do they seem less relevant? Curious what others think of this.

    Read the article

  • What are some examples of open source software that has turned into closed source software? [on hold]

    - by Verrier
    As the title says... can anyone think of any software that has made the transition from open source to closed source / proprietary? These could include software owned by the same company who decided to take a once open source offering and turn it into closed source... but I'm really looking for some examples of companies who developed a commercial closed source product off of an existing open source one (obviously with a permissive license).

    Read the article

  • Why should I consider using the Source Engine?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've always been a Valve fan, but now that I have the opportuninty to choose a game engine for a project I'm not sure I want to choose the Source Engine after watching this wikipedia entry. My options essentially boiled down to an open source stack (Horde3D + Zoidcom + Spark + SFML + CEGUI, and well, not OSS but PhysX too), UDK and the Source Engine. My question is (because I really have no experience with it) what would be the technical reasons (not license or other) for any developer to choose the Source Engine over any other open source or commercial option ?, is the Source Engine really worth it as a game development tool or has it time already passed and it is obsolete against other solutions?. Thanks Edit: Precised my question a little more , I'm looking for technical reasons to choose the Source Engine.

    Read the article

  • Databases in Source Control

    - by Grant Fritchey
    I’ve been working as a database professional for quite a long time. But originally, I was a developer. And I loved being a developer. There was this constant feedback loop of a job well done, your code compiled and it ran. Every time this happened successfully, you’d check it into source control. These days you have to add another step; the code passed all the tests, unit, line, regression, qa, whatever, then into source control it goes. As a matter of fact, when I first made the jump from developer to DBA/database developer/database professional, source control was the one thing I couldn’t believe was missing from the DBA toolbox. Come to find out, source control was only the beginning of what was missing from your standard DBAs set of skills. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not disrespecting the DBA. They’re focused where they should be, on your production data. But there has to be a method for developing applications that include databases and the database side of that development and deployment process has long been lacking. This lack of development and deployment methodologies is a part of what has given rise to some of the wackier implementations of Object Relational Mapping tools, the NoSQL movement, and some of the other foul cursing that is directed towards databases, DBAs, and database development by application developers. Some of that is well earned. A lot isn’t. But it is a fact that database professionals, in general, do not have as sophisticated a model for managing development and deployment as application developers do. We could charge out and start trying to come up with our own standards and methods. I’m sure people have done exactly that. However, I’m lazy, and not terribly bright. Rather than try to invent a whole new process, I’m going to look to my developer roots and choose instead to emulate the developers. They’re sitting over there across the hall from me working with SCRUM/Agile/Waterfall/Object Driven/Feature Driven/Test Driven development processes that they’ve been polishing for years. What if I just started working on database development the same way they work on code development? Win! Ah, but now I have to have a mechanism for treating my database like application code. First, I need a method for getting it into source control. That’s where Red Gate’s SQL Source Control comes into the picture. SQL Source Control works within SQL Server Management Studio to connect your database objects up to the source control system of your choice. Right out of the box SQL Source Control can link to TFS, SVN or Vault. With a little work you can connect it to Git or just about any other source control system. With the ability to get my database into source control, a lot of possibilities for more direct integration with the application development teams open up.

    Read the article

  • Why should I consider using the Source Engine?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've always been a Valve fan, but now that I have the opportuninty to choose a game engine for a project I'm not sure I want to choose the Source Engine after watching this wikipedia entry. My options essentially boiled down to an open source stack (Horde3D + Zoidcom + Spark + SFML + CEGUI, and well, not OSS but PhysX too), UDK and the Source Engine. My question is (because I really have no experience with it) why should any developer choose the Source Engine over any other open source or commercial option?, is the Source Engine really worth it as a game development tool or has it time already passed and it is obsolete against other solutions?. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Which Open Source Licenses can address concerns for an Open Source Game Engine?

    - by Chris
    I am on a team that is looking to open source an engine we are building. It's intended as an engine for Online RPG style games. We're writing it to work on both desktops and android platforms. I've been over to the OSI http://opensource.org/licenses/category to check out the most common licenses. However, this will be my first time going into an open source project and I wanted to know if the community had some insight into which licenses might be best suited. Key licensing concerns: Removing or limiting our liability (most already seem to cover this, but stating for completeness). We want other developers to be able to take part or all of our project and use it in their own projects with proper accreditation to our project. Licensing should not hinder someone's ability to quickly use the engine. They should be able to download a release and start using it without needing to wait on licensing issues. Game content (gfx, sound, etc.) that is not part of the engine should be allowed to be licensed separately. If someone is using our engine, they can retain full copy right of their content, including engine generated data. Our primary goal is exposure, which is why we're going open source to start with. Both for the project and for the individuals developing it. Are there any licenses that can require accreditation visible to players? While I'd put our primary goal as exposure, for licensing the accreditation is less of a concern. From what I've read through (and have been able to understand) it doesn't seem like any of the licenses cover anything that is produced by the licensed software. Are there any that state this specifically, or does simply not mentioning it leave it open for other licensing? Are there any other concerns that we should consider? Has anyone had any issues using any of these licenses?

    Read the article

  • MUD source code

    - by Tchalvak
    I haven't been able to find a lot of the old, open source mud source codes. I find the way they did things very applicable to text-based/browser based games, and I'd love to be able to skim through parts of 'em for inspiration. For instance, we have this huge list of muds and the relationships between them, but little by way of access to source code. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUD_trees Often (I'm looking at you, dikumud, http://www.dikumud.com/links.aspx ) the sites of the mud itself doesn't even have a working link to the source. https://github.com/alexmchale/merc-mud has a copy of merc that I found, which certainly contains other works within it's history, but the pickings seems sparse. Does anyone have better resources for gaining access to MUD source code than these?

    Read the article

  • What are some ramifications of open source software turning into closed source software? [on hold]

    - by Verrier
    If a company takes a permissively licensed open source application and then develops a closed source application from that by reworking extensive parts of the application, adding new features and applying bug fixes... Ignoring any license requirements... How does the transition happen and what can be done to prevent it beyond choosing a difference license? What are the (ethical or social) responsibilities for the company? (For example: Giving back to the open source project would be the ethical thing to do) If the open source version and closed source version are both available, how does the competition affect either product? Are there any examples of companies or products that have done this (either successfully or unsuccessfully) in the past? What was the community attitude toward those projects?

    Read the article

  • Choice of open source license for some components, closed source for others

    - by Peter Serwylo
    G'day, I am working on a set of multiplayer games, where different games play against each other (e.g. you play a Tetris clone, I play an Asteroids clone, but we are both competing against each other). All the games would be based on the same underlying framework written specifically for this project. I am struggling to comprehend how I would license this so that: The underlying framework is open source, so other people can create new games based on it. Some games built on the framework are open source Other games are closed source The goal is to have two bundles on something like the Android market: One free and open source package which has a collection of games Another "premium" (although I dislike that word) paid package which has a different collection of games. Usually I am fond of permissive licenses such as MIT/BSD, however I would prefer something more in the vein of the GPL for this. This is because for software such as the snes-9x SNES emulator, which is a great piece of software, there is a ton of poor quality versions being sold, whereas it would be preferable if there was just one authoritative version which was always kept up to date, and distributed for free. If the underlying framework was GPL'd, would I be able to build closed source games on top of it? Thanks for your input.

    Read the article

  • 3D open source physics engine suitable for mobile platforms (Android and iOS)

    - by lukeluke
    I have made some research and found that bullet, ode, newton and some others are open source physics engines that should be portable enough (but I have never tried to comile/use anyone of them on phones). I am writing my games for mobile platforms in C++, so the engine should be C or C++. I need a fast engine, since mobile platforms have limited resources. I need a free engine. A good design would be nice to have too. What engine is best suited for my task? What I really would like to hear from you is your direct experience. Documentation and support (for example, forum or an IRC channel) is a really important aspect to take into consideration.

    Read the article

  • Open Source Survey: Oracle Products on Top

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    Oracle continues to work with the open source community to bring the most innovative and productive software to market (more). Oracle products received the most votes in several key categories of the 2010 Linux Journal Reader's Choice Awards. With over 12,000 technologists reporting, these product earned top spots: Best Office Suite: OpenOffice.org Best Single Office Program: OpenOffice.org Writer Best Database: MySQL Best Virtualization Solution: VirtualBox "As the leading open source technology and service provider, Oracle continues to work with the community stakeholders to rapidly innovate many open source products for use in fully tested production environments," says Edward Screven, Oracle's chief corporate architect. "Supporting open source is important to Oracle and our customers, and we continue to invest in it." According to a recent report by the Linux Foundation, Oracle is one of the top ten contributors to the Linux Kernel. Oracle also contributes millions of lines of code to these important projects: OpenJDK: 7,002,579 Eclipse: 1,800,000 (#3 in active committers) MySQL: 5,073,113 NetBeans: 7,870,446 JSF: 701,980 Apache MyFaces Trinidad: 1,316,840 Hudson: 1,209,779 OpenOffice.org: 7,500,000

    Read the article

  • Dilemma for growing a project: Open source volunteer developers VS closed source paid / revshare developers? [closed]

    - by giorgio79
    I am trying to grow my project, and I am vaccillating between some examples. Some options seem to be: 1. open sourcing the project to draw volunteer developers. Pros This would mean anyone can try and make some money off the code that would motivate them to contribute back and grow the project. Cons Existing bigger could easily copy and paste my work so far. They can also replicate without having access to the code, but that would take more time. I also thought of using AGPL license, but again, code can still be copied without redistribution. After all, enforcing a license costs a lot of money, and I cannot just say to a possible copycat that it seems you copied my code, show me what you got. 2. Keep the project closed source, but create some kind of a developer program where they get revshare Pros I keep the main rights for the project, but still generate interest by creating a developer program. Noone can copy code easily, just with some considerable effort, but make contributions easy as a breeze. I am also seeing many companies just open source a part of their projects, like Acquia does not open source its multisite setup, or github does not open source some of its core business. Cons Less attention from open source committed devs. Conclusion So option 2 seems the most secure, but would love some feedback.

    Read the article

  • Farseer Physics Engine and the Ms-PL License

    - by Stephen Tierney
    Am I able to produce code for a game which uses the Farseer engine and release my code under an open source license other than the Ms-PL? My concern is with the following section from the license: If you distribute any portion of the software in source code form, you may do so only under this license by including a complete copy of this license with your distribution. If you distribute any portion of the software in compiled or object code form, you may only do so under a license that complies with this license. If I do not include Farseer in my source code distribution does this give me an exemption from this clause as I am not distributing the software? My code merely uses its functions. No where in the license does it force you to provide source code for derivative works or linking works, it simply gives you the option of "if you distribute".

    Read the article

  • Graphical quality of open source vs. commercial games

    - by Toktik
    I'm new in Game development. I have researched many open source games. But I have not met any open source game which has high quality graphics, comparable to these found in commercial games. What is the reason for this? Are open source game engines not advanced enough to support such graphics or is there just a lack of assets, textures and models? I know that this question is very general, I would like to hear some points of view.

    Read the article

  • going from closed-source to open-source [closed]

    - by mspoerr
    I am thinking of releasing the source code of my application (Freeware at the moment). It is written in C++ with VisualStudio 2008 and all used 3rd-party libs are free or open-source and platform independent. The idea to release the source-code is very old, but till now I did not want to show the code because I am not sure if it is nice/well designed (I am not a professional developer), but the application is growing and help would be very welcome, but I want to keep control... What do I need to consider? Is there any best practice for this scenario? The code itself is one thing, but there is much more like license, documentation, project settings, 3rd party libs, platform (Sourceforge, other?)

    Read the article

  • Need Guidance Making HTML5 Canvas Game Engine

    - by Scriptonaut
    So I have some free time this winter break and want to build a simple 2d HTML5 canvas game engine. Mostly a physics engine that will dictate the way objects move and interact(collisions, etc). I made a basic game here: http://caidenhome.com/HTML%205/pong.html and would like to make more, and thought that this would be a good reason to make a simple framework for this stuff. Here are some questions: Does the scripting language have to be Javascript? What about Ruby? I will probably write it with jQuery because of the selecting powers, but I'm curious either way. Are there any great guides you guys know of? I want a fast guide that will help me bust out this engine sometime in the next 2 weeks, hopefully sooner. What are some good conventions I should be aware of? What's the best way to get sound? At the moment I'm using something like this: var audioElement = document.createElement('audio'); audioElement.setAttribute('src', 'paddle_col.wav'); audioElement.load(); I'm interested in making this engine lightweight and extremely efficient, I will do whatever it takes to get great speeds and processing power. I know this question is fairly vague, but I just need a push in the right direction. Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • Open Source vs. Closed Source? Which one to choose? [closed]

    - by Rafal Chmiel
    So far, I was always creating open-source applications (or didn't publish them at all) because it was free for me to create a new CodePlex project, and upload everything. Couple of days ago I started wandering what kind of apps should I make, closed or open source. I can see "cons" and "pros" in both such as the ones below: Open Source: Pro, free project hosting (CodePlex is excellent for .NET app updates. ClickOnce etc) Pro, free help such as developers and designers Con, people can get your source code and (sometimes) use some of your code in their apps and make money Con, companies such as Microsoft, Twitter or Tumblr won't be looking forward in buying your project (like for example Twitter bought TweetDeck - TweetDeck being a closed source AIR application, of course) Closed Source: Pro, it's harder for people to copy your idea without the source code Pro, you're more likely to get acquired/bought by companies Con, no free hosting - you have to have a website to do so (not good for updates) Con, no free help What do you think? What do you think I should choose?

    Read the article

  • Best Platform/Engine for turn based Client/Server Android game

    - by Paradine
    I'm currently designing a turn based game for tablets. Initially for Android with porting to iOS later considered in design. I'm having trouble narrowing down the available technologies to even know where to spend my research time. I am hoping that if I explain what I am trying to achieve someone may be able to suggest a platform and/or engine. I've looked into some of the open source Engines ( http://www.cuteandroid.com/ten-open-source-android-2d-or-3d-game-engine-for-android-developers ) and some appear to handle much of what I might require - although with a higher focus on graphics than i need. Mages looks interesting although development appears to have ceased. If I could somehow leverage GoogleApps that would be excellent. Here is what I am trying to achieve: PvP turn based strategy game over internet - minimal animation and bandwidth required Players match up online using MetaGame system MatchID created on Resolution Server and Game starts Clients have 30 second countdown to select MoveString Clients sends small secure timestamped and MatchIDed MoveString to Resolution server Resolution server looks up Move String for each player, Resolves and Updates Players status in MatchID on Server Resolution server updates Client Views Repeat until victory conditions met - MatchID Closed, Rewards earned in MetaGame There will also need to be a full social and account system and metagame backend - but this could be running on separate system(s) Tablet in Offline mode would be catalog browsing and perhaps single player AI - bum I'm focusing on the Resolution Server at this point I'm not even certain if I would be looking at an Android App or a WebApp at this stage! I want a custom GUI so I guess an app - but maybe as I have little animation a WebApp might also work. Probably some combination of both. There will be very small overhead in data between client server - essentially a small text string every 30 seconds sent to the Resolution server which looks up the Effect and applies it to the Opponents string and determines some results to apply to the match. The client view is updated minimally with the results (only 5 in game Integers tracked) - perhaps triggering small animations/popups on the client to show the end result. e.g Explosion. If you have suggestions for a good technology or platform to best achieving the Resolution Server I'd love to hear. Also if you have experience with open source Engines - and could narrow down which (if any ) might be most suitable that would be a big help. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Best Platform/Engine for turn based Client/Server Android game

    - by Paradine
    I'm currently designing a turn based game for tablets. Initially for Android with porting to iOS later considered in design. I'm having trouble narrowing down the available technologies to even know where to spend my research time. I am hoping that if I explain what I am trying to achieve someone may be able to suggest a platform and/or engine. I've looked into some of the open source Engines ( http://www.cuteandroid.com/ten-open-source-android-2d-or-3d-game-engine-for-android-developers ) and some appear to handle much of what I might require - although with a higher focus on graphics than i need. Mages looks interesting although development appears to have ceased. If I could somehow leverage GoogleApps that would be excellent. Here is what I am trying to achieve: PvP turn based strategy game over internet - minimal animation and bandwidth required Players match up online using MetaGame system MatchID created on Resolution Server and Game starts Clients have 30 second countdown to select MoveString Clients sends small secure timestamped and MatchIDed MoveString to Resolution server Resolution server looks up Move String for each player, Resolves and Updates Players status in MatchID on Server Resolution server updates Client Views Repeat until victory conditions met - MatchID Closed, Rewards earned in MetaGame There will also need to be a full social and account system and metagame backend - but this could be running on separate system(s) Tablet in Offline mode would be catalog browsing and perhaps single player AI - bum I'm focusing on the Resolution Server at this point I'm not even certain if I would be looking at an Android App or a WebApp at this stage! I want a custom GUI so I guess an app - but maybe as I have little animation a WebApp might also work. Probably some combination of both. There will be very small overhead in data between client server - essentially a small text string every 30 seconds sent to the Resolution server which looks up the Effect and applies it to the Opponents string and determines some results to apply to the match. The client view is updated minimally with the results (only 5 in game Integers tracked) - perhaps triggering small animations/popups on the client to show the end result. e.g Explosion. If you have suggestions for a good technology or platform to best achieving the Resolution Server I'd love to hear. Also if you have experience with open source Engines - and could narrow down which (if any ) might be most suitable that would be a big help. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Open source vs commercial game engines

    - by Vanangamudi
    How commercial game accomplsih stunnning graphics with smooth game play? I am a huge die hard fan and follower of GNU Stallman and his philosophies and other Libre people Cmon how wud I miss Linus. but I got to admit commercial games does excellent jobs. One such good example is Assasin's Creed from Ubisoft. It has good quality graphcis and plays smoothly in my Dual core CPU with Nvidia Geforce 8400ES. Rockstar GTA4 has awesome graphcis but it's slower than AC considering the graphics quality tradeoff. Age of Empires from Ensemble studios, does include Massive crowd AI simulation, yet it plays so smoothly with eyecandy graphics and very large weapon sets and different techtree elements on the other hand. Open source games like Glest, 0A.D(still in alpha :) are not so smooth even though they have very restricted abilities? Coming to question: how do game companies achieve such optmizations, or the open source community is not doing optimizations, or there are any propriarity technological elements that benefits only the companies exists huh?? e.g the OpenSubDiv from Pixar just released open to community?? something like that. and why it is hard to implement optimizations? are there any legal restrictions???

    Read the article

  • Getting into game/game engine programming

    - by Darkslash
    So I am interested in learning game programming, but I really have an interest in the lower level engineering in games. I have openGL experience, and I am really interested in learning more about implementing AI, Physics, etc. I have a computer science degree, so I really like getting into technical stuff. Many times when I ask about this sort of thing, I get a lot of "Use an engine", "Use Unity3d", "Why waste your time writing code that already exists", etc etc. My idea was to use simpler libraries such as SFML or XNA so that I could learn how to implement the more complex systems. The thing is, although I do want to write games, I want to learn things that using something like Unity simply doesnt teach you. My goal is not to make a current generation quality 3D game to sell, I just want to make some cool smaller games and learn all I can about the programming side of game development. Is this something that people just do not do anymore? It seems like everywhere I turn people are using Unity or UDK or GameMaker. I fully understand why you would use a tool like these, but I cant see how they would suit my purposes. So where does someone like myself turn? Am I trying to learn something that people just do not bother doing anymore? Is the innovation in this area gone and just all about gameplay now? Im sorry if this question seems silly, but I am genuinely interested in knowing more about this and meeting more people who are interested in this sort of thing.

    Read the article

  • Open source clone for Starcraft

    - by sinekonata
    Two questions about a SC:Broodwar clone. Is there one yet? How likely is legal pursuit? Since almost all games I usually play now have an FOS alternative from alpha to way polished, I was wondering why can't I find one for SC, one of the biggest titans of the gaming community? So my first question is, is there a game that was made with the intention to emulate SC? Is it that I didn't look well enough? Could it really be that no one tackled what seems like a small effort compared to the creation of a game engine like Spring or games like Rigs of Rod or Minetest? And since SC is not being maintained at all shouldn't the incentive to see a bug free modable balanced version huge? What am I not getting here? In the event that there is none, is it a legal problem? Could it be that people expect Blizzard to release sources themselves? Or that developers don't see the point in having SC mechanics without the patented lore and aesthetics? And the trickier question, if I were to make SC an open source game, a total clone of it for the purposes of maintenance, modability, etc. Would Blizzard really sue a team of developer fans that just do them a favour knowing they don't lose any money from Korea broadcasts? Or would they do it not to set precedents. So thanks for reading all that, hope I'm not the only one to think it's weird that no one talks about it. See you.

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >