AGDG - AMATEUR GAME DEVELOPMENT GENERAL

...

INB4 anti-OOP Swe guy spends a whole other thread sperging about why OOP is satan whilst functional programming is superior in every way in the way he also thinks katanas are the beat all weapons.

We all know functional programming has its uses, you're not special or cool because you haven't made a game yet using what you claim to be the superior method. (Nor has anyone for that part).

slightly less saturated pls.

Reminder not to reply to the guy who thinks all OOP critics are a single boogeyman, and also believes that you can either have OOP or FP and nothing else.

Try the first one with the blue lighting.

Thats fun. Rigging is "okay" until you have to set up IKs.
Animation can go fuck itself.

essentially what I meant by If everyone's example of good OOP is using as little of OOP as possible, why are they using OOP to begin with.

What does functional programming even look like? How does it even work?

nigga, you fucked up the previous thread link again.

Previous thread:

Most games are built with ECS already. For example, every game built with Unity is using ECS (Or at least Unity's "EC" modification of it where Components also contain logic). Unreal of course also uses component-oriented design.

DON'T REPLY

don't look back, always face forward user. the future is all that matters.

at work i designed SQL abstraction in OOP, THAT'S where it shined. for games? stay away from inheritance and you'll be fine

Ideabros, hit me with a new twist on roguelikes. Give me some cool ideas.

>Hurr there have been no games using functional programming the last 10 years but its superior because muh fedora
>Hurr communism has always ended in famine/genocide but its a superior form of government because muh fedora
>Hurr everyone who eats this poison dies but when I eat it I'll survive because muh fedora

"Object-oriented programming (OOP) refers to a type of computer programming (software design) in which programmers define not only the data type of a data structure, but also the types of operations (functions) that can be applied to the data structure."

docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/GameObject.html

Hmm yeah unity is not at all OOP just because it fits the very definition of it!

Wow.

>for games? stay away from inheritance and you'll be fine
You should also stay away from putting data and behaviour together, for the most part. It makes it very hard for components to interact cleanly. Case in point: Unity.

>Well I'm going by what a pure object oriented programming language is (squeak as an example)
Oh ok. That's very strange.
Look at this link in this post
He's talking a lot about a lot of things and it's worth a watch. But the direct criticisms of OOP arrives at 18:05. I disagree with some of them (at least how he presented it. I can't assume to know what he's thinking magically). But that's the stringent OOP. And it's absolutely bonkers in summary. Still. It's what people have desired. It's weird to think that.

A pro wrestling roguelike where you can do ridiculous grapples and winning over the crowd is as important as beating the other guy up.

That doesn't contradict what I said. ECS is a subset of OOP. It just favors component-based composition over inheritance. Which is exactly how Unity works.

docs.unity3d.com/Manual/CreatingAndUsingScripts.html
>The behavior of GameObjects is controlled by the Components that are attached to them.

how to create a human in blender in one easy step.

www.makehuman.org

That's a really bad definition of OOP.

If that's all it is (structs with member functions). THen clearly nobody is complaining about that. I haven't heard anyone complain about optional namespaces.
This is OOP:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming
>inb4 you quote their definition of an object and assume they're defining oop

>ECS is a subset of OOP
Not really. Unity's version of ECS uses (too much) OOP in its implementation, but the game objects themselves are not OOP objects.

What does roguelike even mean anymore? I've seen roguelikes that don't have grids, roguelikes without permadeath, and roguelikes without turn-based gameplay.

It seems like these days "roguelike" just means "procedural levels + pixel art"

>ECS is a subset of OOP
Not at all. ECS has nothing to do with OOP other than that OOP people use OOP to implement ECS.

What you're saying is basically that a print function is OOP because c++ does std::cout.

Why do rookie programmers claim ground so easily?

For all GM:S peeps just to let you know that "display_set_gui_size(width, height);" Put somewhere at the start of your game will make all things drawn on the GUI layer scale properly if you full size the game.

Putting this here because I just wasted about four fucking days trying to figure out how to do this using a million methods before finding out Game maker has it's own fucking bit that isn't mentioned anywhere.

Fucking fuck.

Print functions don't require objects to work. ECS does not work without Objects.

FPS, same shop, progression and upgrades system as Downwell but instead of going down you're walking up stairs to a gate like pic related, after each gate there is a giant arena with a boss like in painkiller, after each boss there is another world with the same stairs and gate but different theme.

Enemies use the stairs to throw some shit at you and traps. of course the stairs aren't all flat and some structures allow you to take cover behind or something.

Like in Downwell you can choose to run and get past the enemies but the enemies you don't kill will respawn later in the level (so if you're a bad situation with shit upgrades you can just get past them and pray for better upgrades next shop because more are coming at you).

>No I have never programmed in Unity because then i'd known that GameObject actually uses inheritance!

OOP.

Well thats the official definition you asshat so why do you have to shit in every thread? Nobody cares. You are literarilly the guy in the class that can't stop telling everybody that he is vegan. You know the scrawny fellow who claims veganism is great for building muscles to a bodybuilder. If its so superior then why have you now game?

Pathetic and sad.

And you do realise ECS don't work without objects?

>ECS does not work without Objects.
Actually, lots of ECS presentations make components (and entities by extension) pure data, with all behaviour in systems that don't correspond 1:1 with components. That's quintessential procedural programming.

ECS can work without objects, as long as there are data structures to hold other structures.

This is CompSci101.

>ECS does not work without Objects.
Elaborate? Why do I have to associate member functions to my data? Why can't i just have an array of 'movables' (probably just a struct with position vector and velocity) and call a static function on each member it?
ECS doesn't work without polymorphism. Polymorphism is not OOP specific.
>Well thats the official definition
OK. So source me that definition? Why doesn't wikipedia follow the official definition? Edit their article so they stop misleading people then. Then watch them laugh at you in the Talk page.

>ECS doesn't work without polymorphism.
That's not even true.

That's literally the definition of an object.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_(computer_science)

>In the class-based object-oriented programming paradigm, "object" refers to a particular instance of a class where the object can be a combination of variables, functions, and data structures.

thank you for sharing user
this will come in handy

That is literally the definition of an Array.. or struct, linked list, stack, heap too.

Object-orientation is simply the logical extension of older techniques such as structured programming and abstract data types. An object is an abstract data type with the addition of polymorphism and inheritance

Well. Ok I haven't really seen any non polymorphic implementations because I find that kinda weird. Kinda misses the point of ECS to my understanding.

I'd gladly read an example though.
>definition of an object
>OOP
No. That's the definition of an object. It's not the definition of OOP. Where you orient your code around the idea of objects.

boreal.aggydaggy.com/programming/2016/05/26/entity-safari.html

145189351

There is so much garbage in the custom packages I wouldn't even be surprised.

I mean for all we know you can write a game in fucking excel

Anyone who's good with Blender: Any clue whats causing this? Its two planes, both of which look fine in the preview, but one looks all blurred in the actual render. Been looking at every setting that could possibly blur one object and not one a few mm closer to the camera.

Is it feasible to build a game using a mix of C/C++ and Haskell? I think it would be a good idea to handle things like rendering, audio, and input in C/C++, but implement the game logic, rules, AI, etc. in Haskell.

Items are now a thing. No special effects and no item count display or anything fancy like that yet. Uses the exact same framework that skills use to calculate and display effects. This makes it easy to generate new items.

Next up will be adding skill descriptions, fixing my garbage particle system, implementing visuals and sounds for the current existing skills, then maybe mouse support.

I'm the guy doing the skeleton thing for VR. I think that OOP is really good for some things when you know how to use it right, but it is also dangerous if you don't as with all paradigms.

10 bucks you are all nodevs without games, if you aren't, at least stand for your opinion and prove that you aren't just a shitposter by posting a new image of you game.

Otherwise go shit up some other guys threads please, nobody cares about your autism opinions whether you are pro or anti OOP.

The enemy class isn't a "separate" class, it inherits from character, and is therefore a specialisation of it.

In fact, using inheritance the enemy class can't actually be separate, because it doesn't declare important things like the HP, MP, Position, Texture, etc.

If the enemy class was separate, it'd have to encapsulate all required functionality itself, and the point of specialised classes is that they let the base class encapsulate the shared properties, and they add the special functions and properties required.

Sure.

>I think that OOP is really good for some things when you know how to use it right, but it is also dangerous if you don't as with all paradigms.
Pure waffle.

FFS forgot image, not trolling I'm actually that guy.

Thanks bud.

___
Apparently quads are preferred over tris and n-gons when modelling.

I'm not familiar with what Either is supposed to be but it looks like a polymorphic thing? But assuming it isn't thanks. I'l read that later.
>but implement the game logic, rules, AI, etc. in Haskell.
Of course if you can compile code and interface with the code you can write it in any language you want. But I think you should probably move AI to outside Haskell. If it's not trivial amounts of computation. People often underestimate AI. Can't speak for your case of course.
I'm not a nodev but I'm making slow progress because I have so much other shit to do right now.

>Apparently quads are preferred over tris and n-gons when modelling.
when modelling for subdiv. if it's for games there's literally no use in forcing yourself to quads

GPUs only talk in tris. If your model has quads, at some point you will have to split it into tris to work with the GPU regardless.

Also moving between engines because of doubts surrounding what to do.

This upcoming collab has distracted me a lot honestly. It really shouldn't have. But I'm awkward as fuck and can't help but overthink it.

Maybe I should just take a legit (100% nodev) break until it starts.

So far all the nodevs have been anti-oop. Weird huh? Listen to skele-shit-simulator guy and leave.

Thanks spoopy.

Can someone show me an example of functional programming? I have no idea what it is, what it looks like, or how you'd make a game with it.

>if it's for games there's literally no use in forcing yourself to quads
Untrue, quads usually deform cleaner. With that said, a car model is unlikely to have to deform and as such a few tris here and there won't hurt.

Apparently, even for game dev. But it's suggested to convert quads to tris for game dev. Converting quads to tris is easier anyways that the other way around. Plus, if you want to pass on the work to team member they'll have easier time following your quad topology. So basically, before putting into the game use quads and after you can convert is what my understanding is.

That was meant for
Also I see the autism has gone from GDDs to hearsay knowledge about OOP. Guess I'm gonna do some stuff instead.

These threads used to be good.

I'm joking. They've been terrible since 2011. Only now there is an established body of behaviour rules that must not be broken or people go on hour long rants about it like autists

Here have some concept art.

If you keep talking about programming paradigms and all that shit instead of posting progress you lead me to believe you have no game and come here to shitpost. Please prove me wrong.

I wouldn't call it polymorphism.
>In programming languages and type theory, polymorphism (from Greek πολύς, polys, "many, much" and μορφή, morphē, "form, shape") is the provision of a single interface to entities of different types.
Either is a value that can essentially be A or B, and you have to explicitly deal with both cases.

950
Nobody's talking about functional programming.

No problem user, hope it helps.

Nothing more annoying than wasting time doing something that can be fixed in one line of code you didn't know about.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_programming

Now stfu and leave this issue.

Nodev, spoopy called you out its time to leave.

I never understand you people. Are you literally only capable of understanding gamedev through a series of screenshots? Why does every single discussion about development that doesn't have attached pixel art get shitposted by you morons?

Nodev, if you aren't making a game and are only shitposting about how one exotic paradigm is better than another then you should leave, its just sad.

>usually deform cleaner
lie. quad will be converted to two triangles. if you convert it yourself you at least know which direction it goes

i explicitly said "force yourself". what i meant by that is you should use quads because it helps with workflow (e.g. quickly adding edge loops) but going out of your way to "fix" every triangle is retarded

t. programmer salty that he has no game

Okay so it's just a meme? Thanks for clearing that up for me.

>I'm not skilled enough to make a real time game so I'm going to use Veeky Forums as my blog and post about my shitty game

How could you make a game out of just functions? It makes no sense, you have to be able to mutate state to actually do anything

People talking shit about OOP and preaching FP like it's a silver bullet are scrubs.

>tfw multiparadigm masterrace

>STOP TALKING ABOUT GAME DEV IN A GAME DEV GENERAL
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

This is all very interesting, but where is the progress?

>sudden influx of shitposters bringing up FP
Are we being raided?

Guys I want to know something,so If I'm working in low poly to make a character,what's the best way to go about the eyes.
Should I actually model them, or do I create them on the texture?
I want to know because I'm trying to learn how to make idle animations with blinking

for my over all aesthetic I've been taking a look at late ps1 era games,early ps2 games,ds,psp and 3ds stuff.
but so far I want the concept I have to look similar to pokemon S&M,The ps2 Tales of games or MML3

Post your game? We've not really had time to record even.
I'm familiarizing myself with this new engine that looks promising.
You shouldn't make a game with it. It's not what OOP is in opposition to. Procedural programming (what you started with) is what OOP is opposed. Procedural programming makes sense.
Functional programming is rather extreme. It's a very perfectionist view of programs that doesn't really work for games because it's too slow.
It's not a meme. It's just not fit.
This is the kind of person that does FP right now:
youtube.com/watch?v=7Zlp9rKHGD4
(steer clear)

Practicing art stuff, no progress.

>Programming paradigms
>Game dev
This is like those faggots on /v/ creating "What's the __ of videogames" threads

How? Do you pass objects as arguments to functions?

Not really, you're just /dpt/ rejects that come here to feel big.

Dear salty nodev; any progress is better than your shitposting.

Stop talking paradigms

Its possible just a pain in the ass thats why almost all games are OOP.

rate my protagonist

Someone discussed this earlier - paint them on, then have a texture swap for the face in order to have different expressions.

that's not where the eyes should be user

ok thanks a lot,I was having hard time choosing

It's separating data from logic. For a game, data for the game might be some sort of serialized data format like JSON or XML, which is read by the program which cares not about any sort of state, but is just functions which manipulate that data as instructed.

It's another way to tackle the same question - "How do I just like make game?".

How far should we censor discussion? Is talking about UV unwrapping no longer gamedev either? If you're unable to see how the architecture of a game's codebase is relevant to game development you're either being intentionally obtuse or legitimately a moron.

Pretty much what said, make the face a separate mesh with its own textures, then swap them in code. I personally use a coroutine that swaps the "eyes open" face texture with the "eyes closed" one and then back to the first one very quickly. I'll post a webm in a sec.

Coke or Pepsi?

This is certainly not gamedev. Until you make a game about soda and want to choose who you get sued by first.

Go away nodevs. Stop talking topology. This is a game dev general. Either post progress or go back to /3/.

Pepsi

Please nodev, I can hear you are passionate about shitting about OOP but this isn't the place. Please leave, literally nobody wants you here.