[Java] Pixavive Alpha (derived from Demo concept I was working on.)

[tom_mai78101]

I would like to share something with you guys, so I can get some feedback on what directions I should go.

Here is a Java program consisting of a white box in a black background. You control a light pink square by left clicking to select it, and right clicking to move. A green square follows you where ever you go.

It's bland, it's not really much. But it's a concept I'm experimenting with during the little free time on my hands.

Anyone wants to pitch in some ideas for me? Thanks in advance.

 

[Accname]

Well, it works, but what do you want to do with it?

 

[tom_mai78101]

Good question.

Before all of this, I was planning on creating a 2D real-time strategy game based on Warcraft III, done in simplistic levels.

But then, just as I continue to work more on this, I realized I needed a framework of some sort for a real-time strategy game, in order to add more entities (like, 1 more enemy), and make it all work together. Then I started having a fuss about it due to procrastinations and less time to work on it.

Other than this "real-time strategy" concept, I was wondering what else I can venture out and add more to this. Or maybe I could listen to all of you, and learn a thing or two about the framework designs and stuffs I may have overlooked.

 

[Accname]

What are you using for the graphics if you actually want to make a game with this?

 

[tom_mai78101]

Pixels.

No one has ever tackled this problem, nor has ever thought of this before. What if I told you, pixels when magnified, can be also fun to play?

 

[Accname]

I actually meant the API you are using. Are you using OpenGL, DirectX, etc?

 

[tom_mai78101]

Direct Image Manipulations by Pixels. Java AWT stuffs, so I'm not exactly sure what API that belongs in.

 

[Accname]

Isnt that horrendously ineffective and slow? How would make a game with that?

 

[tom_mai78101]

Isnt that horrendously ineffective and slow? How would make a game with that?

With today's computer, I don't see much difference at all. This program runs at O(n^5), and it's still acceptable. Making a game on this is also acceptable.

 

[Accname]

Have fun in your rose colored world.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Have fun in your rose colored world.

I know, you don't have to remind me of that.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Demo update.

Press A to fire a non-working AoE ring. Hold A to continuously fire under your will.

The green dot no longer follows you, so that testers can concentrate on what ideas I can listen in order to evolve the game concept. I would like your feedback, and tell me what you see when you are controlling the pink dot. Tell me what comes into your mind the moment you see the area-of-effect (AoE) circle, and what you think of when you hold down A.

Thanks in advance.

 

[monoVertex]

With today's computer, I don't see much difference at all. This program runs at O(n^5), and it's still acceptable. Making a game on this is also acceptable.

You don't realize it now, but you'll get to a point later in developing this game when you'll discover yourself in a mess of code and bugs which you don't know how to tackle anymore and your program will most probably be slower and slower. Also, keep in mind that today's gamer whines even at the slightest lag. This being the situation, "acceptable" is not acceptable. A game has to deliver a perfect, smooth experience.

You are basically ignoring every lower-end laptop / desktops / netbooks. I do have a beast at home, but when I'm on a bus or at school, when I will most probably want to play such a game, I will be on my silly netbook and I'll see how slow it is and just close it and download something else.

Besides, ignoring optimization is simply a bad practice. Your user may have a good computer, but that doesn't mean your program is the only thing running. This is a more and more frequent mentality which is not good at all in my opinion. What is the purpose of my 16GBs of RAM, if my processor is dying under a program that does n^5 stuff.

I suggest you start paying attention to how to make the game in a healthy manner, with efficiency and to start using higher-level libraries. They're there for a reason.

 

[Accname]

And there are many simple to use libraries too. LibGDX is a good example for a simple OpenGL java implementation. Well, actually the OpenGL part is LWJGL, LibGDX makes it much easier to use, adding a game framework around it and lots of simplified components.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Without any ideas on what to make, touching those libraries is meaningless. Hence, I am looking for feedback and get new ideas from other people's opinions.

 

[Varine]

What's with everyone making games with Java now?

 

[tom_mai78101]

It is because of Java's singular library thst contains everything you need. 2D graphics? Use either AWT Canvas. C++? Either learn about Win32, or have to select from a lot of libraries, and gotta learn about the selected libraries' API calling methods, before delving in 2D glory.

But of course, Java 3D still needs a library.

 

[Accname]

LibGDX is a very good java graphics and sound library, as I said. It is also capable of 3D graphics.
JMonkey-Engine is also a 3D engine you could use.


Java is a very good language for simple projects varine. Its easy and safe and it runs on any platform.

 

[monoVertex]

So is Python and it also has a very large database of packages with which you can do pretty much anything. In fact Python is easier to learn than Java.

I also don't understand why Java gets so much hype, I dislike it a lot because of it's bloated code and because it makes you dependent on an IDE.

 

[Accname]

wait, what?
Why would java make you dependent on an IDE?

And what do you mean with hype? Java is horrible, I hate it in many ways, but it has some merits and its excellent for the task. With libGDX you can make a single application which runs on all desktop computers (windows, mac, linux, solaris), on android systems and with webGL through the browser.

I would say that is a good argument in its favor.