Rick

Cool. Sounds promising. Any drawbacks at all before we all get excited?

Exciting! I'll give this a try tonight. klepto, are you planning on using this for your LE control then?

Is that really possible? If you try to move a model that isn't fully loaded wouldn't it crash? If you put mutex around wouldn't that pause leaving you with the same issue? I would think you might have to spam your code checking if each model is NULL or not maybe?

It only happens at the start if that's how you program your game. Loading hundreds or thousands of unique models at the start of an RPG or MMO isn't practical. Loading them on the fly is preferred to get a streaming world. Weren't you big on streaming worlds without precaching everything at the start? I think that's one of the biggest arguments for multithreading in LE. You would want your main thread to do the manipulation of your models and your secondary thread to be the one that loads them to give you the power of streaming your world.

So you still have to load unique models in your main thread which still cause pauses to your game?

I thought this has been decided that it wasn't possible? I seem to recall many topics on this with that being the outcome.

You are free to do that Rekindled but just be aware that it would seem you'd be going against the grain of what Josh is looking for. "Official" support wouldn't be there and libraries that Josh decides to write or others that follow LE.NET (because he well get into .NET eventually himself. it's only a matter of time) could have compatibility issues with whatever you write. It could/would split the .NET community. Would just be a shame to do that because of some ideology. From the sounds of it klepto is leaning towards making his things for whatever Josh decides is the path, which sounded like LE.NET. So why not join forces and make the official .NET library the best it can be?

This might be a good time to change that seeing as LE.NET is becoming the official .NET library for LE2. I have a feeling you won't like it though as it seems it'll be more like LE.NET is today and not an OO library like Leadwerks.NET.

pyramid scheme ftw

The "masters" are purists, but this is the real world where Josh doesn't have time or the money to put towards documenting and maintaining something that goes off the path of what he's doing. What you did was really great and has helped move the .NET community in LE farther than anyone else. Hope you are proud of that because you should be Given this news I think I'll come back to .NET for LE. Exciting stuff.

Exciting news. See Roland, what you did was amazing. You shouldn't have given up on it so fast

The interesting thing is when LE3 comes out, what is the 1 for 1 wrapper? I don't think it's the C API since it'll be written in C++ and object oriented. I guess LE2's original library is in BMax and I think it is OO there too, so really the .NET folks could/should have followed that OO design. I would think following the C++ OO design of LE3 (which Josh seems to be OK with) would at least give .NET folks an OO version which is what they/we want right? The community would just have to be satisfied with Josh's design but come LE3 the OO design he has in C++ will most likely be popular enough where copy that on the .NET side will be a good idea. Josh, I know you once listed all the C functions before, but do you have the OO design all set currently?

It would seem a big criteria for Josh to officially support is documentation. So unless Leadwerks.NET is structured the same as LE3 C++ it seems it won't do.

Because you have never given them an object oriented design to follow like you are now. After you release LE3 it'll be easy to just duplicate your C++ design. A port could be made that follows the C#/C++ LE structure but just uses XNA behind the scenes instead of OpenGL, use a different .NET physics engine, and could most likely use Lua still. I won't hold my breathe but it would be cool.

I believe everything needs to be in a class, so the C structure could be duplicated BUT they would be static methods of a class. So you would have something like LE.EntityParent() instead of just EntityParent(). Is that acceptable? FYI, this is basically what LE.NET is and why I liked it so much, but the .NET community wasn't thrilled about it. Would you be open if your C++ structure is duplicated because honestly that would be something the .NET community would enjoy more and it could be much closer to the actual C++ docs, which I assume you'll have? FYI, this would be sweet because it would could lead into XNA port which means we could run LE on WP7 and XBox, and those are good platforms to hit because WP7 is only growing & Xbox is already huge and getting developing for the 2 platforms only requires you to get a $99/yr subscription.

Does it get overwritten with the most current website that had this link and they click on it? That's so sneaky

I didn't think that was happening?

lol, nice As a developer all I care about is power and ease of use to develop for. With those 2 factors it'll draw more developers which will mean more applications which will mean more people will use it because it has more functionality in all the apps. This is really a "crappy" time we live in because it's the start of the mobile wars. This puts more pressure on developers to support so many more platforms which is a pain for us because it adds more development time and money. My predication is once things calm down it'll look similar to the PC world. MS will be on top followed by linux and mac. It'll be that way because MS will leverage so much integration between their phones and their OS and since most people have Windows PC's it'll just be easier for them to get the MS phone too. Apple is to picky about what gets on their platforms, Google is just to free and unorganized, and MS sits right in the middle of those 2. So I agree with the few others that WP7 should be included in the list, however I get the impression Josh doesn't want to support them because WP7 uses either XNA or Silverlight which both run on the .NET framework. :/

I'm shocked that Symbian is that high. That's interesting. I might have to check this platform out.

PREDICTED ?? I assume this is your guess? Here is my source for it's system requirements. http://www.game-requirements.com/index.php?title=Minecraft My wife's laptop from Dell meets these requirements and she doesn't have a gaming machine by any means. Either way just using those as examples. I'll leave it at that.

I would disagree with that but we can have different thoughts on the subject I'd also argue that to make money on games you don't always have to charge for your game. Advertisement is a model that does work for some games. Personally I have a medium end machine and I have no issue dropping $5-$50 on a game but don't want to drop a grand for a higher end PC. Wouldn't Mincraft be a pretty good example as to why you want to support lower end PC's? From an engine point of view I hope Josh supports both.

Besides XBox it's harder for indie's (which seem to be the majority on LE) to get their games on the console at all so what do we rely on? All cassius and I are saying is that as an indie it's probably "wiser" to hit more types of hardware for your games you wish to sell so you get a better chance at more money. All things being equal with the fun factor of your game, assuming that you don't believe graphics make the fun factor, you'd be able to reach more people on basic PC specs which would give you a better chance at making more money.

I was kind of thinking that same thing. You would assume anyone wanting to sell their game would vote basic graphics in order to hit the most machines. I voted for Android too. It's a very popular android that is on a huge variety of phones. No doubt in my mind that Android is/will be more popular than iOS because it is on more types of hardware.

At the time I went with physics bullets. It worked pretty well. Thanks!

I don't think you give MS enough credit. By providing .NET and XNA as open source frameworks people make ports so that we can write code once and have it work on many different platforms. MS was brilliant in this respect because .NET will rule the world some day and we'll all bow down to it I'm sure https://github.com/mono/MonoGame Now imagine the person who bases their game engine around this. Basically everything put playstation, which I'd be shocked if they haven't or don't get that going soon.