Rick

Thanks Zio, I'll check that out.

I'm going to start a small experiment to create a small editor that has a game structure to it and uses C# as the scripting languages. Was there an example out there that shows how to get LE's window into a picture box defined in C#?

That's because it's for an OS and not games. If you are a PC gamer you know there is a concern about will your game play on your current hardware. No one expected this for an OS since most OS's don't try to push hardware that hard like Vista tried to.

The grades would always be getting higher. As years go on and new hardware comes out the grades just keep incrementing. A grade basically represents hardware at a given point in time. The grade on certain hardware won't ever change. So a grade of 1 on Dell PC x will always be a grade of 1. It tells you that with that hardware you can only play games with a grade of 1 on their box or whatever. Eventually the grade 1 for hardware will just drop off the planet as it gets so old no one would buy it. My guess is that it would probably be a addition of other hardware that gives the grade. Like processor, memory, & graphics card. Well honestly the grading system would be setup for people who don't custom build. If you custom build you know what you are putting in. You can compare that to the specs of each grade out there and see where it falls. This system would be setup for people who aren't into building their own PC like most console people probably are.

That's what I'm talking about. It's not like this can't be for the PC. PC's can do everything a console can do. A console is a dumbed computer. The biggest advantage I can see is that there isn't any question about if your PC can run a game. On a console it's easy. If you have an XBox 360, you can play XBox360 or below games. PC's and PC game titles should come out with a numbering system. They would start out with 1 and it would mean certain specs need on the PC to play. This would require it to be a standard across all specs in the world. Then PC makers would give a rating based on a PC they sell. This way it's a no brainer if your PC can run the game. If your PC that you bought from dell has a rating of 3 for games, then when you go to the store to look at PC games you look at games with a rating of 3 or less, and you know your PC can handle it. I think industry standards could be created and agreed on by game companies and PC manufacturers like Dell.

I actually agree with you these days Pancakes. I actually don't even think I've every bought a console with my own money. Most of mine have been Christmas gifts from my parent. The PS2 was the last console my parents bought for me and I won a Wii (which I hardly play) from a raffle. I just refuse to pay $300+ for a gaming machine when my PC does all of that and more. Nothing pisses me off more than a console only title. It's just BS shady business by the console companies to try and get people to buy their system to play that game, when clearly every game on a console can be ported to PC.

I'm guessing he didn't. I'm thinking MS and Sony just saw his game and said, sure you can develop that on our system. Now would come the task of Josh getting an LE port going to make that work?

Nice. That'll be some scary stuff right there. I like it! Zombie games are freaky.

SceneBuilder is a type. The only way you can do SceneBuilder.Atmosphere() is if Atmosphere() is defined as static. Otherwise you have to make an object and call it via that way. SceneBuilder scene; scene.Atmosphere();

LE could make an XNA version and it would be much easier, but that'll only be on that online thing with XBox. If you want a CD sold in stores you can't do that with XNA. That's where they get a little pickier.

You can't lump every platform together. Those console people are picky about the games created for their systems. Yet another reason I dislike consoles compared to PCs. I'd like to determine if a game is worth it or not.

Yeah, like Pixel is saying, you wouldn't store "bad" routes, you would update the grid. Either remove some nodes as walkable or make them very expensive to walk so the path finding system might not include it the next go around. I wouldn't want to remove it 100% because sometimes it might end up being the only way to get to point a (bridges out other routes or whatever) and so even though this would have a high weight to it, it would still be the only way. The AI and pathfinding should be separate. They are standalone systems and should just have interfaces between each other.

I think you said it best when you said: That concept is universal and should be built into any engine. That's what I'm talking about. Then like you said, all the other stuff is AI related that is specific to the game. Pathfinding just gives you view of your available paths in data form. It would then be up to the AI specific code to use pathfinding to figure things out like you were describing. My script attached to the soldier could be looking at every point in the path and seeing if there is a gunner in any sort of radius. If there is, it might try to find another path. All that stuff can be very specific but the general idea of finding a path from A to B is so generic that it should be part of any engine.

I find other peoples view on this topic fascinating. To me the above doesn't make sense. I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just trying to figure out where you are coming from. I can't see lip-sync support or even rag-dolls being something that would take priority over a pathfinding system. Very few games actually use lip-sync technology. It's a cool feature but not exactly a requirement. Many games in the past have been very successful without it. On the other hand, even games made 20 years ago required some form of pathfinding. It's such a core game feature that it seems like the best candidate. I also don't know if I buy the argument that there are so many kinds and nothing would fit every need. It seems to me that navmesh with A* has kind of taken over as the standard. Sure it might be overkill for some projects, but if it's already there why not use it? It provides pretty much all needs of any pathfinding system at pretty little performance cost. I don't want to hijack the thread but I think this is kind of what the thread is about. Talking about these features and priorities. I'd be interested in hearing debates against pathfinding being a key component.

That's why I put Robust (always have an escape word ) I feel the library should include multiple styles on how it does it's implementation. I think the first criteria in deciding on answering his question "should" be what is most common in every game. From his list pathfinding is pretty high up there.

I would also pay for a pathfinding system in LE.

I have to say a robust pathfinding system, hands down. Most every game in existence requires some form of pathfinding. After that would be shaders. A huge array of cool shaders can make a huge difference since they are so dang powerful.

Basically the same with a few added: UU3D Hex Editor Neo Skype CrazyBump Firefox is getting annoying though. If I leave it open for more than 3 days it starts eating up a ton of memory ><

I sent you an IM also since you IM'd me, but from what I can understand what you are asking, if you use Lua you would use engine.exe and just pass your main lua file as a command line argument to it. After that, either use a zip, rar, or install wizard to package it all.

Just saw Zombieland last night. Love zombie movies & games. Just something about the idea of if you would survive a zombie attack or not is so enticing.

A big one for me is that we don't have to calc the velocity vector. I'm working in Unity and you have to calc the velocity vector by subtracting your vector from another one then normalize it, then multiple by your speed. It's much easier to just pass a value to UpdateController() or MoveEntity() instead of doing that. Also easier to do rotations in this entity system compared to Unity because.

FPS? 3rd Person? Top down?

C# will be slower then C++ because of the interpretation that needs to happen. There isn't much getting around. How much slower and if it really affects your game is another question. It might not in which case it's fine.

That line is basically a sugar coating to "You will drive the business into the ground". It's "wiser" to take a lower risk lower profit than to risk it all when it comes to a business. Don't get me wrong many businesses take high risks and they do sometimes come out on top, but it's shown over time that a high risk business does not survive long term. The risk always catches up with the business.

I think you aren't understanding how risk to a business works? Everything the business does is a risk. You can't make money with some kind of risk. But there are different levels of risk. Businesses try to pick the lowest level of risk. It basically looking at the odds. Also, of course there is evidence that a DOOM clone will sell. They are selling all the time. That is the evidence. The risk with making a DOOM clone is lower than coming up with something completely different.