141–150 of 154 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other way to look at it is that browser settings are the perfect way to express lack of consent for non-allow listed entities and get rid of the ridiculous piecemeal approach we have now.
Do Not Track header was used by the ads industry to track people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is seeing yourself as part of a “community”. You’re the customer/user of a business. They owe you nothing other than what you’ve paid for.
at some point "independent game development" became more of a fashion than a craft taken seriously
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They don't develop engines, they don't develop rigid body collision systems, they don't develop 3D renderers, note how I never suggested doing any of those things in the post-Unity pre-Godot weekend project I suggested—except for the "engine". if you call yourself a "game developer" in general—as opposed to an expert user of a specific piece of game development software—then you should intuitively understand the le…
Ah damn bruh, I guess my artist friends aren't really artists since they don't know how to program photoshop from scratch. I'll let 'em know that they're just "expert users of certain software".
if you can ONLY make art with Photoshop and completely lack any ability whatsoever to draw/paint/etc. without it, then yeah, you might not be an artist, but rather, a Photoshop-user.
hopefully we agree at least that LLM users are not artists, right? just because one uses a tool and art comes out the other end does not make one an artist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd recommend trying to make a game "from scratch", using only libraries, instead of an "engine", if you haven't done it before, and have only used fully-featured game engines. it's good to learn how to solve problems using structs and pointers and memory, instead of thinking only in high-level primitives like Entities and Components and Prefabs and Scenes and Nodes. not only will you level up your knowledge of how c…
Just more gatekeeping and elitism. Same reason that "C" devs sneeze on Javascript devs and for some reason act like JS devs "aren't smart enough to write C" as if that's the real reason. Bruh, write a game from scratch including engine? Why don't you write your own network stack and display drivers from scratch while you're at it? Hell, you won't truly know how the graphics are rendered until you build your own Direc…
"understands what a 'game engine' necessarily entails such that 'making a simple single-threaded 2D platformer "from scratch (using libraries)" in C or equivalent' isn't a scary thing, but rather very, very simple and straightforward"
seems about as good of a bar as any—and it's a very, very low bar, one that anyone who is offended that they don't meet this criteria, should be able to achieve in two weekends, tops. then you can go back to using whatever general-purpose engine you want, secure in your improved knowledge about how games can made without using one.
you seem to think that my 2D platformer example is some outrageously difficult task, too scary for you to make, which is exactly what I'm talking about—you should intuitively understand how little I'm actually asking for here, instead of being outraged at my suggestion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd recommend trying to make a game "from scratch", using only libraries, instead of an "engine", if you haven't done it before, and have only used fully-featured game engines. it's good to learn how to solve problems using structs and pointers and memory, instead of thinking only in high-level primitives like Entities and Components and Prefabs and Scenes and Nodes. not only will you level up your knowledge of how c…
>(if any downvoters could explain why they find this post to be disagreeable, I'd love to hear it.) https://aas.sh/blog/make-games-not-engines/ I post this as someone who in fact is an engine developer, To my chagrin, most people don't want to actually work on engines. >this is all assuming, of course, that your goal is, at least in part, to be able to honestly call yourself a "game developer" in general, as opposed…
I haven't kept up with GameMaker: Studio, but if it's still anything like Game Maker 8, then it should be very straightforward for any seasoned GameMaker user to spend a weekend or two making the 2D platformer example I outlined, in C or similar. GameMaker (or, at least, Game Maker) does lots of things the dead-simple way: resource IDs are just integer constants. when you draw_sprite(x, y, sprPlayer), sprPlayer is just 4, or whatever. this is a pretty decent simple API that could be replicated easily!
GameMaker users who try this project out will discover how much easier it is to have most or all of your game's logic in once place, instead of split up into various Events in various Objects. they'll discover how, when you're doing things the simple straightforward way, you don't need to make an "objController" with a Code action in a Step event and a Persistent flag, and remember to stick an instance of it in your first level, just to get some logic to run every frame of every level of your game. you just write the code in your simulate()/update() function! it's that easy!
after working on this project, the GameMaker user who has never tried anything like the project before can still go back to GameMaker and continue to use it if they find it to be a useful tool in rapidly developing the kinds of games they want to create—but they'll have gained immense experience, knowledge, empowerment, and possibly inspiration from having gone outside their box and having experienced a different, simpler way of doing things. maybe they'll reconsider if they need GameMaker for their next project—maybe they'll be better off owning more of their own code, if all they're using GameMaker for is easily replicated without it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd recommend trying to make a game "from scratch", using only libraries, instead of an "engine", if you haven't done it before, and have only used fully-featured game engines. it's good to learn how to solve problems using structs and pointers and memory, instead of thinking only in high-level primitives like Entities and Components and Prefabs and Scenes and Nodes. not only will you level up your knowledge of how c…
Just more gatekeeping and elitism. Same reason that "C" devs sneeze on Javascript devs and for some reason act like JS devs "aren't smart enough to write C" as if that's the real reason. Bruh, write a game from scratch including engine? Why don't you write your own network stack and display drivers from scratch while you're at it? Hell, you won't truly know how the graphics are rendered until you build your own Direc…
If you think the way you do about game engines and javascript, then if someone uses AI to generate a game by typing a paragraph about their game, do you really still see them as a game developer? Maybe that term isn't as important to you, but I'm willing to bet you would agree that artists would find it highly offensive if people who generate art using AI call themselves artists with as much authority as those who have disciplined themselves in the field for countless years.
And that's avoiding the fact that with higher and higher level abstractions that people know what's even going on at all. Bro, have you tried debugging modern javascript frameworks? What a nightmare...The call stack dump alone is like 3 full pages of shit that nobody knows how it works, all built on shit that also nobody knows how it works. Absolute nightmare. Oh, but don't worry! Someone will build yet another stack of technology on top of that to give it a Band-Aid! Yikes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd recommend trying to make a game "from scratch", using only libraries, instead of an "engine", if you haven't done it before, and have only used fully-featured game engines. it's good to learn how to solve problems using structs and pointers and memory, instead of thinking only in high-level primitives like Entities and Components and Prefabs and Scenes and Nodes. not only will you level up your knowledge of how c…
Just more gatekeeping and elitism. Same reason that "C" devs sneeze on Javascript devs and for some reason act like JS devs "aren't smart enough to write C" as if that's the real reason. Bruh, write a game from scratch including engine? Why don't you write your own network stack and display drivers from scratch while you're at it? Hell, you won't truly know how the graphics are rendered until you build your own Direc…
Not every game needs to be ANOTHER open world adventure game with crafting, an overhead camera, dialogue scenes, and click and hold menu buttons.
In the end, creating games at lower levels might inspire you to actually create something unique.
The same problem occurs in the music industry as well. Why even compose music when garage band offers audio clips you can just re-organize and loop in cool ways? Why use mics to record sound when there are plenty of already professionally recorded midi plugins for you to use?
My answer to you is creativity. Try doing something more natural and you might just create something fascinating, something nobody expected, something actually unique. Not only that, but you will be able to more fluently communicate your ideas to your audience, tweaking things exactly as you mean them to be. Not limiting yourself to the buttons and inputs in some interface.
There's always tradeoffs. These generic tools are made generic to reach the biggest audiences. But by being generic, they sacrifice the ability to be more specific, or else they become so much more abstract that they are harder to use than just writing something yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do Not Track header was used by the ads industry to track people.
Indeed - what I'm suggesting is not that we have some opt-in standard that people may or may not follow. Browsers should go nuclear on tracking, and remove any feature that permits it.
Because tracking is significantly larger than just placing third-party cookies on the users' machines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would claim that’s the physics engine, more than the “game engine”. Physx did this sort of thing 15 years ago.
well, no one else is known for their "physics engine", so clearly Bethesda did something right, or cheaper than everyone else (doubtful).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah damn bruh, I guess my artist friends aren't really artists since they don't know how to program photoshop from scratch. I'll let 'em know that they're just "expert users of certain software".
if a sarcastic, defensive metaphor is what you were looking for, you could've spent a few more minutes coming up with a more logically-sound one. or you could've just engaged with my points directly, without the sarcasm. if you can ONLY make art with Photoshop and completely lack any ability whatsoever to draw/paint/etc. without it, then yeah, you might not be an artist, but rather, a Photoshop-user. hopefully we agr…
A game dev starts with Unity, same thing. They're still a game developer even if they only know how to use Unity - a lot of their knowledge is applicable to game development in general. If they switch to Unreal there'll be a learning curve, but not as steep as when they first started.
The same logic could be applied to cooking: we don't refuse to call someone a chef because they specialise in Asian cuisine, they're still a chef. A physics major is as much a scientist as a chemistry major is.
And as to your last point, it's pretty baity but maybe you have a very narrow definition of art? What is art? Is taping a banana to a wall art? If so then the person who did it is an artist. Personally, though I think you definitely disagree with it, I think using an LLM does make someone an artist as they're using a tool to produce something with aligns with their vision - if they just pressed a button without any input at all, I'm not sure I'd call that art unless it's something performative. But otherwise I put LLM users into the same category as people using PS tools - there's plenty going on under the hood, but the artist is still feeding it with input.
Let's say an artist uses a coloured pencil for some traditional art, are they now not an artist because they don't understand the chemical composition of the pencil that the company worked on so that it leaves a mark just-so? The pencil is a tool that the artist inputs into, but the artist doesn't have to understand the workings of the pencil from an atomic or quantum level to be considered an artist.