The Daily Click ::. Forums ::. General Chat ::. Kidney or MMF3D?
 

Post Reply  Post Oekaki 
 

Posted By Message

Johnny Look

One Happy Dude

Registered
  14/05/2006
Points
  2942

VIP Member
26th September, 2010 at 13:51:34 -

hagar: I have to disagree there. You are implying that the engine might be more difficult to use because some of the new features brought by a 3d engine wouldn't be easy to work with.

3D physics work the same way as 2D physics except there's a 3rd dimension, but car physics for example are something that you couldn't do accurately in a 2D engine. It's a new thing that is not that easy to work with (I know, I did this a few years ago, you can check my F1 legends "game" if you could call it that), but it's something that was previously inaccessible, so if you want to use it you are forced to learn, just like you were forced to work with extensions you weren't previously familiar with.

But the more basic functions that MMF2 has that would need to be converted to a 3D engine, such as moving or rotating a model or a sprite would remain pretty much the same. I wouldn't say that moving object A from 0,0,5 to 0,0,10 is significantly more difficult than moving object B from 0,5 to 0,10 for example.

GamesterXIII: Pretty much every 3d engine includes distance calculation functions, so I'd be surprised if MMF3D(or whatever it would be called) didn't.

 
n/a

Hagar

Administrator
Old klik fart

Registered
  20/02/2002
Points
  1692

You've Been Circy'd!Teddy Bear
26th September, 2010 at 14:36:30 -


Originally Posted by Johnny Look
hagar: I have to disagree there. You are implying that the engine might be more difficult to use because some of the new features brought by a 3d engine wouldn't be easy to work with.

3D physics work the same way as 2D physics except there's a 3rd dimension, but car physics for example are something that you couldn't do accurately in a 2D engine. It's a new thing that is not that easy to work with (I know, I did this a few years ago, you can check my F1 legends "game" if you could call it that), but it's something that was previously inaccessible, so if you want to use it you are forced to learn, just like you were forced to work with extensions you weren't previously familiar with.

But the more basic functions that MMF2 has that would need to be converted to a 3D engine, such as moving or rotating a model or a sprite would remain pretty much the same. I wouldn't say that moving object A from 0,0,5 to 0,0,10 is significantly more difficult than moving object B from 0,5 to 0,10 for example.

GamesterXIII: Pretty much every 3d engine includes distance calculation functions, so I'd be surprised if MMF3D(or whatever it would be called) didn't.



My point was that I cannot bothered doing 3D, and that I want game making to remain fun and something relaxing to do. I solve complex problems day in day out (I am a PhD student and I already have two engineering degrees so I think I have a pretty good grasp of mathematics involved ), and to relax I want something light yet fun to do - 2D game making fits the bill for me. I also find modelling organic things in 3D a complete and utter pain, and that's before animation!

<cynic> I also do not wish for my games to become a real life simulation of things - I want them to be fun . </cynic>

I tried to download your F1 legends game but all the links seem dead (pointing to mediafire). I did notice on your page that you have used the Tokamak engine for the physics. How many man hours has this engine taken to write? Quite a few I bet. I know this is beside the point, as MMF3D would provisionally have something similar bundled in but this would limit you to either using the built in functionality or your own. Also are people that are capable of making 3D games really going to use MMF3D? I doubt so. Jamagic Mk 2

Out of interest (still thinking of a GTA 1 style game here ) what do you think is the best free 3D engine out? (Barring any basic or Pascal language based ones).

 
n/a

OMC

What a goofball

Registered
  21/05/2007
Points
  3516

KlikCast Musician! Guy with a HatSomewhat CrazyARGH SignLikes TDCHas Donated, Thank You!Retired Admin
26th September, 2010 at 15:30:03 -

"Also are people that are capable of making 3D games really going to use MMF3D? I doubt so." Same with 2D! If it does the job and makes it easier...

When (if) MMF3D comes out you don't have to use it.


Edited by OMC

 

  		
  		

Hagar

Administrator
Old klik fart

Registered
  20/02/2002
Points
  1692

You've Been Circy'd!Teddy Bear
26th September, 2010 at 16:25:01 -

The whole point of MMF and TGF was being able to pick it off a shelf (sadly since TGF CT do not sell them via stores), and for people regardless of their computer skill level pretty much to make some 2D games. A professional game making firm would be probably not choose MMF to make a game, I am not a professional game maker hence I use MMF2. Sorry for being a real misery guts (and some people are probably going to find one or two games made by MMF by "professional companies" in an attempt to disprove what I say) but it's the truth.

Sorry for being overly pessimistic but I would rather CT concentrate on 2D rather than diluting all their efforts by doing both. I can see MMF3D if it ever sees the light of day being overly dumbed down like 3D game maker (http://www.thegamecreators.com/?m=view_product&id=2126) or it being like MMF2 (which would be very nice granted but with what looks like a game engine from about 1999 if we are lucky).

Plus with the OpenGL extensions on the brew (Fishhead 3D is using them) do we really need it?

Edited by an Administrator

 
n/a

OMC

What a goofball

Registered
  21/05/2007
Points
  3516

KlikCast Musician! Guy with a HatSomewhat CrazyARGH SignLikes TDCHas Donated, Thank You!Retired Admin
26th September, 2010 at 16:31:06 -

The extensions aren't the same thing. That's like taking a 3D engine and duct taping it to MMF.

All of this would hinge on MMF3D being done right. There's no guarantee that will ever happen, so you can continue to enjoy MMF2's 2Dness.

 

  		
  		

Hagar

Administrator
Old klik fart

Registered
  20/02/2002
Points
  1692

You've Been Circy'd!Teddy Bear
26th September, 2010 at 16:41:55 -

Duct tape is a practiced engieering standard in the UK - it was commonly found in many places such as the British car industry! Plus I would rather have something duct taped than a rumour anyway

It's a large task for such a tiny company to take on. How long has it taken them to get what is basically TGF1 with layers, sprite rotation and resizing and floating point arithmetic up to scratch?



 
n/a

Johnny Look

One Happy Dude

Registered
  14/05/2006
Points
  2942

VIP Member
27th September, 2010 at 02:42:05 -

hagar: Thanks for letting me know about the broken link, I can't fix it right now but in the meantime I found a mirror here:
http://www.brothersoft.com/games/f1-legends.html

As for free 3D engines, if you know some C++ I'd recommend you Irrlicht, it's very well supported and I think it would be more than enough to make a GTA 1 style game.
There's also Unity3D and UDK, though I've only had a short time with both of them so I can't really recommend them but they seemed rather simple to use.

 
n/a

GamesterXIII



Registered
  04/12/2008
Points
  1110

I am an April Fool
27th September, 2010 at 15:16:34 -


Originally Posted by Johnny Look


GamesterXIII: Pretty much every 3d engine includes distance calculation functions, so I'd be surprised if MMF3D(or whatever it would be called) didn't.



Kinda figured this, but you can never be too sure . 3d and programming have both come a long way and designers/programmers don't need to know as much now as they did back in the day to achieve similar effects. Yay for future.

 
n/a

Hagar

Administrator
Old klik fart

Registered
  20/02/2002
Points
  1692

You've Been Circy'd!Teddy Bear
27th September, 2010 at 16:42:53 -

Thanks - I really love the Irrlicht coding style as its exactly as per my own. By trade I am a C / VHDL programmer but I was taught C++ some time ago.

I have no idea why but i really detest this style of C

if ( jim ) flag = FALSE;

if ( counter == 128 ) {
cheese = TRUE;
stringbuf[N] = '\0';
counter = 0;
}


 
n/a

Muz



Registered
  14/02/2002
Points
  6499

VIP MemberI'm on a BoatI am an April FoolHonored Admin Alumnus
28th September, 2010 at 18:19:47 -


Originally Posted by Johnny Look

3D physics work the same way as 2D physics except there's a 3rd dimension, but car physics for example are something that you couldn't do accurately in a 2D engine. It's a new thing that is not that easy to work with (I know, I did this a few years ago, you can check my F1 legends "game" if you could call it that), but it's something that was previously inaccessible, so if you want to use it you are forced to learn, just like you were forced to work with extensions you weren't previously familiar with.

But the more basic functions that MMF2 has that would need to be converted to a 3D engine, such as moving or rotating a model or a sprite would remain pretty much the same. I wouldn't say that moving object A from 0,0,5 to 0,0,10 is significantly more difficult than moving object B from 0,5 to 0,10 for example.



3D physics to 2D is as significant a change as 2D to 1D, IMO. 3D vectors are a headache to work with. If you can work comfortably with 3D physics, it fetches a high salary Even if I had 3D capability, I'd be working in 2D anyway. But 3D has some benefits in that you get more detailed (but not always nicer) graphics. It's tough to depict every small thing a character is wearing in a sprite, or animate them realistically, but that's where 3D shines. Still not worth a kidney.

But I disagree with what a lot of people say about Clickteam not being able to do both. Progress in software normally hinges on only one programmer.. whether you put 2 or 10 people on a project doesn't speed it up. Since 3D and 2D are so far different, they could just hire a few new guys and work on MMF3D.

 
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.

Image

UrbanMonk

BRING BACK MITCH

Registered
  07/07/2008
Points
  49566

Has Donated, Thank You!Little Pirate!ARGH SignKliktober Special Award TagPicture Me This Round 33 Winner!The Outlaw!VIP MemberHasslevania 2!I am an April FoolKitty
Picture Me This Round 32 Winner!Picture Me This Round 42 Winner!Picture Me This Round 44 Winner!Picture Me This Round 53 Winner!
28th September, 2010 at 19:30:26 -

hey, don't knock 3d gamemaker,

it's a good source of ready made 3d models with animations!

Think of it as just a model pack with an engine bundled with it to test them out, a good deal if you ask me.

Oh and distance calculations and movement engines aren't that hard at all, just like 2d cept like this

3D distance:
sqrt((x1-x2)^2+(y1-y2)^2+(z1-z2)^2)
3D platform movement:
X pos = X + cos(angle)*speed
Z pos = Z + sin(angle)*speed
Y pos = Y + Gravity

I've made some 3d games using DarkBasic about 7 years ago, and I was only 13, if I could do the math then it shouldn't be hard now.

I'll see if I can find those old games and compile one and post it here.

Edited by UrbanMonk

 
n/a

Hagar

Administrator
Old klik fart

Registered
  20/02/2002
Points
  1692

You've Been Circy'd!Teddy Bear
28th September, 2010 at 20:03:43 -

The maths above is rudimentary basics. Making a decent engine would involve a lot more . Even my isometric game involves a lot more than that

3D Game maker is bad, the models are nothing special either .

 
n/a

GamesterXIII



Registered
  04/12/2008
Points
  1110

I am an April Fool
28th September, 2010 at 20:12:54 -


Originally Posted by UrbanMonk
hey, don't knock 3d gamemaker,

it's a good source of ready made 3d models with animations!

Think of it as just a model pack with an engine bundled with it to test them out, a good deal if you ask me.

Oh and distance calculations and movement engines aren't that hard at all, just like 2d cept like this

3D distance:
sqrt((x1-x2)^2+(y1-y2)^2+(z1-z2)^2)
3D platform movement:
X pos = X + cos(angle)*speed
Z pos = Z + sin(angle)*speed
Y pos = Y + Gravity

I've made some 3d games using DarkBasic about 7 years ago, and I was only 13, if I could do the math then it shouldn't be hard now.

I'll see if I can find those old games and compile one and post it here.



My problem is that I can't see formulas as just formulas that are used to accomplish something.

I like to know EXACTLY how they work if I'm going to use them. It seems as if a bunch of people that know what formulas to use simply have them memorized (which seems like the more logical choice as well.) =/

 
n/a

UrbanMonk

BRING BACK MITCH

Registered
  07/07/2008
Points
  49566

Has Donated, Thank You!Little Pirate!ARGH SignKliktober Special Award TagPicture Me This Round 33 Winner!The Outlaw!VIP MemberHasslevania 2!I am an April FoolKitty
Picture Me This Round 32 Winner!Picture Me This Round 42 Winner!Picture Me This Round 44 Winner!Picture Me This Round 53 Winner!
28th September, 2010 at 21:42:27 -


Originally Posted by ..::hagar::..
The maths above is rudimentary basics. Making a decent engine would involve a lot more . Even my isometric game involves a lot more than that



Basic Isometric is more difficult than a basic 3d engine.

For most users the engine I described is exactly what they'd want. Everything else is just a basic modification similar to what can be done in mmf.

Friction for example is just a simple coefficient multiplied by the speed value.

A simple loop for getting the height of the ground, jumping would just be a matter of modifying the Y position and disabling friction.


But I do see your point, if you've never made a decent 2d game how do you expect to make a 3d one.

 
n/a

Hagar

Administrator
Old klik fart

Registered
  20/02/2002
Points
  1692

You've Been Circy'd!Teddy Bear
28th September, 2010 at 21:57:57 -

Gamester - the distance formula is basically pythogoras thereom which I presume everyone does at school - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_distance

The X & Y Movement utilises the Sine and Cosine function, with Cosine having a 90 degree phase shift, this graph demonstrates the phase shift http://www.mathsrevision.net/gcse/sincostan.gif.

Imagine you are going 0 degrees with a speed of 10, lets assume we have an overhead 2D shooter or racing car game where


X pos = X + sin(angle)*speed
Y pos = Y + cos(angle)*speed


From that graph we can see that the object would move only in the Y direction, downwards at 10 pixels per always event tick. Now imagine we have the object travelling at 90 degrees at the same speed. We would now not move on the Y axis as the Cos function would return 0 and would move to the right along the x axis at a speed of 10 pixels per always event tick.

That is a very very brief intro to the topics mentioned. I have been meaning to write an article on using basic maths for some time to try and help the community

 
n/a
   

Post Reply



 



Advertisement

Worth A Click