I was told by a game developer at this seminar that if I want to learn how to program games, a good way to start is with Java and making cellphone games. I plan on learning C++ before Java anyway but around how long would it take a newbie to learn Java or when would it be a good idea to learn Java if not at all?
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-27 8:36
And same with VisualBasic cause I heard they'll be teaching it to us next year at my highschool and I'm not sure if I want to learn it and pick up bad habits or whatever.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-27 10:06
If you're going to be learning Java and C++ start with Java because it's less headache to start with (the headaches come later when you find it's just not powerful enough) then learn C++ after. Don't even touch VB. Consider leaving school to avoid it.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-27 12:48
It takes about a month to get the basics of Java (I recommmend B. Eckel "Thinking in Java" as a guide to Java world :) )
About Java and C++ (I'm NOT trying to start a flame war here): both languages have their weak points, and you certainly can find places where C++ is "not powerful enough" (portability or advanced webapps for example). But this is an oppinion of a well-known Java freak. ;)
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-28 2:22
>It takes about a day to get the basics of Java
fixed.
Get one of those "Learn Java in 30 days" books, lock yourself in your basement on a lazy saturday, and plow through the entire book in one day. Seriously, it's a cakewalk.
Start with C++, then spend a while with Java to realize how much it sucks and is full of enterprisey bullshit; do not under any circumstance start with Java lest you fall into the enterprisey bullshit trap and become stupid.
4chan is not serious business you idiot.
YOU FAIL AT 4CHAN !!!
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-28 23:23
IN before scalable object-oriented enterprise solution that is web 2.0 ready
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-29 0:13
We should synergize scalable J2EE and XML to create a best-of-breed Web 2.0-based service to blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
That's enterprisey, and the Java world reeks of this shit. Who in their right mind uses Java unless they're paid to? If you actually like the language, you're seriously fucked in the head; it makes even C++ look nice, fer fuck's sake.
I've had to use that crappy language on-and-off since 1.1 (and it just keeps getting worse), and it's the only language of the dozen or so I've written software in that I can say I genuinely hate.
Java has one good thing going for it though: every ad that contains the word "Java" screams "Stay away! Your soul will be eaten by an elder god!". If it wasn't for the saving grace of filtering out the real dreg jobs of the software industry, I'd say we should burn Joy and Gosling on an oaken stake, liquidate Sun, and salt the earth their offices sat on. Only then can we enter software nirvana.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-29 14:34
Never start with C++, you'll only fail. It's a horribly insane language. While there are dozens of languages more suitable than Java as a learning language, if the choice is between C++ and Java, I'd recommend Java every time. Similarly if I were starving and I had a choice between shit and maggots I'd go for the maggots. Of course given the choice I'd have steak and chips with a generous portion of gravy, but just as starving Ethiopians know nothing of steak, many student programmers know nothing of LISP.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-30 11:57
if the choice is between C++ and Java, I'd recommend staying the fuck away from programming.
fixed.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-30 12:12
c++ is one of the hardest languages to start with but if you have to choose between java and c++, id recomend c++.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-30 12:52
c++ is one of the hardest metals (if not the hardest) known by the man
If you think C++ sucks, then you are too stupid for it and you should stay the fuck away from game programming. Too many Java programmers have tried and failed to properly balance the graphics pipeline.
except you need to add a space after the greater than sign. This will also add a new line after the quote, so make sure you space your lines properly.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-30 19:47
>>1
For games, I recommend starting with Irrlicht. It's not very powerful but it's ridiculously easy to use, and it's also under the zlib license (i.e. free for anything, do whatever you want with it) as opposed to the more restrictive LGPL.
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 2:48
i took a java class last year. i believe i have a firm understanding of the language.
now, knowing this, how should i start myself off on c++?
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 11:05
3D libraries lols
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 13:19
>>21
Depends what you want to do with it. Are you looking to program high-performance computations? Are you looking to program games? Are you looking to create large-scale applications?
Name:
Anonymous2006-07-31 17:53
applications with a slighly less than 'large-scale' nature, i would say
First learn C. Not C++, C. If it's too hard, do Pascal first, then C. Use only the standard input and standard output. conio.h if you get bored. Learn to write proper structured code and understand everything that happens at low-level (C pointers and strings). Then move on to a high level, object-oriented, preferrably multi-paradigm language like Python or Ruby. Not Java, it's one of the worst OO languages ever and a piece of shit overall no matter how you look at it.
Then you'll be in a position to decide what to use for your games. I suggest a high level language like Python with existing graphics libraries like PyGame. You can get fairly serious with it, without getting fairly costly and unproductive as it would be to do that in C++.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-01 19:10
>>28
Yeah, you could use python for your games, if you want them to be piece of shit tetris clones.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-01 23:42
conio.h if you get bored.
1993 called. They want their compilers back.
Other than that, I agree.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-02 9:12
>>29
OMG Python is a high-level language, therefore inefficient! Let's use pure Assembly! And disregard OpenGL, it's a bloated high-level API therefore inefficient, let's write our own video driver!
>>30
Last time I checked it was still available and builtin in my lcc-win32; it's just good to have newbies learn the language while entertaining them in a simple way that doesn't deter much from the real purpose. So if they get bored with prime numbers, you ask them to draw a real Eratosthenes Sieve or something.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-02 10:30
>>31
No, let's avoid Python because it's trash for writing games. OpenGL is fine. Continue.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-02 10:59
>>31
w4ch driver for your videocard, how cool can that be!
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-02 12:52
>let's write our own video driver!
signing this
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-02 19:04
>>33 >>34
I'm not sure stuff like scan conversion is as exciting as you think it is.
FYI for general OpenGL fuckery java is fine and fast enough.
Seriously both C++ and Java are poor languages. At least Java is better.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-02 23:54
>>36
Python is slow with 3D and AI code, which make up a large part of games. Therefore, it is not a good choice for game programming.
>>37
You have obviously never coded anything useful, let alone a scenegraph based game engine. GTFO out this discussion.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 0:11
>>38
You've never finished anything so stop talking.
Name:
NonymousQ2006-08-03 0:17
I must say that yes, Java and C++ are poor languages in general. You may want to consider dabbling is a simpler language like Python or Perl,
Try learning OpenGL or SQL; they're excellent for graphics.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 0:28
>>40
You are a retard. You are obviously too stupid to learn C++ or Java, and OpenGL is an API, not a programming language.
>>43
Renderer? WTF are you going on about, programs make API calls that pass points and matrices to the graphics hardware, where they are transformed/scan converted/lit/etc. The 3D code that is written in the program is stuff like movement and collision detection with vectors and bounding geometry.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 6:15
Remember guys, to pythonistas Python is the answer to life, the universe, and everything.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 10:00
Why are there so many inexperienced programmers running around saying that Python is the One And Only language? Did they start teaching it in high schools or something? Different languages have different uses. In this case, the OP wanted to get into gave development. Almost all large scale commercial games are written in C++, therefore learning it along with the OpenGL and DirectX APIs should be his ultimate goal. That being said, Java would be a good way to start because all the libraries needed for basic games are built in (timers, graphics, etc.) and the language is easier to work with for beginners. He could start with basic programs, then work up to taking input, timing the game, and using the graphics library. After that, C++ would be lot easier to understand and through learning memory management he could learn about all the various optimization structures like quadtrees, scene graphs, bsp trees, etc.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 10:03
You can't get into game development without learning how to program. Game programming is seriously the worst kind of programming to teach you good programming skills. Game programmers never finish their game, never release their source code and rarely work together with someone else. A Game programmer is a guy who has half written 2 or 3 "engines" but finished nothing. Even commercial game code is horrible.
Oh those are not called optimizations, those are called algorithms and datastructures. Why don't you go back to arguing if preincrement is faster than postincrement.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 10:36
>>48
What the fuck do you think the algorithms and data structures are for? You don't NEED to use a quadtree, but you do because it's faster than testing everything in the world when you only care about a small area. If you are trying to dispute that algorithms and data structures aren't used to increase performance, then you need to get out of this thread.
And stop making some whiny incoherent rant about "Game programmers". A game is a system just like any other project, you can apply good software engineering practices like prototyping and risk analysis. Sounds to me like you couldn't get a job, and you just want to whine about it here.
>>47
This post is made of win. I've never even heard of a large scale game written in Python, let alone a commercial one. If you pythonians think you can do anything in it, then link me to a large scale high-performance 3D game.
For you anti-Java zealots, YES, JAVA SUCKS, WE KNOW, but it's simple enough to easily learn OOP, and it's similar enough to C++ make a smooth transition when you want to build a real project. I'm so sick of getting a flood of "oviously u'v never programed real apps lol" every time we recommend Java to someone interesting in learning. Yes, we know, you're not supposed to program real apps in Java. Jesus christ.
As far as learning optimization structures, if you're a person who likes to learn by example, there are a lot of open source high-performance 3D engines out there from which you can learn. Irrlicht, Lightfeather, OGRE3D, Crystal Space, etc. I recommend starting with Irrlicht, and from there you can move to a more serious engine or start writing your own.
Q. What language are you writing the gamecode in? A. (S.M. 2/6) The renderer is written in C, the animation player is in C++, the game logic and user interface is also written in C, and most of the scripting is done in Python (thanks Guido).
ToEE is written in C/C++ you fucking noob. It uses Python for ENVIRONMENTAL SCRIPTING, and it does not use PyGame whatsoever. Way to check your facts before opening your mouth.
What's more is it's not exactly a high-performance game; it uses shitty 3D characters and doodads rendered on a static sprite-based isometric environment. This reeks of pure shit. Even if it were written in Python, this would prove nothing.
>>52
So? Give me an example of a high-performance game engine written in Python. You idiots keep saying you can code anything in Python, well FUCKING SHOW ME.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-03 23:44
Do any of the Python fanboys here actually have any experience with graphics or game engines (i.e. have taken a upper level college course in graphics or real time rendering), or are you all just speaking from your "experience" from making Python tic-tac-toe in an intro course and reading some articles online?
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 3:36
Does Python have Buzzwords now?
Is Python the new Java?
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 3:43
>>53
How good or bad, decent or undecent the algorithms used are doesn't invalidate Python.
>>56
Python is not the best for 3D engines. Big deal.
>>58
Python does not have buzzwords because buzzwords are not Pythonic.
Python is not the new Java because even Guido commanding an army of fanboys funded by Google couldn't turn it to something as shitty as Java (both language and API) in 30 years. Java is an amazing scatologic work.
>>59 Python does not have buzzwords because buzzwords are not Pythonic.
I rofled. This speaks volumes, doesn't it?
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 4:39
"pythonic" is a buzzword
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 5:50
so what are the Python equivalents of:
enterprise
scalable
web 2.0 ready
best practices
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 6:01
>>62
You haven't been in the business long, have you? Well, gouge out your eyeballs, because here you go: http://www.zope.com/ Go on, read it; you know you don't want to.
PS. "pythonic" == "best practices", if you're not bright enough to notice the obvious.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 8:45
>>61
Yeah, I was kidding. But I don't use any buzzwords in Python, except Pythonic to piss non-Pythonic people off.
>>62
All you said is zope.com. What's good about Python is that the enterprise shit is isolated in Zope, so you can have an enterprise scalable business-free Python by simply staying away from Zope.
>>63
I digress; Pythonic == whatever Guido feels like. It's a set of practices, syntax, coding style, indentaion style, comment style, English style, and even the way you sit when you code.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 9:38
>>59 Python is not the best for 3D engines. Big deal.
End of thread, you have admitted that Python is not the best for 3D Engines, and this was a discussion about game programming. Everyone shut up about python, because it does not belong here.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 9:58
Python is not the best for 3D Engines, and this was a discussion about game programming.
I see what you did there.
>>67
YOUR LOGIC IS WRONG
Realtime 3D Games are a subset of Games. And if you subtract the set of Realtime 3D games from the set of Games, you end up with a subset of Shitty, Boring Games
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 14:25
>>68
Your logic is stupid, and it's also American. It's very sad if you can only find fun in 3D games, and it's also American.
That's not to say 3D games suck; they are great, but 2D games can be great as well, all up to gameplay and tastes.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 14:33
>>69
Someone really likes turn based tabletop war games.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 14:48
>>70
I like most kinds of games, including 2D weeaboo RPGs, 2D strategy games (ZERG RUSH KEKEKE), and puzzles (especially if they are weeaboo puzzles like Puyo Puyo).
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 15:00
>>59 Python is not the best for 3D engines. Big deal.
Finally. Glad you agree with what we've been saying all along. Now quit recommending Python to the OP already, Jesus Christ.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 17:32
>>72
Oh but Python is so... Pythonic, I can't resist :P
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 19:06
They just recently started teaching Python in the Program and Data Representation class at my college. I have experience programming games and graphics engines in C++ from some upper level CS courses. All this Python talk has finally convinced me to use my remaining free time this summer to learn it. Expect a thread in a month or so about how much Python fucking sucks for games, etc.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-04 20:12
>>74
__Welcome__ to Python! Jokes aside, I think you'll find it interesting at worst, and you'll probably find uses for it, graphics or not.
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-05 12:38
What >>75 means to say is Python.__welcome__(self)
Name:
Anonymous2006-08-05 13:50
Any good Python for C++ programmers guides, so I don't have to wade through "Hello World" tutorials or explanations of what an int is?
Dive into Python is crap. You might like it if you've never programmed before, otherwise it's _very_ longwinded. The only reason anybody reads it is because it's free.
Then again, most language books plain stink.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-14 21:24
lol
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-14 12:23
LISP
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-26 9:59
ur gay
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-28 10:59
beware the army of 12 year old autistics
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-28 11:30
Man I like Java for the portability, but jesus christ the language does not want to be learned. Every tutorial is shite and if I hear "UML 2.1" once more, I will fucking eat a bird.
Also, and this is retarded, XILINX runs on Java. Who the FUCK decided that an 8 gig VHDL compiler should run on Java? Even on top-line machines, hardware synthesis can run upwards to an hour if your layout is fiddly enough.
>>88
Dunno what I need; I haven't got into electronics yet, will do this summer.
Yesterday in a thread on /g/ someone said that they were using an FPGA to "emulate" (synthesize? I don't know what the proper terminology is) a CPU, on which then they ran Linux.
I am currently using a Spartan3a to do some hardware reading for me, but I don't want to use VHDL for everything I need and space/weight is limited so I can't just plug the FPGA into a processor, so in the Spartan3a, I'm emulating a 66MHz processor which'll take my C code. Analog data goes to ADC goes via SPI to FPGA, is manipulated in C and fed through TCP/IP to data logger.
>>90
Right, FPGA guys are 2 c00l to ``compile'' ``programs'', they »synthesize« »designs«.
But why would you want to run Linux on some shitty MicroBlaze, when you could make an OpenSPARC and run glorious Solaris?
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-28 15:39
If you know c++ already, Java shouldn't be terribly difficult. I might suggest C# instead though. And if you want to make games of decent quality, might as well jump from c# to c# with XNA.
Cellphone games will help you deal with finite resource management, horrible compilers, and debugging annoying little things, but in general, don't do it unless you want to do it for a living.
Name:
Anonymous2010-06-28 16:53
>>92 But why would you want to run Linux on some shitty MicroBlaze, when you could make an OpenSPARC and run glorious Solaris?
Don't ask me; my understanding of FPGAs is that they're magical pieces of hardware which change due to your spells.
Name:
not anyone in this thread2010-06-28 17:07
>>92
Synthesize is the right term when generating FPGA or ASIC netlists.
You compile C code to machine code which is interpreted by the CPU. The machine code is ran sequentially.
You synthesize VHDL/Verilog/schematics code to netlists which translate into real hardware structures(in the case of ASIC. In the case of VHDL, they just represent the configuration of various cells, but it's still functionally equivalent to the one ran on an ASIC, just an order of magnitude slower(or less). CPUs like x86 are full custom designs which are a lot more optimized(they optimize the schematics at the transistor/cell level, instead of just at the logic gate level) than autogenerated ASICs, because of ZOMGspeed). The netlists are ``ran'' in parallel, because that's just how electircal current works, but even then, most designs are synchronous and are synced by a clock signal, because true parallel async designs are much harder to manage and keep error-free. (In the case of a CPU, you can say that an instruction takes x (as documented) ticks to execute, that would mean it takes that many clock cycles).
But why would you want to run Linux on some shitty MicroBlaze, when you could make an OpenSPARC and run glorious Solaris?
Probably because OpenSPARC is too large, and thus too costly to fit on his FPGA?
>>95 In the case of VHDL, they just represent the configuration of various cells, but it's still functionally equivalent to the one ran on an ASIC, just an order of magnitude slower(or less).
Which is again functionally equivalent to interpreting the netlist on an CPU.
Meh, I guess what I really take issue with is the people who keep claiming that ``Verilog/VHDL is not a programming language''.
>>97
Of course you can do that, and I do consider Verilong/VHDL to be a programming language, but it's not a programming language meant to be ran on sequential CPUs (even if it can be emulated on them). It's more of a programming language than XML, in the sense that it describes a form of code which can be ran on a physical platform, not data, but at the same time it will compile to physical gate-level structures... Argh, whatever, it is a programming language.
>>99
Oh calm down. /prog/ doesn't need more people that know English as badly as it needs more people that know C, or any programming language at all for that matter.
>>100
There's a strong correlation between having anything to contribute and understanding the rules of grammar, spelling, capitalisation, and punctuation.
Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy