Forum on Gameplay

General Discussions
#1

I’m pretty new to java-gaming.org, but over the past couple of days I started a couple of topics that went into great detail about the relationship between gameplay and technology.

IMO the forums are primarily focused on technology and there’s little room for other things. I think a forum called gameplay (or something similar) should be created. This should be a place were we can discuss design strategies and other things that can make a game a good game other than technology and programming. Games aren’t just about programming (and I’m a programmer) but about ideas and beliefs. It sounds a bit melodramatic, but I think we should be able to discuss our personal philosophies about how games should be created.

Thanks, Derek

#2

I vote for :slight_smile:

#3

Personally I don’t think that’s a good idea, because there are already much better (and perhaps more appropriate) places for that kind of discussion - and you’ll find a MUCH broader, better-informed audience if you look in the right places.

I’ll throw out various suggestions, but I don’t frequent most of them these days, so you’ll need to look around for yourself. Places like the IGDA forums would appear a good start, or the top-notch specialist game-design sites - e.g. Gamasutra used to have forums (although last time I looked they appeared to have died).

There’s also several mailing lists devoted to the topic - at least one run by Brian Hook, IIRC (id Software).

…plus the semi-professional sites, like Flipcode and CFXWeb. Both those have very active forums.

I’m sure if you nose around, you can find places where really exciting discussions in this area are going on. If you try doing it here, on a java-games-only site, you’re only going to get a tiny proportion of the participants.

#4

I agree those sites are very good places to discuss such topics, but how a game is designed depends on the platform that it is being designed for. How a java game is designed is much different than how a c++ game is designed because of both its strengths and weaknesses.

This site would not be a good place to discuss how to make high-end commercial c++ games in java as you can’t really make most of those games in java. Other sites discuss things not exactly like this but similar. If we had our own forum we could avoid these things that do not apply to java. Why would we need to talk about how hardware pixel shaders affect the immerissiveness of a game on a platform that doesn’t support it?

#5

There’s no more polite way of saying this… it really seems like you haven’t done your research. Your software rendering experiments are cool (and completely beyond my skill, btw) but hardware rendering is just as possible with Java now as it is with C++. Going the Java2D route is going to be fine for hobbiest and applet programmers like me (so far anyway, I’m going to try to get started with OpenGL this year) but that’s definitely not the extent of our capabilities with on this platform.

#6

hardware pixel shaders are only supported on d3d from what i know, and i’m pretty sure ms didn’t make a version of d3d for java

#7

If you’re interested in getting started with pixel shaders in Java, just head over to the LWJGL forum and I’m sure the guys there can start you off in the right direction. ;D

#8

[quote]how a game is designed depends on the platform that it is being designed for.
[/quote]
ehm, no. only reason i can think of is an object oriented language versus non-OO. otherwise i don’t understand what you mean.

#9

developing games in java doesn’t just mean applications it means making games as applets aswell, too bad LWJGL doesn’t work with applets. ;D

It was a bad example for me to use, you can tell me anything done in c++ can be done in java, true, but not always in an applet and definetly not always platform independant

#10

actually it does depend on the launguage used. I’m not going to make an applet (platform independant) an unreal2 game because java applets just can’t do those graphics and that game is designed around those graphics

#11

Maybe you should have specified “Forum on Applet Gameplay” then. Does GL4Java support applets? It might…

#12

"IMO the forums are primarily focused on technology and there’s little room for other things. I think a forum called gameplay (or something similar) should be created. This should be a place were we can discuss design strategies and other things that can make a game a good game other than technology and programming. Games aren’t just about programming (and I’m a programmer) but about ideas and beliefs. It sounds a bit melodramatic, but I think we should be able to discuss our personal philosophies about how games should be created. "

[confused]
ehm, ok, so why did you bring up technology and platform independency etc later on?
[/confused]

#13

i guess the discussion get led in the wrong direction. its almost inevitable that when you talk about gameplay and making good games that technology is going to become associated with it. thats kinda what i wanted to avoid

#14

[quote]actually it does depend on the launguage used. I’m not going to make an applet (platform independant) an unreal2 game because java applets just can’t do those graphics and that game is designed around those graphics
[/quote]
I’d expect the best reason not to do “Unreal2004: the applet” :slight_smile: is because of the audience. People who are playing applets do not intend to sit down for hours of exhilarating gameplay, working out their stress; they’re probably having a 15 minute coffee break and doing some surfing (well, yes of course there are exceptions - but please indulge me in my gross generalizations :wink: ).

However, assume for the time being that an applet were a suitable medium for delivering UT (in terms of the audience). Java applets can -of course- “do those graphics”, although (at present; perhaps in a few years time LWJGL will have changed all this? I hope so…) you have to work hard to retain the platform-independence. You can probably say “I’m not going to make an applet UT because…it’s too much effort” and have most people nod their heads in sympathy.

But if you want to do it, it’s certainly far from impossible…

The game you are talking about is an OpenGL game. As has been pointed out, OpenGL (and Pixel Shaders etc) are just-another-programming-language that you can invoke from C++ - and you can also invoke from Java.

#15

There’s a lot of openGL discussions here as well and that’s all discussed in greater detail on other boards too. There’s also forums about the business side of things here. Hell, even an ‘Off Topic’ forum!
I really can’t think of a reason why not to include a gameplay forum on a game programming forum, even if its focus is on java.
Currently its just a plain fact that different games are written in java compared to C++ games. The fact that you can do the same in java as in C++ does not change that.
So probably the gameplay and design tactics discussions will have its place here. Maybe not, but we can’t tell as long as there has been none.

[quote]you can tell me anything done in c++ can be done in java, true, but not always in an applet and definetly not always platform independant
[/quote]
That’s just a decision you are making. Not everybody makes the same decisions as you. You can make doom3 in java (although not in an applet, but who the hell wants to play doom3 in an applet anyway?!). You’ll probably loose an insignificant number of fps, I’ll give you that, but it definately can be done.
You’ll also loose 100% platform independance, but even that it’s not a big issue. Most important java benefits are still there, and that’s increased productivity and better portability compared to C++.
I have the feeling you’re not fully aware of these facts or that you’re underestimating them.

#16

they could also make games nowadays that run twice as fast or are twice as smart, or pretty, etc. all they would have to do is write it all in assembly which would be too much effort, so they don’t do it and who would want too.

Are there any forums on writing commercial-like games entirely in assembly, its a guess but I’d have to go with no. Why would people discuss something in order to learn and not actually use it, I know I wouldn’t.

I think writing a game in an applet is very important because it brings in an entirely new audience. I like to program for myself because it brings me pleasure, but i also like to share what I’ve done and learned with others. If a painter painted a picture that nobody could see, its probably not as good as one that everyone could experience

I don’t think I’m underestimating the benefits to what u said, but IMHO too many people underestimate the benefits of writing for applets as well as applications

maybe this is too philosophical for a web forum but I believe that making games is an art form more than a science and that its important to reach as large an audience as possible. Whether the art is good or bad, I personally believe I would benefit from experiencing it

#17

[quote]making games is an art form more than a science and that its important to reach as large an audience as possible
[/quote]
If we’re talking art, for me art doesn’t mean that the artist has to reach as many people as possible. Many, many important artists didn’t actually. Only the most popular did.

[quote]Why would people discuss something in order to learn and not actually use it, I know I wouldn’t.
[/quote]
I don’t understand what you’re saying. Could you please explain?

#18

I’m not saying art has to reach as many people as possible and i’m not saying that art is better if it reachs more people. I’m saying that it should be the goal of the artist (from a societal point of view) to share their art with as many people as possible

i was saying that their arn’t many forums talking writing big games in assembly because nobody makes them (that i know of) People read/write to forums mainly to learn. Why would u learn about something your never going to use, its just not very practical.

sorry if i can’t make it any clearer :-[

#19

[quote]I’m saying that it should be the goal of the artist (from a societal point of view) to share their art with as many people as possible
[/quote]
And why is that? It seems like asking from the artist to restrict himself for the sake of popularity. I certainly hope you don’t think about every artist that way. Man, how dull the world would become.

[quote]sorry if i can’t make it any clearer
[/quote]
Oh right, of course :-X I’m getting tired :-/

This discussion should be moved to the ‘Off-Topic’ forum.

Back on-topic, I still vote for :slight_smile:

#20

[quote]And why is that? It seems like asking from the artist to restrict himself for the sake of popularity. I certainly hope you don’t think about every artist that way. Man, how dull the world would become.
[/quote]
i didn’t mean that they should restrict themself to become popular. The art shouldn’t change unless the artist feels it should. I meant that it should be shared so that everyone can experience whether that experience was made for them or not or whether its good or not