I''ve also noticed that C++ is widely used in the game development world. There has to be a reason as to why. I just don''t want to get stuck using something that would be a watse of time.

You guys have been a great help.

i dont understand why you''re limiting yourself to one
language. i flexible programmer will know 3 or more languages
like the back of his hand. not every project you work on
will require c++, or visual basic, or java, or delphi, ect...
who knows, you could get hung up on c++ and d++ will come out
and you''ll be SOL

my point here- learn as much as you can. dont limit yourself
to what the mainstream is doing.

-eldee
;another space monkey;
[ Forced Evolution Studios ]

''In C we had to code our own bugs. In C++ we can inherit them.''

in the past Visual Basic has been a tad slower than Visual C++ because of their compiling differences. Visual C++ 6 compiles down to machine code whereas Visual Basic has always compiled down to byte code. Visual Studio.net offers a twist of compilations. When developing for the .net platform, both languages compile down to the same byte code. This is what makes it now possible to work on the same project in mulitple languages, because all .net languages compile to the same byte code.

The result of this is that speed wise, they''re virtually the same when developing for .net.

If you''re developing with 6.0, C++ does run faster, but Visual Basic offers speed in productivity. In games like Quake the speed of C++ is a requisite, but if you''re working on an isometric RPG, then Visual Basic would give you quicker results.

All in all, it just boils down to your coding preferences. If you like to do everything code wise... learn C++, if you''re a visual sort of person, use Visual basic. Both languages work with DirectX so you''ll be able to pump out games with either.

But they''re the same because in Managed mode they both target the .NET Runtime.

(which is kinda like the way Java does it. It compiles to bytecode, which is run through a JIT style interpreter)

Its true that VB.NET and C# both target the .NET Intermediate Language, therefore "in theory" have access to the same set of instructions.


Personally, I think you''ll probably best to write your engine in C / C++ without the .NET runtime (i.e. not managed).

This is mainly due to speed issues (does .NET allow you to target the platform with VB?) and because you''ll find far more tutorial related to advanced game development coded in C / C++ than VB.


Then, for quick application dev, use languages such as VB to develop tools... and write plugin''s for your 3D tools to export to your favourite file formats (i.e. MaxScript) rather than coding a conversion tool from scratch.

.. but this is only my view. Try em all. See which one you prefer. But if you want to re-use these skills in the industry, then learn C++ ... because looking at the game dev jobs in UK, nobody is asking for VB...

Stu M

quote: Original post by 4thegraphics
I''ve been comparing both tools. Can anyone tell me if there is anything one tool can do that the other can''t? Or can they perform identically just in a different method. Also, I''m getting the impression that Visual Basic appears to be much easier to use and learn. Is this true? Would Visual Basic be ideal for building a game engine?

Why don''t you mention Delphi ? It''s fast, can do everything, makes making windows applications a lot easier, and it''s easier to program, leading to fewer bugs.

Just mentioning Borland C Builder.

I think it is great because it offers the best of both worlds.

It has excelent support for visual design of forms, with very easy code, while still staying in C++ (so you don''t have to worry about VB)

Also it can make executables that don''t use the VCL (visual component libary - what handles all the forms, etc). So pure windows programs can be made. This also lets you support DirectX (although, MS has stopped Borland support in the latest versions of DirectX ) as well as OpenGL, SDL, and other multimedia libarys you may want to try.

Also, you can combine the two in many ways, so you can have a game that uses DirectX, and then also have a form that is quickly desined (instead of manualy coded) using the VCL.


The only disadvantage is that you must distribute libary or staticly link in any other libarys that you use (must include the runtime libary, and can also requrire VCL and database libs if you use them). Of course, Microsoft''s compiler needs its own versions of these libarys as well, but they are distributed with windows, while Borlands are not.
Fortunatly, they can be staticly linked, so you just have the one executable anyway.



All in all, an excelent compiler. Well worth it.


ALSO: it can compile, link, develop and what-not deplhi code as well! You can have a project that has deplhi units and C++ units. Infact, the entire VCL was written in Dephi.

The version I have was 3, and I got that for free on a cover-CD. They might offer it free on their website as well. Worth looking into.

Do not meddle in the affairs of moderators, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Cool Links :: [ GD | TG | MS | NeHe | PA | SA | M&S | TA ]
Got Clue? :: [ Start Here! | Google | MSDN | GameDev.net Reference | OGL v D3D | File Formats | Go FAQ yourself ]

Hey, C++ is the clear winner, even nes8bit the most famous VB user in the history of ... uh ... these forums is switching to C++!

If I had my way, I''d have all of you shot! codeka.com - Just click it.

quote: Original post by zer0wolf
in the past Visual Basic has been a tad slower than Visual C++ because of their compiling differences. Visual C++ 6 compiles down to machine code whereas Visual Basic has always compiled down to byte code. Visual Studio.net offers a twist of compilations. When developing for the .net platform, both languages compile down to the same byte code.

What? VC++.NET compiles to byte code? So... VC++6 is faster than VC++.NET?

EDIT: Woops, should've read Stuart Miller's post first.. Apparently you can specify wether you use the .NET runtime? Or were you talking about C# when you mentioned VC compiles to byte code?

[edited by - Bas Paap on September 26, 2002 11:49:27 AM]

quote: Original post by zer0wolf
ktuluorion, everything you said about Visual Basic isn''t at all true, especially when you look at Visual Studio.net ... Visual Basic and Visual C++ have virtually all of the same features. Their coding styles are just different. Visual C++ allows programming at a more fundamental level that allows great precision. Visual Basic is much quicker to develop with, but practically everything is dealt with visually and for a hardcore coder, that sucks.

OK, perhaps my info is out of date. I have never worked with .net, and most of my experience with VB is the older versions as I dropped it long ago because my code got too messy with larger projects. Maybe these issues have been resolved. I cede to your experience.

quote: Original post by Bas Paap
What? VC++.NET compiles to byte code? So... VC++6 is faster than VC++.NET?
EDIT: Woops, should''ve read Stuart Miller''s post first.. Apparently you can specify wether you use the .NET runtime?

VC++.NET doesn''t emit managed code unless you add the /clr switch.


The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without religion, and religious men without intelligence.


  Abu''l-Ala-Al-Ma''arri (973-1057; Syrian poet)