pong.

nuff said.

quote:
pong.

nuff said.

couldn''t have said it better meself!

Thanks for the responses, really brings up my hopes for this game. About a week ago I was wondering if there was even a point to making this game because it''s mulitplayer based (with some single player bot levels, might add a fully single player part to it like most game have). If no one played the game multiplayer, then there would be no point in doing this game, which would make me waste my time doing this game. Also (not related to this, but I thought I''d say it anyway), I don''t want to be looked down on because I''m a newbie or anything. I''m just a newbie at game programming (which I''ve been trying to do for the past 2 years but have had all sorts of things get in my way), but even though I didn''t know how to do most C++ when I started 3 years ago, I read some game programming books, game design tutorials, etc, to figure out the game loop, various ways of making things work in games, and what people look for in games. I personally know if a game idea I have sucks and I''ll dump it if it does. The idea I have now has stuck with me for a week so far, and I still love it. I''m currently reading a windows/directx game programming book so that I can do this in windows with directx. All I need to learn is the extra code and what does what. I think that a lot of people won''t think I''ll be able to do this game because I don''t have the coding experience in windows. I think that if you know how to do something, but just have to figure out how to implement it (this is why I''m reading the book, and I ask people other things I don''t know) that the first game someone makes could be kick ass. Now, if anyone disagrees/agrees, let me know. I''m bored as hell right now (which is why I have just typed most of that) and I''d like to know what other people think about this.

Slayer-X, you sound just like me about a year or two ago .

Keep working on your game, the only reason you would need to do 3D is if someone hired you to do it. That is the reason I''m learning it .

Null and Void

Hi Slayer-X

Everyone is a newbie to start with, EVEN those arrogant ''pros'' who you stumble across from time to time.


Keep at it bro!

I have just been learning the basics of Win32 programming after years of DOS programming, and its great. Most of the people on these boards have helped me do this, so when you are good at stuff, take the time to help another newbie out so he can learn as well

Cel

Of course I''ll help other people =). That is, if I actually become good at this, which I think I should be able to do. Most of the stuff I''ve seen people helping other people with has been common sense to me, so I don''t think I''ll have TOO much trouble.

Hell yeah 2D all the way! In my opinion the best games every put out were 2D. The Ultima series, the FF series, and one of my all time faves Xevous(sp?). 3D is nice but it seems that developers spend more time making pretty effects than gameplay *cough*Quake3*cough*.

I agree completly on the topic of 2d having a charm that 3d does not. Although I might interject that In "Legend of mana", yes for the most part the graphics were hand drawn but most of the attacks were 3d. they dont look it but a lot were mounted 3d. A combination of the two mediums can create a very nice effect. Enix''s "Star Ocean 2: The second story" was a decent example but by no means perfect. "Breath of fire 3" and "Saga frontier" used mounted sprites on 3d backgrounds. although most new console games are still a melding of the two. Every Final Fantasy game on the PSX as well as chrono cross has used 3d characters over 2d backdrops. but then again, this is only explointing one genre of gaming. there are many creative uses of the pair, maybe you should have a look at running half and half.

Allow the flaming to begin
Conshape Electronic Arts

When people put down 2D, it is usually because so many newbie games tend be to clones of Tetris and Pac-Man and Asteroids and so on. Of *course* nobody cares about those games any more. You can download dozens or hundreds of free clones of each one (and they''re mostly pretty lame).

The 2D vs. 3D arguments usually stem from people who want to be able to write Tetris clones and get praised for them. The feeling is that "2D is easy; 2D games are like Tetris and Asteroids" and "3D games games are hard; I cannot write 3D games." This is superficial. You could write an excellent game that is not 3D if you get away from thinking about classic arcade games and generally fixating on the 2D aspect. If you look at top selling games from PC data, you''ll see lots of huge, huge titles that aren''t done with textured triangles: Starcraft, Roller Coaster Tycoon, The Sims, etc. The designers of those games were not fixating on 2D vs. 3D, but focusing on gameplay.

IMO, it depends on the game itself. I reckon 2D works best for things like god-sims, city-building games, and some war-sims; stuff like that ( Populous2, SimCity3000, Command & Conquer all come to mind ), while 3D works for stuff that is based on 3D worlds, flight and racing sims, FPS, stuff like that. Saying that 2D is dead is just a pile of brown.


"If you have any questions you may direct
them to that brick wall over there." - South Park