I have committed the terrible sin of not reading all the posts in this thread, so please forgive me if I repeat what someone else has posted.

Windows Game Programming for Dummies is not for beginners! I think it even says you should have good knowledge of C/C++ before you start. It is not to teach you how to code, it is to show you DirectX. It provides all the info you need to make a simple DX game. Forget the WGPDUMB engine... the think is crap. It doesn''t even use the hardwear blitter most of the time! I learned DX from that book, but I had already been programming C++ the OOP way for about two years because of my wonderful chance encounter with Learn C++ in 24 Hours (Jesse Liberty). Don''t flame that book... it is the best one I have ever read. The only problem is that it doesn''t use hungarian. Back to the topic at hand: Have someone read a GOOD programming book, then they can tackle the good-reference-bad-coding-style book and still get something from it without being harmed. After reading that book, I went out and wrote a new, better, less messy engine to replace WGPDUMB. My first project was a particle system

If you want a copy of my engine (I still add stuff to it, so it is always changing), email me. It still isn''t perfect coding style, but it is much better than WGPDUMB.

--------------------


You are not a real programmer until you end all your sentences with semicolons; (c) 2000 ROAD Programming

You are unique. Just like everybody else.

Yanroy@usa.com

Visit the ROAD Programming Website for more programming help.

It''s not black and white just like that BZ... LaMothe''s books are great for most newbies, still some people don''t like his style... Just for the sake of justification, the DUMMIES book was heavily cut by the publisher to save pages... My advice to your cousin is that he should return the book and go for "Tricks of the Windows Game Programming Gurus" instead... And come to you for some more clear advice when it comes to OOP...

quote: Original post by SteveP3000
The reason why I like LaMothe''s books is that they allow new programmers to start creating games rather quickly. Most readers of these books are hobbyists/amateurs who don''t necessarily want to spend 8-10 months studying object oriented programming before they can load their first sprite.

While LaMothe''s books might not cover programming fundamentals as well as, say a whole book devoted to C++, I think that it allows newbies to get a taste for game programming, which will eventually inspire them to seek other resources for how to improve their code, etc.

Unfortunately, this (almost) never happens. Yes, you may quote exceptions to this rule, but in the long run, virtually no one goes on to teach themselves a solid background in basic software engineering skills after they learn first from a book like WGPFD. Why should they? Virtually none of the game programming books I have read or skimmed through say, "Go learn some data structures and algorithms," or, "Go learn some object oriented design/programming/analysis," etc...

I''m done for now. More later.

MSN

quote: Original post by msn12b

Unfortunately, this (almost) never happens. Yes, you may quote exceptions to this rule, but in the long run, virtually no one goes on to teach themselves a solid background in basic software engineering skills after they learn first from a book like WGPFD. Why should they? Virtually none of the game programming books I have read or skimmed through say, "Go learn some data structures and algorithms," or, "Go learn some object oriented design/programming/analysis," etc...

I''m done for now. More later.

MSN

very odd statement here. 4 questions: Are you saying that a person who reads wgpfd will never learn basic software enginering skills? Are you saying everything a person does he reads from a book? How would you know how many people go on and learn after reading a book like this?

Right on Fel. Well said.

I beg to differ msn12b. The "serious" begining game programmer will eventually go on and teach themselves, other programming topics. This kind of person, will realise, to become better at game programming, they must become a better programmer in general. If they are casual, they will probably not be dedicated/ambitious enough to learn more.


For a book to teach every topic relevant to game programming is ludicrous. It would be at least 5000 pages long.

500 pages of general programming.
1000 pages of basic C.
500 pages of good coding pratices.
1000 pages of OO/C++.
500 pages of algorithms and data structures.
1500 pages of game progamming!

Keep in mind these numbers would be just basics.
To create the true complete game progamming reference, it would be at least 50,000 pages long. I''m not kidding.
Scripting, AI, Physics, D3D, OpenGL, Glide, Interface design, Special grapic effects, Directsound, Directplay, multiplayer, 3D file formats, 2d file formats, etc...

The only way such a book could exist, is if some company decided to make a library reference. Volumes I to XI. Basic to very advanced. Many different authors. Each author, specializing.

This library, will probably never exist. 2 years after it''s release, it''s very dated!

A better altenative already exists. Go to the store and buy the books that interest you!!!!!

what an amazing idea. Someone should start an encyclopedia for programmers. That would be totally kick ass, a huge reference manual set. Instead of each book being hard bound, each book could be sort of a notebook, where after it''s dated, you could take out the pages, and replace them with new ones. I like it, it would be a huge collection, but it could be cool. As long as it was as detailed and all-encompasing as possible.

Well I''ve never read that book, only looked through some pages, but I didn''t like the way he throwed stuff at people, but that doesn''t mean anything, I just wouldn''t feel learning programming with that book...

Ok, down to business. As bz, I highly recommend that everybody starts with Java. I started that way (took about 1 or 2 months to pick enough to play around with some applets) and 1 or 2 year afterwards I picked up a C++ book called "learn C++ in 24 hours" or something like that (OK it was a bit basic but I only needed it to pick up the C++ syntax and principles, which differ from Java). I read the whole thing in some 9 to 10 days, on the eleventh I was already playing around with some C++ stuff. Then I picked up a D3D book "Inside Direct3D" (It marginally explains the D3D API, could have been much better...) and some Windows basic stuff (message handling, windows creation...). And since then I''ve playing around with D3D stuff (mainly playing around with some stuff to learn how to properly use C++). So, taking in consideration my experience, taking out time to learn Java just speeds up everybodies capability to learn C++...

Oh, and when you change to C++, don''t forget to ocasionally go back and look at your Java code, because C and C++ promotes ugly and unorginized coding (it''s happened to me once, it could happen again and it could happen to anyone)...

Being punctual is only making your mistake on time...

Murphy

I don''t really post much but this seems something to comment about...

LaMothe''s book (by that I mean TOTWGPG) DID help me...
Wait, it didn''t just help, IT IS THE REASON I AM ABLE TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL IN WINDOWS, DX, ETC!!!!!!!!

Let me explain...
I started programming a while back (in about 1995 or something) with QBASIC on a 286 my dad made for me. Being pre-adlecenct (BAD SPELLING!!!), having spare time and nothing else to do, I started making little demos with code I learnt from the in-program help. Nothing major, the most I did was a spaceship that shot something as it went across the screen. Then, after a straight-out time of doing this, I burnt out. I never again really did anything with QBASIC and now from all the upgrades I discovered REAL games!!! Awhile passed with me being a day and night addict (Wait, I still am, but thats not the point )!

Then, fumbling around a book store, I found a book called.......
"Visual C++ 5 for Dummies" (Haha - thought I was going to say TOTWGPG ). I brought it and got through the first chapter with very little understanding of what the hell was going on. (Now that is a VERY badly ordered book!) I did though understand a lot of chapter 2 (I got to pointers). Then with the knowlage I just learnt, I made LOTS of little "tests" but nothing more...
A few a year or two passes and I was DESPERATE to do something of any worth, in the game area of course. Then one day wondering through PC World, I found the first game program book I had ever seen - TOTGPG! I BORGHT IT! (with a £5 discount because it was the last of the lot, and you know people don''t like buying books with a little damage ).

I began reading and understanding it!!!

Over-all, the moral of the story is - Don''t buy "Visual C++ 5 for Dummies".................. Oups, that ain''t the moral of the story !

But, really, TOTGPG is the only reason I can learn things about windows like DirectX, OpenGl, etc. Sure, VC++5 for Dummies DID teach me C++, but it also teached me something I didn''t want -

FRUSTRATION!!! - All thoughs "tests" I made have given me a itchy "Give up" button and I REALLY HATE THAT!!!!!!!!!!

Oh-well, I hope this contributes to the talk. Other things to note is that I am Dyslecix (this is my exclaimation for the bad spelling) and that I understand plenty, but implentation is a pain for me (I must be cursed or something ).

Moz - edmorriss@aol.com

I just have to chime in here, I have several problems with what''s being said. First, if someone wants to learn to program games, why mess around with java for a year or two? What''s the point? You guys do this, and advise people do this because you have some phobia or preconceived notion that C++ is somehow more complex than java. There''s enough crap that needs to be understood when learning to program games, why compound it by learning things you don''t need to know? If you want to program games, start programming in C or C++, that''s it. Next, you may not agree with LaMothe''s style, and call him a hack, but I''m sure others would say the same about anyone on this board if they looked at their code. The point of Lamothe''s books are not to define a coding style for you or even really teach you the proper way to make games, but to help you understand what goes into a game and get you up and running with DirectX. For that these books do an excellent job. If you have simple concepts explained in a clear, concise manner, you''ll be able to pick up advanced concepts quickly, and often without any other info than what''s provided in the Direct X SDK. These books don''t teach you to program games, but rather give you some basic info and send you off in the right direction. I would think that anyone who starts reading one of his books and can understand and grasp the examples he gives will undoubtedly have developed their own style by this point (good or bad) and provided they are capable of logic, be able to come up with better, or at least more sensible and cleaner solutions to the problems he presents. All I can say is the best advice anyone could give to a new programmer is to read everything you can (even the Lamothe books), don''t waste time learning things you don''t need to know (java), and take anything a programmer tells you with a grain of salt.

I think LaMothe''s books are great for some of the same reasons bz thinks they suck. He doesn''t bog you don''t with anything but *exactly* what you need to know to accomplish a certain task. He may not teach you good coding style or structure or teach you graceful error handling or anything like that, but if you want to learn how to put graphics on the screen he will teach you very quickly in very simple terms.

Even today when I''m learning a new language or technology of some kind I''d rather start with a quick hack and broaden my knowledge later - at least I''m getting something done immediately and seeing results. That pretty much sums up what LaMothe does. If you want to start making simple games his books will have you up and running quicker than any others, and you''ll understand each step along the way because you''re not bogged down trying to understand ten files chock full of "robust" example code that diverts your attention from the simple things you''re trying to learn.