InterviewSolution
Saved Bookmarks
InterviewSolution
| 1. |
Solve : I'm trying to build my own RPG-style game? |
|
Answer» I have some experience with a couple different programming languages, but very little with creating anything resembling a sophisticated, or even friendly, interface. I've heard that Flash is a reasonable approach, but I know ZERO about programming in/with flash. I am also only self taught... If you want to create a game with a 'classic' feel, then use QBasic. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense... what is a "classic" feel and how does QBASIC provide it?Quote That doesn't make a whole lot of sense... what is a "classic" feel and how does QBASIC provide it? The games that you develop using qbasic run under DOS. The PC speaker and 320x200 VGA/CGA graphics make it seem like a classic DOS game that was made in the early 90s.Quote from: Linux711 on November 08, 2010, 10:54:55 AM The games that you develop using qbasic run under DOS. The PC speaker and 320x200 VGA/CGA graphics make it seem like a classic DOS game that was made in the early 90s.Doom was made in the early 90's and certainly can be called a classic DOS game. However I fail to understand how QBASIC even comes close to approximating that experience. Additionally, it would seem that you are not describing "classic" DOS games from that era as much as you are describing the crap of the crop of the time. Just because something creates "DOS games" doesn't instantly give those games a classic feel. That has to be added intentionally. The only games using the PC speaker after around 1993 were not "classics" as much as they were shareware cruft. Additionally, it sounds more like you are using "classic" to refer to text-based RPG games, which is a rather large generalization, and in no way requires a console interface. Either way, suggesting anybody use QBASIC for any purpose is stupid. The assumption here is that if they produce a game, they want to get other people to try it as well. QBASIC cannot compile so they will have to distribute it as source, and hope anybody who wants to try it is not running a 64-bit OS and KNOWS how to get QBASIC and knows how to use it to start the game. This directly flies in the face of the fact that they implicitly want to create "anything resembling a sophisticated, or even friendly, interface." Which undebatably QBASIC doesn't even begin to provide. Quote from: icedragon668 on November 07, 2010, 07:54:48 PM I have some experience with a couple different programming languages, but very little with creating anything resembling a sophisticated, or even friendly, interface. I've heard that Flash is a reasonable approach, but I know ZERO about programming in/with flash. I am also only self taught... Flash would be a good option, of course you would need to have Flash in order to work with it. I won't lie and say it's "simple" to make a game, but I've made a few simple games, such as a frogger game, pretty easily, so it can't be that bad. The language is called "ActionScript" and seems pretty powerful, if it is a bit confusing syntax-wise at times. Barring that, I'd go with one of the .NET languages. I'd stay as far away from C and C++ unless you are planning to write an Operating System, since they will unnecessarily complicate things. Arguments about "being more portable" are also baseless, as in many ways C# and .NET are more portable to Linux then C or C++ are. (C & C++ are "source compatible", which means you would have to recompile it for each platform; and even then it's only theoretical, since you will almost certainly have to make changes to account for the different systems. With .NET, as long as you avoid using the various Windows-only framework components (which sort of necessitates creating a Console game) you can run it on Linux using Mono. Of course, you could also get a similar and even better effect with Java, which is quite similar in many ways. The advantage here is that you can both use graphics as well as create an Applet that you could plop on a WEB page. Quote QBASIC cannot compile so they will have to distribute it as source False Quote suggesting anybody use QBASIC for any purpose is stupid It's the best way to make a DOS game. The only other option is to use some ancient C compiler like borland and that would suck. Quote Flash would be a good optionQuote I'd go with one of the .NET languages. The problem with these is that your not going to get that kind of classic RPG ambiance; your going to have to emulate it and because of that, these option would not be MY first choice. But if you want it to reach the most people, then yes, you should use flash. The good thing about qbasic though, is it's free and flash is not. Visit this site: http://www.petesqbsite.com/Quote from: Linux711 on November 08, 2010, 12:58:34 PM FalseTrue. Prove otherwise. QBASIC != QuickBasic, QBASIC is free in some older Operating Systems. QuickBasic is not. QBASIC cannot compile the programs you create in it. QuickBasic can. Quote It's the best way to make a DOS game. The only other option is to use some ancient C compiler like borland and that would suck.First, wether QBASIC is the best to make a DOS game is irrelevant. Nowhere in their original post do they make even an implication that they want their game to run or work with DOS. Those implications can only be found in your replies. Even so, AGAIN: QBASIC does NOT COMPILE executables. QuickBASIC does, however it's no newer or more capable then any number of competing products, such as the aforementioned Borland C (or even better, Microsoft C Compiler), which was still being updated long after QB 4.5 (and even QBX) were essentially abandoned by MS. Quote The problem with these is that your not going to get that kind of classic RPG ambiance; your going to have to emulate it and because of that, these option would not be MY first choice. But if you want it to reach the most people, then yes, you should use flash.What the *censored* are you talking about? "classic RPG ambience?" DOS doesn't even HAVE any "classic RPGs" in fact even finding a game that can fit today's definition of an "RPG" is difficult, and those you do find both barely fit that definition and aren't very good in comparison to RPGs that everybody generally associated with the genre, such as those created by Square. In fact, the only thing those DOS RPGs that do exist have in common is terrible control mechanisms, buggy implementations and generally bad execution of the concept. These HARDLY constitute "ambience" you would want to emulate, nor are they intrinsic to the operating platform. Quote The good thing about qbasic though, is it's free and flash is not.FreeBASIC is free too, shares a lot of syntax with QBASIC and QuickBASIC, and actually allows you to compile, which despite any claims to the contrary QBASIC does NOT. FreeBASIC also compiles to both DOS and windows and (I think) Linux, as well. www.freebasic.net Quote Visit this site: www.site.com websites are all terrible in concept and especially in the case of something as antiquated as QBASIC only proves how self-deluded people can get. Personally for 3d games i'd recommend Unity http://unity3d.com. I've only had a play with it myself but if you can get your head around it it is great. There is a free version and a pro version. I've also heard that Dark Basic is good although I have yet to try it. It is commercial software but they seem to have an ad-supported free version for home users. http://www.thegamecreators.com/?m=view_product&id=2000&page=index. The manufacturer also seems to offer other game development software.If you don't want a graphics game and instead prefer a MUD (text based game) then I'd go with building a PHP program on a free webserver like www.justfree.com. I've done this twice, and for the last one GOT funding and now a real server (check out the link in my signature). It's a lot of fun and not too hard, working with PHP/html/css is simple, there's a lot of tutorials, and once it's up it's up and can be played worldwide. That's my two cents anyway ^^ |
|