Standard Game Object Thought Experiment

[hartnell]

One of the reasons Game Maker does so well is that it has a standard game object. NO game programming language has one to date, mainly because it's expected that the programmer is experienced enough to write his own objects. However, to become a noob trap, I think Brutus2D need an optional one.

Each object in Game Maker has a set of variables, events, and functions that you know it will have and simplifies game construction. I will be putting a complete list here in the next day or two, but for now, here are the most important ones :

st_object.hspeed - the amount in pixels that a game object moves per step horizontally

st_object.vspeed - the amount in pixels that a game object moves per step vertically

st_object.direction - the direction of moment, in degrees

st_object.speed - the overall speed in the direction indicated above.

st_object.gravity - the amount in pixels that a game object is effected by gravity per step

st_object.gravity_direction - the direction gravity pulls on an object, in degrees.

st_object.x - the x location of an object in the map

st_object.y - the y location of an object in the map

st_object.depth - the drawing order of the sprite

st_object.sprite_index - the current sprite being displayed for the object

st_object.image_index - the current subimage of a sprite currently being displayed

st_object.image_speed - the current speed of animation of the current sprite

st_object.friction - the amount in pixels a game object is slowed down by friction per step

st_object.friction_line - the direction, as a front and back line (ex. up /down, left/right) that friction takes effect.

This is not a complete list. What would you guys like to see in the standard game object?

- hartnell

P.S. If you are wondering why I talk about Game Maker so much when improving Brutus2D, well, I'm a seasoned Game Maker veteran. It set's a good example, but in the end, it's limited. I believe Brutus2D can beat the pants off it.

[u9]

That's a nice idea. Let me see if I understand you correctly. The object is already defined in Brutus2D and when ever I want to create a, say, player I just say new Object() and assign the different values to it's members (properties)... right?

[Guilect]

I've played some Game Maker games (i.e. the 1945 demo).
They tend to be slow and bloated.
I hope we are not attempting to do that to Brutus2D.
I do not wish to have a "Hello World" program that is 2 meg is size because we stuff every possible function into the program. I always envisioned the core of Brutus2D being very small. Just the basics, additional features would be added by the users and could be easily 'included' only when they were actually going to be used.

Maybe Brutus2D is the next step up for someone coming from a point and click development environment. Where you have to learn a little programming. Is that such a bad thing?

Currently in Brutus2D to do what you want are asking is to have a class that declares all of these attributes. Then you set the object equal to a new instance of that class. For additional objects you do the same thing. I think even a beginner, once shown an example of this, will pick it right up.

With the next release of Brutus2D (v1.6) there is a template system in place (your suggestion). It would be trivial for a n00b or a newb to open a template that has a class like this already defined in it. Having this be a class in a template would make adding new parameters very easy for the user, rather than having a statically defined set built-in.

Just my thoughts on the topic.

P.S. hartnell, your suggestions are welcome. Your participation is valuable. Do not read any tone into my post(s). There is none. I am just making sure that Brutus2D's development is going in the proper direction. I also want to make sure that Brutus2D appeals to all users and not just to one.
Cheers.

[u9]

I agree It is actually ideal for a template.

[hartnell]

I'll have to see the templates before I comment on them.

However, I do see a greater possibility. Standard Libraries. So, you want objects suited for a platform game? Include the Platform Library. Making an RPG? RPG Library.

Of course, for common things, libraries could build on each other. What do you think?

[hartnell]

About Game Maker being simply point and click. Well, no, it's not. It has a full featured and well developed scripting language called GML. Stubbing for it on GDN is going to take WEEKS because there are so many functions. (dont read me as offended, read me as dreading the work to do it)

It's true, the smallest GM game you can get is about 1 MEG, but, it's fast enough to do this :

s64games.com/sbf.php

even with all it's built in features.

With that said. I think standard libraries is the way to go.

-hartnell

[hartnell]

Triple post due to lack of sleep! Templates were my suggestion? Wow. I just suggested a standard start up file like DevC++. What else do you have in mind?

-hartnell