write a game without actually writing program code- can this act? RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • I have taken a look again at the graphical editor (after using a C compiler from 1990).


    there are filters, which are a substitute for a programmed AND.

    certain behaviour can be implemented via graphical interface.
    actually, it is akward to do so (if you are used to edit a single source code file).

    -in the classic source code, you can navigate very fast, using PGUP/PGDN, and the cursor.
    -in the graphical editor, you must click and click, and you do not see the encoding on a single page.
    it would take ten times longer than implementing behaviour using direct programming (certainly, it is possible to do nearly everything using the POPFLY game creator).

    so that is some form of suffering, it is not more easy, but operating the system via GUI is more complicated. effectively, the edit steps only produce substitutes for programmed AND, together with COMPARE.


    there is no complete, consumer-grade documentation, like for instance, such a documentation can be found included to BORLAND compilers. these documents are complete, all system parameters and features are explained (tough MSDOS system interrupts are missing).

    -you can implement a complete game only using the supplied documentation.
    -in POPFLY, you must consult books, the web for javascript, it is not explained. also the interfacing is not documentated (tough for instance, ARRAYS can be used via javascript).


    there is no rasterization, no pixel graphics engine. you can't create BITMAPs. the Silverlight methods to create graphical objects are not documentated. it is not possible to use them, execpt you have the information how to do it.

    this is major suffering. for certain types of games, you need BITMAPs, and pixel graphics.
    or at least, easy way to create vector objects via program code. this is also not documentated.

    so when i want to try implement a game idea, POPFLY game creator is not good, it would take ages via the graphical interface.

    I do think 2D, BITMAP, and PIXEL. Vector objects only exist via special 3D rasterization.

    it is possible to do all the things in POPFLY, at 10% of the speed. especially to change behaviours, or actors, can take a long time.

    -you can copy&paste source code.
    -you can not easily copy&paste things using a graphical editor (one of the major drawbacks).

    maybe some people think, Lambda expression and RUBY are better ways of programming.
    they say, von Neumann computer model is not good, and suffering.

    however, for certain types of software, you'll end up of emulating the von Neumann constructs, in obscure, complicated and restrictive ways.

    one example is, to write FOREACH instead of programming a FOR loop directly.

    -it is good if you want all elements.
    -it is of little use if you want every second element, or from a numeric table.


    the POPFLY game creator interface should be available only via source code programming, and complete documentation must exist, too.

    then there can also be certain wizards and graphical interfaces to edit.

    What i want to say is, that even for simple game i want to create in POPFLY, i would have to operate the graphical editor in akward ways, and before of that, it would be helpful to have the game as one-file source code.

    it is difficult to test ideas, and to make changes, while via text source code, this can be done more easily. also you never see the complete behaviour just by scrolling the pages with the source code.


    still trying to figure out how I could use the game creator in a way that's comfortable, and that makes sense. full documentation would be required, even if i can lookup JAVASCRIPT on the web, it is time-consuming. I do not use it regularily.

    directly speaking, I click the actor, and the graphic representation shows up.
    this is, for certain edits, not required.

    i think of Visual Studio, where properties can be unfolded, if needed, and that's a much better way.

    it is very akward always to open/close screens, just to see some data (one single AND programming).

    it would be better to have mini-windows like in Visual Studio, and just leave them open. in the game creator, the full screen is used, and then it must be closed again.


    It is OK if you do not understand much of my writing.
    there are books, about how to do 3D graphics, and I also do not understand much of it.
    It takes two hours to reproduce the math just from one single page.

    the difference is, if i want the 3D feature, I HAVE TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE SUBJECTS.

    http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/Vsexpressvb/thread/17db9176-32a2-44b1-902c-11b41fbb7ad6/ Why you should not learn VB!
    by the way, i do not agree. BASIC was my first language.

    Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:50 PM