So I'm not an experienced game developer or anything, but I figured we should have a general dedicated to this sort of thing, especially since I'm interested to hear peoples' ideas on lefty-orientated videogames that would be cool for me to make.
I've been using Blender since I was 11 or 12 years old (I'm 20 now) so I'm pretty much at a level now where I can model any game asset I want. I'm also in school for Computer Engineering, and have been a hobby programmer since I was around 14 working with Python, C, and GLSL shaders, so I can script pretty much anything as well. I would say my main weaknesses when approaching a task like this are Sculpting, Spriting, and Painting, so to any drawfags/artfags with skills: I invite you to contribute on whatever projects we end up embarking on.
FREE, OPEN SOURCE, EASY SOFTWARE I RECOMMEND
>ModellingBlender:
https://www.blender.org/>PaintingKritas:
https://krita.org/en/>Game DevelopmentGodot:
https://godotengine.org/>>38299Cyberspace in a post neural upload world
I mean that's probably been done but eh
>>38337>I'd like to use godot to make something like Nobunaga's Ambition or Romance of the Three Kingdoms but set in the Russian revolution.What's stoping you?
I've been playing with godot a lot and it's relatively easy and theres a decent amount of documentation and tutorials for learning and stuff.
>>38337Before picking game engine, pick what you want to do, and what you hope to gain. If what you wants to do involves 3D at a bigger scale than PS2 and wants you want to gain involves profesionnal experience, Godot is not really recommended.
>>38517As
>>38519 said, use an engine if your game doesn't need to have a big outstanding feature no other engine provides. I'd go for Unity 6 with DOTS (URP not HDRP, HDRP is kinda broken) for a city sim, it should get you the needed performance and fast dev time
>>38032I love how efficient being Free Libre And Open Source(tm) is a shield against criticism, even when you try to pose as a professional software
>>38532>use an engine if your game doesn't need to have a big outstanding feature no other engine provides. Even then their are engines that give you full access to the source code which means you could implement any feature possible.
>I'd go for Unity 6 with DOTS (URP not HDRP, HDRP is kinda broken) for a city sim, it should get you the needed performance and fast dev timeUnity isn't open source. Godot or Unreal for 3D. Cocos2Dx if you only need 2D, but I didn't like the documentation and there isn't a big community. I might just go with Unreal or Godot for 2D as well because you never know if you want to do some 2.5d effects. 3D is just another option. You can easily make a fully 2d game in those engines too.
>>38032Maybe he just programmed the physics wrong? Unreal has a full physics engine in it, but I've programmed physics from scratch in it many times before. A ball bouncing and losing energy is easy to program and I've done it. Wait nevermind, he just wants it to bound up and down again and again? That's just a looping command. Like I said no need to involve the "physics engine" that comes with the game engine.
>>38557>Unreal has a full physics engine in it, but I've programmed physics from scratch in it many times before.And you want to do this because you don't neccesarily want your games to be a simulation of real life physics. Do you think Sonic and Mario are based on real physics? Stop with this physics crap.
Think about this. Literally the only "physics" you need is gravity and then collision detection. Which people wouldn't even think of as physics because it's not an equation in real life physics. Detect when movement will cause two hitboxes to intersect and prevent that move from occurring. Adding deflection or bouncing is easy, just program:
>Every time hit is detected>Stop current motion>Add velocity vector at opposite angle from hit location surface normal to previous velocity vectorThis is braindead simple shit. This isn't thermodynamics.
>>38570that's not
you know what? I'll let you live in your ignorance
>>38572>>38569That's all there is to it you dumbass.
>The white represents free space>green is a wall<If the object trys to move into a space the computer checks if it's a free space or wall, if it's a wall, that move is invalid and it doesn't move it there therefore they never intersectI feel like this is something a child could understand. Like you can teach chess to a child. You can teach a child that the white bishop will never occupy a black square and vice versa.
>>38578Autodesk? What are you some CAD monkey? I didn't say I was going to explain advanced collision detection to you, one of the main reasons to use a game engine because some features like that are going to take a shitload of time and you're not going to improve on anything by reinventing the wheel. Actually I kind of want to learn more about how it works, but that's the beauty of an engine, you can do something over yourself from scratch or use what they already have. Unreal uses a capsule shape for all their collisions for characters.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Games/Techniques/3D_collision_detectionA capsule is just two spheres tied together by a cylinder.
If you're making an realtime game, you're probably going to want to study up on how the event tick works in your engine of choice.
>>38577It's all very simple by neccesity because the computer needs to calculate everything happening in realtime aka on the tick 60 times per second to achieve 60 fps. And if you've ever played around with simulations, you know the more advanced they are, the buggier they are, and you're likely to see all kinds of errors happen. Like cloth sims, the cloth collision points end up inside the character they're supposed to be colliding with and etc.
The simpler what you are "simulating" is the more you can bug proof it.
>>38615>>38643I have been thinking about idle games with more of a strategy component, so maybe.
>>38644I have actually considered this, I just don't know where I'd go with it.
>>38938>So why not closely stack triangles with holes in their textures for creating the look of a rough surface?They've been doing this (shell textures) for a long time. Usually to make fur. But you could do the same sort of thing with a different sort of texture pattern. Instead of having one texture copied multiple times along the normal, you could have varying textures. Probably the simplest way is to have a height map that is interpreted as an alpha channel, with the pixel value indicating at what layer(s) the texture should be transparent. E.g. 0 (black) means only visible on the lowest layer, 1 (white) visible on all layers up to the top, and the grays in between vary depending on the number of layers.
Honestly though you should probably prototype to see if a normal map would suit the purposes better since you're already trying to abstract the physical shape of the surface (i.e. "texture" in the common use of the word) with textures (images painted onto the geometry), and normal maps are purpose built to do that. Displacement maps are also doing what you're talking about but they're not very performant. You might find through prototyping that the best solution is some combination of shell textures, normal maps, and maybe other techniques too.
Unique IPs: 31