newn's Profile User Rating: -----

newn's Photo
Reputation: 2 Apprentice
Group:
Active Members
Active Posts:
116 (0.08 per day)
Joined:
22-April 09
Profile Views:
4,668
Last Active:
User is offline Apr 08 2012 05:03 AM
Currently:
Offline

Previous Fields

Country:
Who Cares
OS Preference:
Windows
Favorite Browser:
FireFox
Favorite Processor:
Intel
Favorite Gaming Platform:
PC
Your Car:
Who Cares
Dream Kudos:
0

Latest Visitors

Icon   newn Thinking of starting a new project...

  1. Awards
  2. About Me
  3. Blog

Posts I've Made

  1. In Topic: Sidescroller: sprites only - disadvantages?

    Posted 7 Dec 2011

    View Poststayscrisp, on 07 December 2011 - 11:27 PM, said:

    Pixel-perfect collision is overkill for a game like this (it's slow), I highly recommend that you don't pursue it.


    What would be your recommendation for a game like this if I'd want to make stairs or a smooth mountain or something alike?

  2. In Topic: Sidescroller: sprites only - disadvantages?

    Posted 7 Dec 2011

    View Poststayscrisp, on 07 December 2011 - 06:27 PM, said:

    Collision will be harder using sprites. It's quite simple to knock up a collision system when using tile maps and it's relatively efficient due to only having to run a small computation to find the tile and check if it can be passed or not.

    When using many sprites with different sizes and random locations then you are going to have to check each one individually. Even if you're only using bounding boxes or circles there could be a lot of checks which will slow things down. To make things more efficient you're going to have to use some kind of algorithm like sweep and prune. All of this leads to more code and more need for optimisation.

    Hope that helps some :)


    Hm, that is good point, thanks.

    Could you give me some information on pixel-perfect (or maybe I should call it differently when speaking of tileboxes) collision detection? I haven't found any (literally) around the net.

  3. In Topic: Sidescroller: sprites only - disadvantages?

    Posted 7 Dec 2011

    View PostTheCompBoy, on 07 December 2011 - 09:31 AM, said:

    Using tile maps makes making / changing you maps less tedious, Using tile maps will take up less memory and it is also easier to handle collisions.


    Memory shouldn't be a problem, I'm not targeting Pentium 2s, I'm targeting at least Pentium 3s/4s.

    Also I disagree about the collisions. Making a staircase or just a smooth location is extremely hard - or I don't know something I could've used. If it's just a *cube* collision, then it is rather easy, yes.

  4. In Topic: DirectX Game using C++

    Posted 19 Oct 2011

    You might consider looking at Box2D, they have pretty cool stuff for physics. Although I'm programming physics myself for my game too... That's basically logical understanding of physics (or actual knowledge of physics + less logical understanding of physics), and I'm going for the former myself. A bit hard, but fun and pays off well.

  5. In Topic: Sticky for DIC self made games?

    Posted 19 Oct 2011

    I agree with ButchDean, although IF there wold be much content, it would be a great idea. On the other hand, if there is XNA-specific sticky, there should equally be X-specific stickies...

    Anyway, I voted no for the same reason ButchDean did.

My Information

Member Title:
D.I.C Head
Age:
21 years old
Birthday:
October 9, 1991
Gender:
Location:
The edge of the Milky Way
Interests:
Main interest of course is IT, especially interested in game programming. However I am interested in nearly everything on a low-average level.
Full Name:
Arthur
Years Programming:
0
Programming Languages:
C/C++ (moderate knowledge)
Win32/Direct3D (moderate knowledge)
Pascal (unfortunately have to learn at school, fortunately last year)
HTML/CSS/SQL (not learning, just know the basics from experience)

Contact Information

E-mail:
Private
Skype:
Skype  gamerdev

Friends

newn hasn't added any friends yet.

Comments

newn has no profile comments yet. Why not say hello?