Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Definitely gles3. As you said, by the time you are done with the module the numbers will have increased.
What many people don’t realise is that you, as a small indie, can actually push the same number of triangles on the screen as a AAA developer. But you will not do that by using old tech.And it’s not just 3d games. There are lots of possibilities with the new features. E.g. with 3D-Textures you can do color grading easily and completely change the look of your game with a small image file. Improved Render Buffers make post-processing easier and more cross platform.
It might have made sense to do gles2 1-2 year ago. It’s an investment that doesn’t pay off now, because in 2-3 year, most hardware will be gles3 compatible. The people that didn’t upgrade will probably also not buy your game.
edit: For reference, gles 3.0 was released 4 and a half years ago. gles2, 10 years ago.
The takeaway from the video I posted is that computers today are very fast, but we don’t use it’s full potential.
The reason it’s so important in this case, is that it’s at the core of our development cycle:Change code -> compile -> verify -> repeat
If the compile step takes too long it can be very irritating. Even the 5-6 seconds in mx1 “feel” long to me. I get that this might be an unsolvable problem, because mx2 compiles down to C++ (which doesn’t have the fastest compile times).
Is mx2 already doing iterative compiling where it doesn’t recompile everything?
I am not up to date with mx2, sorry for obvious questions.
To be honest, I don’t like how the shader system works in mojo2.
First of all, it’s not very flexible in that you can only access fragment shaders. Now even though you can’t do much, it’s so cumbersome to use, that I wrote a whole library around it to make it somewhat manageable. Compare this to the really simple API of löve2d: https://love2d.org/wiki/love.graphics.setShader
I think they got the design right. It’s not flexible, but very simple.
If you want it to be more advanced (like access to vertex shader, etc.), a more complex api is to be expected.It’s an mx1 app. I am currently not using mx2, but couldn’t you guys port over the mojo2 system? I mean the source is available if you have mx1 pro.
I think shaders are a cheap way to stylize your game and make it unique. Cheap in the sense that your whole game benefits from it and you have to put in very little work. I disagree that they are not important to gameplay. Conveying information clearly to the player is sometimes best done by an effect (glitching screen, blur, color-toning to convey mood, etc.).
The way I have done Fullscreen effects in my game (mx1) is to use 2 textures (lets call them A and B):
As suggested, you render your whole game to a texture first (in our case on texture A).Then we start applying effects (fragment shader only):
1. Pass A to your shader
2. Set B as render target
3. Render/Flush
4. Switch A and B
5. Go to next shaderMy current shaders include: blackwhite, color-toning (rgb), glitch-effect, water-ripples, invert, reduce-colors & melt.
Like this: http://giphy.com/gifs/shaders-condorra-monkey-x-l0ExouG6baYE95SEg
the name has no real meaning just a naming convention like a logo that has nothing to do with its product
The interesting thing is, that it has been brought up time and time again since 2012. So there seems to be something “rubbing” people the wrong way. To be honest, we have no idea how many people that are, or if it’s just a handful of people. So to solve this “the right way” you would actually need data (like a survey).
PS: I don’t think anyone here suggesting a name change does so because of “monkey hate”. It’s simply that we are very passionate about this product, care, and want as many other people as possible seeing that too.
To clarify: I think it was a good decision to split from the blitz name, simply because monkey is really different. Signalizing this by the name helps people understand that better.
In the UK I would say that the general meaning of the word monkey is “silly”, “stupid”, “simple”, “cheaky”, “naughty”, “fun”, “childish”, “young”, “playful”. As a whole the feel of the title is not overly negative, but from some comments people don’t seem to take the name seriously.
This. The name is not really abstract.
Not sure what you mean here by ‘target their audience a little better’…these names are, IMO, just as meaningless as ‘monkey’
Not everyone knows Lua means moon. Ruby is a diamond. Python a powerful snake (the emphasis being on powerful). If it just were called snake it would be in the same category as monkey. The premise being that these names suggest either something abstract or a positive/strong connotation. The connotation of monkey is the things skn3 mentioned (at least here in central Europe).
But you have a point. Once monkey2 starts building successful games, modules, etc. people will see the value. I don’t think that’s what people are arguing. It has more to to with the inital phase/attraction getting.
How do people expect to find Monkey 2 related content when everyone names it like they want to.
You ever did a google search for monkey language? There is some pretty bizarre stuff showing up, like: “How to speak MONKEY: Researchers uncover primate language” ^^
@Micheal
These are also great talks (especially Mike Actons).I have seen them already. The point to me wasn’t as clear until I actually implemented them.
I am using monkey1 with Atom right now.
I published the package here: https://atom.io/packages/monkey-x (you can install from inside atom as well)It should work for the most part, and is easy to configure (it’s just a folder with files)