>2017
>Doesn't use C++
Are you bullied, mentally handicapped or both?
>b-but it causes bad practice!
And? Was life a contest about who uses the least design patterns?
>it's slow!!!
It's not, as long as you're not under-aged and use classes in moderation
>it's....IT'S CONVOLUTED!!!
Who forces you to use every feature, fucking peat-gavel
Other urls found in this thread:
is there a good IDE for C++?
One like Lazarus
So what you're REALLY saying that there's no actual reason to use C++.
I hate C++'s build tools. That being said, C++ is quite easy to work with, in comparison to Rust, which has a very good set of build tools.
It's a dillema but I guess C++ wins.
>that one guy that posts laughing Dana White maymays about smoking and shitty coding
What form of autism is this?
Honest question here, how do I return a string from a function?
vim + make + DDD + valgrind
>t. manchild
>C++ is slow
but it's not
well, it means i'll start smoking!
>>it's slow!!!
Don't think there's anyone out there that claims C++ is slow.
By returning a string. C++ has this quite convenient class called "string", FYI.
Clion
It's a meme from a finnish messageboard "ylilauta". Finns are widely considered to be sub-human.
I said ONE like Lazarus. Not four like bits of lazarus
no GUI, buttons, listboxes and shit?
Only ignorant cniles.
>t. sepples brainlet
See? Ignorance.
What are you talking about? you never even made a point in the first place.
I was just stating the fact that, if you seriously believe C++ compiles as fast as C, then you are a brainlet, which is true.
Oh, you were talking about compilation times? Yeah, we're in agreement there.
Im using it you stupid nigger
>t. poojeet
>no GUI, buttons, listboxes and shit?
fuck off faggot. new C++ standards are literally designed that you definitely need an IDE with an intellisense to be able to write faster.
This. Languages like Java, C, C# and C++ make you depend on an IDE
especially with the "auto" keyword. enjoy deducing the types manually, or typing std::map b;
how to make gui then?
>not having properly scoped using declarations
Pleb
code::blocks
can you clarify how can build tools be bad or good? when was it a problem to build?
>One like Lazarus
QtCreator is your only choice.
Everthing else and in particular code::blocks is like a crack meth whore version of Lazarus.
C is better.
>c is better
>i made a cube and a torus in opengl once, so i'm clearly an authority
C++ is a whacked up car.
C is a whacked up car with the still working radio stolen.
It's a game.
Also
>all those files that are failing to load
what a retarded analogy
>a tiny scene made of simple primitives
>look ma, i made a game
Almost as retarded as claiming C is better.
Don't make fun of him, he is clearly the 3D artist of the project.
There isn't a single thing made by c++ in this thread. Just like real life. Sure the thread looks like it's c++ but then you open it up and it's just c.
Wtf? States it's good and immediately goes into damage control mode. OK you tried
Not failing to load, the engine is searching for resources in the resource file, and checking if they exist. The output may be obscure.
It's not a tiny scene, and it's not made of simple primitives, you can load any model...
It has ssao, ssr, realtime area soft shadows, gjk collision detection, deferred shading.
If you really want to make car analogies:
>And? Was life a contest about who uses the least design patterns?
hahahaha holy shit you can't make this shit up. C++ fags btfo.
We are simply not that insecure that we seek confirmation in fizzbuzz applications, like C apologists. Only in shitpost threads.
Must be boring waiting for your application to finish running huh? Of course you'd need something to do.
>C++ has a bunch of useless garbage attached to it
yeah, thats about right
>There isn't a single thing made by c++ in this thread. Just like real life
You mean except for actual games that are more than a camera flying around a scene made of 3D cubes?
>look ma, i made a game
The thread isn't about this, but fuck it... it also has gameplay, it's a remake of armorgames' shift in 3D. The gameplay footage I have was on a previous version that only ran on windows and was actually made from ogl primitives, but shows you it's not just a scene, but has gameplay.
youtube.com
C is a programming language. C++ is a video game programming language
>It has ssao, ssr, realtime area soft shadows, gjk collision detection, deferred shading.
Cool story, but your screenshots honestly look like babby's first OpenGL project. Nothing there looks even remotely like a game, or even remotely visually impressive.
>It's not a tiny scene
It's a tiny scene
>It has ssao, ssr, realtime area soft shadows, gjk collision detection, deferred shading.
Nice, so the most work is done in shaders anyway and the rest could have been cut down to 1/10 of the work in C++ and be more reliable
I guarantee all the important shit in any game engine written in c++ is just c. If not then it'll run like garbage and wouldn't be a mainstream engine.
>I guarantee
I guarantee the opposite of what you guarantee, which obviously overrides what you said. Now what?
>on the top: a slow car with fragile tires that will break on modern roads and won't run with modern petrol, you better hope the engine doesn't blow up
>on the bottom: a fast, normal car decorated with fancy guns and a proper windscreen
seems about right
As expected of the c++ cuck, has to take other peoples work and add to it instead of making it themselves.
>A (practical) superset of C contains a lot of C
Stop the presses.
The amount of playground level arguing in this thread is astronomic.
only insecure programmers, who have no accomplishments of their own bother with "MY LANGUAGE IS BETTER THAN YOURS XDD" shit. Grow up
>on the bottom: a fast, normal car decorated with fancy guns and a proper windscreen
>this is how pluslets actually see it
Because of the way the mesh is generated so the solids are air on the other side, it can't be made of cubes, and because of the movable cubes, the mesh has to be be generated over and over. Most of what is done there can't be seen in those screens, so I understand what you're saying. But placing more complex models is really simple.
>remotely visually impressive
What would you say is a modern AAA visual effect that makes a game impressive? What makes most games impressive nowadays is ssr and hdr, I'm not an artist, I'm a programmer, the tools are there.
I want to compare binary size with any engine you show me in C++ with those features. Plus auto-exposure adjustment, bloom and other post-processes.
>decorated with fancy guns
only a sepplet would mistake useless cardboard for actual features
My language is better than yours. Only insecure "programmers" who know nothing besides Java barge into glorious language threads just to tell everyone how much better they are for failing to participate. Protip: you can't fool anyone that you have better things to do with your time and "skills" when you're shitposting on Sup Forums.
I get the impression you're just samefagging because you're jelly that your car hasn't fancy paper guns.
>I understand what you're saying
But you don't. What I'm saying is that I could also post a turd and then claim it's the pinnacle of dynamic lighting and advanced shader effects, or even add some basic collision detection and fall damage and call it a game. It looks like shit graphically, and it barely has any gameplay.
This. I wished he would have frogposted instead, because that would have been a bigger accomplishment.
>barely has any gameplay
What do you mean?
>basic collision detection and fall damage
What are you talking about? My game has no fall damage, it's a puzzle game. Basic collision detection? If you call gjk basic, you sound like you have never implemented it or really have no idea what you're talking about. dunning kruger probably.
>pinnacle of dynamic lighting and advanced shader effects
You're just throwing insults without actually saying what is wrong. Tell me what the pinnacle of dynamic lighting is in your opinion. I'm not contradicting you or defending myself, I want your honest opinion.
It's forced by shitty OP-kuns on Sup Forums.
I don't program for any current systems.
I use 6502, 80186 and m68k assembly.
>I'm not contradicting you or defending myself, I want your honest opinion.
Not that guy, but turn down the reflections and add proper light maps.
>All those people shitting on a guy working on his game just because.
Current state of Sup Forums.
Those screens were when I had just implemented them and was still debugging if they were correct, I plan to go full PBR, which will blur all the reflections to a realistic amount. Light maps would not work because the lights are dynamic and move from one side to the other when you press shift. I could cache radiosity maps, but they would have to be re-cached when the mesh changes when you push a block, I don't see any optimized way of doing this.
Thank you for the input though.
>t. python langlet
I kind of doubt the second line.
Even /diy/, by far the best board, is hits and misses.
Also
>bringing your game dev hello world into a programming language flame war in hope for bragging rights
>What do you mean?
I mean it barely passes as a game. I don't see any non-trivial gameplay mechanics.
>If you call gjk basic
I could also post some turd where you jump on cubes and say it implements GJK (as if that's supposed to be somehow impressive, but I digress).
>You're just throwing insults without actually saying what is wrong
Your screenshots and videos look like babby's first game engine attempt. They simply don't look impressive. You can spout as many buzzwords as you like, and say your cubes are shaded by real-time radiosity with subpixel accuracy, but there's no evidence there of anything more sophisticated than parallax mapping.
>>bringing your game dev hello world into a programming language flame war in hope for bragging rights
Not an argument.
Sup Forums is just full of sad bitter fucks.
>All those people shitting on a guy working on his game just because.
It's a matter of context. When he's posting this turd and trying to imply that it's somehow evidence that he's an expert programmer and that his opinion about programming languages should be given extra weight, I will point out that it looks like the average beginner's turd, because it really does.
Not sure light map was the correct term, since they all sound the same and have different meanings in different context.
I mean the greyscale map that just says how much reflection happens on which part of the surface. Not a precalculated light.
>I mean the greyscale map that just says how much reflection happens on which part of the surface.
That's called a specular map.
So whenever you go to /biz/ you brag with your lemonade stand?
Not an argument, shit analogy.
The way you got defensive about it just proves the point.
I mean reflection of light, not general mirroring.
Guess what, fucktard? "Not an argument" is literally not an argument.
To be fair, I did start by saying C is better when posting a screen of the game.
I didn't want to brag though, it's just a project that makes me happy, and I'm feel really comfy when programming it. I know I didn't say any of this, but it's my thoughts on the matter, sorry.
>I mean it barely passes as a game. I don't see any non-trivial gameplay mechanics.
It's a puzzle game, the simpler the mechanics, the better the puzzles. I think if you'd actually played it, you'd have to stop and think how to solve things, and be somewhat gratified when you did. Or maybe it's just not your type of game.
>Your screenshots and videos look like babby's first game engine attempt. They simply don't look impressive. You can spout as many buzzwords as you like, and say your cubes are shaded by real-time radiosity with subpixel accuracy, but there's no evidence there of anything more sophisticated than parallax mapping.
You sound like you actually don't know anything that goes into developing engines... I could say the exact same thing while looking at the blog describing how doom is shaded. All that matters for me is if the tools are there, using them to make something pretty is a designer's job. This is a thread about programming. And so far, you haven't said what is it that it's lacking on that department.
I have a specular map, the alpha represents roughness, the higher it is, the more blurry the reflection gets. The darker the specular map is, the darker the reflections will be, is that what you meant?
Sure thing, buddy.
In reality, your just assmad because it's a good analogy because is right.
No need for one. You already proved the point.
Also that other faggot that went full defensive.
>I mean reflection of light, not general mirroring.
Yes, those reflections of light are called specular highlights, and the map you're talking about is called a specular map.
Cool game. I can see the shift mechanic being a pukefest though and I'm usually pretty tolerant to motion sickness.
>buddy
Nice try. We already accomplished that everybody getting butthurt about the "state of Sup Forums" post is a fuckup bitter fool.
Keep trying though, "kiddo".
It's probably because it's someone else controlling it, or I'm used to it... Maybe if you were playing you would be prepared when it happens.
I have no idea how this could be fixed though, I thought of maybe adding motion blur, but that may make it worse...
>the simpler the mechanics, the better the puzzles
Nice subjectivist "argument", but the point is that there aren't any complex gameplay mechanics there that imply high programming competence.
>You sound like you actually don't know anything that goes into developing engines...
You sound like you unironically believe that your babby-tier engine will impress anyone who's ever developed a serious engine, and it's cute.
> All that matters for me is if the tools are there, using them to make something pretty is a designer's job
Too bad there's nothing in your screenshots or videos that constitutes clear evidence of any advanced lighting techniques. Where does this delusion come from that people on the internet are going to just take your word for it when all they see is a turd?
>I have a specular map, the alpha represents roughness, the higher it is, the more blurry the reflection gets. The darker the specular map is, the darker the reflections will be, is that what you meant?
Basically, but it still looks way too strong. Or the map data is kind of crap. Anyway, as long as the blur doesn't result in some weird-ass fake corona...
I heard at least three different names for those kind of thing and there's no indication that (You)r variation is right.
Because you delivered such a good argument to begin with.
>replying to röökiposting
>I heard at least three different names for those kind of thing
What are they? The only "variation" you gave so far is "lightmap", and nobody calls it that, so I'm getting a feeling you're a brainlet with no clue of what you're talking about.
>there's no indication that (You)r variation is right
It's called a specular map. Maybe some people refer to it by other names as well (only retards call it a lightmap, though), but "specular map" is fairly standard. I'm not here to argue this with you. I'm just telling it for your education, so that you don't sound like a fucktard next time calling it a lightmap. You're welcome.
>röökiposting
What did it mean by this?
I'm also pretty sure it's mainly due to watching a video of it, especially one where you're pretty much speedrunning it. A friend of mine (who is quite prone to motion sickness already) experienced the same thing to an extreme degree when he had a VR headset on and I started controlling the player character.
>imply high programming competence
The mechanics make it so I can't just import cubes... the mesh has to be generated, and I am not implying that is "ULTRA HARD", but it probably wouldn't be "babbys first game".
>You sound like you unironically believe that your babby-tier engine will impress anyone who's ever developed a serious engine, and it's cute.
Show me one engine developed by one single person. I can name you one, Anki, and it does have more features than mine, it has lens flares, parallax mapping, decals, volumetric light and probably more that I can't think about right now. He did start developing much earlier than I, and adding those visuals one by one. Though probably if he showed you pictures of particular effects you would dismiss them as well. Most engines though are not developed by single people, there is really a lot of work that goes into it.
>Too bad there's nothing in your screenshots or videos that constitutes clear evidence of any advanced lighting techniques.
Give me one, ONE example of a technique you would call "advanced lighting technique', please, one.
It is too strong, I agree with you.
fucking peat-gavel
>The mechanics make it so I can't just import cubes... the mesh has to be generated, and I am not implying that is "ULTRA HARD", but it probably wouldn't be "babbys first game".
Tell me what part of your map geometry requires GJK and can't be collided against in a 20 years old game engine that uses convex brushes and sweeps bounding boxes through a BSP tree for collisions. Actually, just tell me what part of your video constitutes clear evidence of any advanced technique. (Protip: saying you used the state of the art algorithms to implement collision with cubes and those ugly static blobs you call "shadows", but it just isn't visible because there's no art, makes you as good as a lying fizzbuzzer in my book.)
I have to wonder what percentage of people have had a part in developing a "serious engine". Even more so what percentage of them browses Sup Forums.
I'm not proposing that Sup Forums should be a hugbox where any project gets complimented so as to not hurt the poster's feelings (although feedback should be constructive if possible). Based on what I've seen on Sup Forums over the years though, the overall level of the board isn't anything stellar. No offense to FizzBuzz posters or to anyone participating in the Game of Life thread, those are fun little challenges.
>what percentage of them browses Sup Forums.
Zero. I've never developed a "serious engine", but my toys sure looked more impressive than this clown's.
>Tell me what part of your map geometry requires GJK and can't be collided against
I'm not using GJK on those scenes, it was implemented because I wanted to have it ready, since the levels are in a grid, I just use some simple checks to see if you collide with it or not.
>constitutes clear evidence of any advanced technique
Again you failed to answer my question. I don't know what you mean by "advanced technique". Give me one example of what you would call an "advanced lighting technique", if it's something that's viable and used in modern games, I will take it as a suggestion of something to add.
The shadows are not static, and they're actually pretty close to reality in the way they blur out. It's actually faster than any implementation of realtime area soft shadows I've read on nvidia papers.
Are you stupid or retarded? All these languages except for C# can comfortably be used through a text editor alone.