Jump to content


Photo

Vega 3D Drift Engine Update version 1.2 (Editable included) Gm 8.1 and Studio!


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 13 May 2015 - 05:06 PM

MOD EDIT: Please note that the topic starter is a banned user; you will be unable to leave feedback or ask for support using this example. Use with care.

 

 

2a9v95h.png

 

Hello and welcome to the Vega 3D Drift Engine. It is a combination of 2 earlier examples.

 

Drift engine 

      +

Vehicle Physics

_________

_________

 

Vega 3D Drift Engine, the most advanced racing physics engine known to GM.

 

Proof here!

 

Controls are mouse. Also features automatic road generation.

 

Please post your suggestions.

 

\/ New versions \/

 

http://host-a.net/u/...adrift1pt2.gm81Gm 8.1 file 

 

http://host-a.net/u/...ult-1.0.0.2.exeGm studio .exe 

 

\/ Old versions \/

 

http://host-a.net/u/.../vegadrift1.exe< standalone

 

http://host-a.net/u/...vegadrift1.gm81< editable

 

Old versions Uses Paul "Master Xilo" Frischknecht's .obj importer


Edited by Yal, 23 May 2015 - 08:11 PM.
Added warning notice

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#2 Floofpaws

Floofpaws

    Fox

  • GMC Member
  • 2161 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 14 May 2015 - 12:42 AM

It's kinda cool, but I wouldn't call it the most advanced or arcade quality.

Pros:
- Driving :P
- Slopes.
- Drifting and powersliding.
- Plenty of comments.
- An example of something that is a little difficult to find/figure out.

Cons:
- No GMX option for download! D: -- Actually it can't be imported that easily into GMS in the first place because of an invalid sound error.
- There are some real oddities with the steering, particularly when steering sharply or back and forth at a medium to high speed. Of course this is something that could be quickly fixed by an experienced programmer, but an inexperienced programmer will be in trouble.
- DnD mixed with GML.
- You gave no credit (or at least it's not easy to find) to the creator of d3d_model_ext, who specifically asks for credit. http://gmc.yoyogames...howtopic=246230 If you want credit yourself you should at least give credit to others...
- Code is very clumpy in places and the formatting seems a little random.
- Not much control over the track shape, except the X and Y points.

Edited by Floofpaws, 14 May 2015 - 12:43 AM.

  • 1

#3 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 01:54 AM

Just a lil update I provided credited to him (thanks for pointing that out) but I won't be using his obj loader in the next update, it gives errors on Studio.

 

i think I found out what you are talking about with the sharp steering. If you turn sharply at super high velocities the car doesn't drift, instead it hugs the direction of the tires (wheras in real life it would probably twist over and do a barrel roll.)

What adjustment did you make to "fix" this? Can you post the modified code or gm81 file?

 

However, your second thing about " back and forth' I have no idea. It's not a bug, its simply behaving in a realistic and game ready fashion. If you're talking about "snaking" is a natural product of drift physics.

 

Also this is the most advanced thing in GM, why do you say it is not? Because the snidr has upside down roads? The Snidr's is just simple tube physics, it doesn't behave in a realistic manner. 

 

in the past I made my own .obj importer that was better than his. I never released it to the public so I was unable to find it online, it's buried on my PC somewhere, so I just grabbed the quickest one on google and I didn't bother to read the comments on his .obj importer, but hey it's in the open now, we used his object importer not mine, so he can nap easy. Just so we are clear, Dear world, I did not use my obj importer, I grabbed some other' guy's Master Xilo's obj importer. Alrighty, now that that's out of the way, we shall carry on...

 

I mix DND with GML in an good way, if you notice there is a pattern to my methods and I use only a little DND.

 

'not much control over the track shape"

Yes this is a problem but it's not my fault actually. You see GM is just to slow, I have to abort the polygon collision check early. I originally planned to have tunnels and track that can go underneath other tracks but that would require the polygon collision check to not abort upon the first collision. 

 

I am open to suggestions on this matter, in fact the polygon collision checking is the #1 speed drain not the physics. I am looking to do a complete overhaul of the basic collision detection system.

 

'steering problems at high speeds'

I presume you are talking about the steering becoming sensitive at high velocities? 

This is actually a realistic feature, it seems odd because in real life the steering wheel would be rather heavy and hard to move. however in GM mouse control has no option for force feedback. I once had it so the screen grabs and moves the mouse x but that didnt seem right either.

Give it a few runs, youll notice that its really just your driving abilities and not the game itself. In real life steering becomes touchy when you're driving at 200 mph on slanted roads. Think more along the lines of Forza 4 and less Mario Kart physics.

 

The code is clumpy in some places yes but unfortunately that is the nature of the beast. I could make it less clumpy which would increase the framerate by 100 fps however the car would become very bumpy and sink in near edges of things.

 

I am in the process of porting it to studio however Studio is not cooperating with me at the moment (it's not because of a soud issue, that is just a generic popup because I included some midi's in the project.

 

 

So we've bundled up the main points of focus

Gm studio problem, it wont let me pass a list index as a script argument

Clunky code and collision system which doesnt allow for tracks on top of one another. 

 

Suggestions?

 

As for the steering, I wouldn't suggest "fixing" as that would drain all the realism from the game. Cars naturally wobble back and forth when recovering from drifting. I recommend watching actual videos of car drifting, less videos of Mario Kart.  :whistle:

Unless it was something else you were talkig about

 

Also there is no GM racing engine more advanced than this, and it would feel arcade quality if it had force feedback steering wheel. Gaurantee you will not find a GM racing engine that even comes close to this. If the pinaccle of GM is at the 1998 level, the average of GM is at the 1970 atari pong level.


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 14 May 2015 - 01:57 PM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#4 ShadeSpeed

ShadeSpeed

    Procedural Generation King

  • GMC Member
  • 771 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 02:38 PM

Also there is no GM racing engine more advanced than this, and it would feel arcade quality if it had force feedback steering wheel. Gaurantee you will not find a GM racing engine that even comes close to this. If the pinaccle of GM is at the 1998 level, the average of GM is at the 1970 atari pong level.

 

... What? Game Maker is used to create lots of modern day, highly intuitive applications and games. Just because you personally don't have the skills to create such projects using Game Maker, doesn't mean there aren't lots of talented Game Maker users that can.

 

Great engine. Must have taken the best part of an hour to create? 

 

The car turns way too sharply when cornering at high speeds.


Edited by ShadeSpeed, 14 May 2015 - 02:52 PM.

  • 2

Marketplace Resources

 

code.png page.png video.png


#5 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 02:40 PM

Clunky code and collision system which doesnt allow for tracks on top of one another. 

 

Suggestions?

 

You're using the built-in collision system for a 3D game? I'm working on a similar project myself which stores the car's position as path coordinates (distance along the path and distance from the center of the path in the direction perpendicular to the path's direction, and of course an up/down part too) and computes path coordinate changes each step given the car's velocity in 3D space and the dimensions of the current path segment. This way, you not only get perfect 3D collisions much faster than doing precise collisions (as you most likely are doing), you also stop the player from taking shortcuts. Putting in collision objects along the path is also fastened because each object only belongs to one segment of the path, so you can instantly dismiss collisions with objects that aren't on the current segment.

 

And of course, normal paths doesn't have support for all this data, but I'm using a ds_grid with various data in it, and using b-splines to interpolate between x/y positions in this grid in order to actually draw it.


  • 0

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#6 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 03:08 PM

 

Also there is no GM racing engine more advanced than this, and it would feel arcade quality if it had force feedback steering wheel. Gaurantee you will not find a GM racing engine that even comes close to this. If the pinaccle of GM is at the 1998 level, the average of GM is at the 1970 atari pong level.

 

... What? Game Maker is used to create lots of modern day, highly intuitive applications and games. Just because you personally don't have the skills to create such projects using Game Maker, doesn't mean there aren't lots of talented Game Maker users that can.

 

Great engine. Must have taken the best part of an hour to create? 

 

The car turns way too sharply when cornering at high speeds.

 

What dimension are you from? This engine took 48 hours to complete, not one hour. What dimension is this where GM race games have state of the art physics? I must be trapped in a parallel world, because all of the GM race games I see have basic rudimentary 2D physics. Even though this example is in beta and equivalent to 1998 physics, there isn't a GM racing game/engine that even comes close. If there was you would have posted it already, but you haven't, because no such thing exists. I would be interested to see it.

I guess we live in a world where people think poop is gold and gold is poop. Tough crowd. The car does turn too sharply at high speeds, but the engine's still in beta, gimme a break, it's one minor flaw. I give the most advanced technical engine known to GM and it still isn't good enough somehow. But people will be praising sonic clones all day, lol. Tough crowd.

 

You're using the built-in collision system for a 3D game? I'm working on a similar project myself which stores the car's position as path coordinates (distance along the path and distance from the center of the path in the direction perpendicular to the path's direction, and of course an up/down part too) and computes path coordinate changes each step given the car's velocity in 3D space and the dimensions of the current path segment. This way, you not only get perfect 3D collisions much faster than doing precise collisions (as you most likely are doing), you also stop the player from taking shortcuts. Putting in collision objects along the path is also fastened because each object only belongs to one segment of the path, so you can instantly dismiss collisions with objects that aren't on the current segment.

 

And of course, normal paths doesn't have support for all this data, but I'm using a ds_grid with various data in it, and using b-splines to interpolate between x/y positions in this grid in order to actually draw it.

 

The code is actually hybrid physics. The sprite collisions were added as an afterthought and only apply to the walls. I added sprite collisions because the walls are defined as a list of 2d points, and collision_line is a built in routine. Because of this there are some minor glitches with the z height checking on walls, since the collision on walls is treated like a rectangle rather than a parallelogram or a rhobus. 

in essence, the reason I did this is because GM is too slow so I opted to use the built in collision_line functions rather than craft a supremely 3d function.

 

As for the roads and 3d terrain, I thought about taking a screenshot of the road and saving it as a sprite to save speed however that would cause more problems than it would solve. I also considered your idea of using the path spline earlier on but that would cause problems. The main problem is that you cannot use a smooth spline to calculate the normals and collisions of a sharp polygonal road, otherwise you will get artifacts like cars poking through the road like in the Snidr's race friends game. In essence, the roads and terrain are supremely 3d functions, the walls are not.


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 14 May 2015 - 03:11 PM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#7 ShadeSpeed

ShadeSpeed

    Procedural Generation King

  • GMC Member
  • 771 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 03:25 PM

I guess we live in a world where people think poop is gold .


Nobody is saying your race engine is 'gold', though.


  • 0

Marketplace Resources

 

code.png page.png video.png


#8 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 03:47 PM

 

I guess we live in a world where people think poop is gold .


Nobody is saying your race engine is 'gold', though.

 

Can't tell if you are trolling or not. It's 1998 physics, which is gold compared to other GM racing games. Where are these invisible GM racing games that have physics better than this? I can't find them anywhere, because they don't exist.


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#9 Lukan Spellweaver

Lukan Spellweaver

    Gay Wizard Freak & mcmonkey's plaything

  • GMC Member
  • 3704 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 04:02 PM

Ummm, there are a few good 3D racing games made with GM.
Race Friends by Snidr and Lolli comes to mind.

Check it out, it has a variety of tracks and racers, and physics from this millennium.
http://gamejolt.com/...-friends/16425/

Oh, I see you have seen this game. So even if we show evidence of there being better games you are going to deny they are better?

Edited by LukanSpellweaver, 14 May 2015 - 04:14 PM.

  • 1

DeEuDARh.pngi1SR21Q.png

Find me on Itch.io | GameJolt | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Ask.FM

 GMC Google Hangout | I liek monkehs

The GMC, here lies she. Kicked to the curb, with nary a word. She shall live on, though. Remain strong, bros.

Also: MIKE DAILLY TOLD ME TO UPDATE MY SIGNATURE


#10 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 04:13 PM

Ummm, there are a few good 3D racing games made with GM.
Race Friends by Snidr and Lolli comes to mind.

Check it out, it has a variety of tracks and racers, and physics from this millennium.
http://gamejolt.com/...-friends/16425/

I already mentioned it and I already reviewed it.

 

The physics are subpar. I think you are quite biased, blown away with the graphics and not looking at things with a very rational mind lol.

 

For starters, the car often pokes through the ground near the edges. Snidr's physics are simple spline, tube physics, with some slight "drifting" added. It's very basic, if you'll notice the car does not even fall down when the road is completely upside down. It's very basic on rails physics with poor steering and rudimentary "click button to drift" drifting. Let me put it in perspective, 1991 era F1 racing games had better physics than Snidr's Racing Friends. Even Lone Race 3D (made with Gm Lite) has better physics than Snidr's http://sandbox.yoyog...02-lone-race-3d (LoneRace is not as advanced as my physics but pretty impressive for being made in Lite.)


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 14 May 2015 - 04:20 PM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#11 Lukan Spellweaver

Lukan Spellweaver

    Gay Wizard Freak & mcmonkey's plaything

  • GMC Member
  • 3704 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 04:25 PM

Excuse me? In case you haven't noticed, I'm not a graphics man. I like games for how they play and control.
Race Friends is one of the better GameMaker racing games I have played.

Also, I can play AAA games where things phase through each other, so there is a bit of car through roadness, big deal.
Also, why the hell would you want the cars to fall off the upside down roads? That's part of the track, if you fell off you couldn't finish the race!

People don't play racing games to see the best physics in game kind. They play them to have fun. Race Friends is fun, automatically making it better than you engine here. It does look nice too, so there's more points. It controls in a way you would expect when starting to play. Realistic physics are not always the best thing for a game.

But that's not to say your engine isn't good, it just need work. People above have pointed out some things that could be fixed, and I'm sure you have plans for improvement. Keep working on it!
  • 0

DeEuDARh.pngi1SR21Q.png

Find me on Itch.io | GameJolt | YouTube | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Ask.FM

 GMC Google Hangout | I liek monkehs

The GMC, here lies she. Kicked to the curb, with nary a word. She shall live on, though. Remain strong, bros.

Also: MIKE DAILLY TOLD ME TO UPDATE MY SIGNATURE


#12 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 04:56 PM

Then it must have been the music.

 

"Fun" is an opinion. Many people don't enjoy Forza because it is "too realistic". My engine offers a bit more leeway in the settings to reduce the difficulty curve. Saying an engine is not "fun" is silly and an opinion. My personal opinion is that my engine is more "fun" to drive than Racing Friends because it simply feels more visceral and accurate to reality than Racing Friends. Racing Friend's physics feels dry but that's partly due to the graphics. In actuality it plays more like a watered down Mario Kart clone geared for kiddies. The physics are nothing remarkable, Mario Kart 64's physics were far superior to Racing Friends'. I suggest you take a look with a more rational mind, you'll find that you can't even turn left or right on a road, it's simple spline physics that lock you to forward and backwards on the road spline. You seem to be dazzled by the illusion it has provided, since upside-down F-Zero style roads have never been done before in GM. Is it more advanced than my phyiscs? No. And it's certainly not more realistic. And in my opinion it's not even more "fun". See it for what it is, a game slapped together in 3 days that masks its mediocre driving physics with wacky roads, frequent speed boosts, flashy effects and loud dubstep soundtracks. The core physicsof it is not really all that "fun" or deep.Mario Kart 64, VegaPhysics, and even LoneRace had a more fun "core" physics. Racing Friends core feels dry.


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 14 May 2015 - 04:57 PM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#13 Floofpaws

Floofpaws

    Fox

  • GMC Member
  • 2161 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 14 May 2015 - 05:10 PM


'not much control over the track shape"

Yes this is a problem but it's not my fault actually. You see GM is just to slow, I have to abort the polygon collision check early. I originally planned to have tunnels and track that can go underneath other tracks but that would require the polygon collision check to not abort upon the first collision. 

 

Flying scrap supports all kinds of track shapes and it was originally written on GM8 or 8.1, which is slower than GMS. And it does have plenty of collision checking; you ride along the track normal and can scrape against things.


Edited by Floofpaws, 14 May 2015 - 05:11 PM.

  • 2

#14 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 05:14 PM

 


'not much control over the track shape"

Yes this is a problem but it's not my fault actually. You see GM is just to slow, I have to abort the polygon collision check early. I originally planned to have tunnels and track that can go underneath other tracks but that would require the polygon collision check to not abort upon the first collision. 

 

Flying scrap supports all kinds of track shapes and it was originally written on GM8 or 8.1, which is slower than GMS. And it does have plenty of collision checking; you ride along the track normal and can scrape against things.

 

Does he have the source code availiable? Is it compatible with terrain or does it only support floating tracks?

 

If it uses a DLL I thought about that however I wanted to make this native to GM, especially because I planned on making this compatible with GM studio. Making it rely on DLL functionaility would reduce compatibility with other platforms like Mac and Iphone.


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#15 TheSnidr

TheSnidr

    Heavy metal viking dentist

  • GMC Elder
  • 3345 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 05:48 PM

This is pretty cool! 3D collisions are hard to get right, physics on them even more so. People may take you more seriously if you avoid making bold claims such as "the most advanced racing physics engine known to GM" though. This topic got very negative very fast because of that. As it is now, this is just an engine, which is cool, people like looking at other people's code. But if you want it to be used for anything worthy the work behind it, you should make a game with it yourself!

Since Race Friends was dragged into this: RF was made for a jam. We made the engine, the level editor, the levels, the characters, cars, backgrounds, textures, we also had to find fitting music, record sounds and basically make an entire game. In three days. Obviously we had to cut some corners when it came to physics, and couldn't tweak them as much as we'd like. Comparing a pure physics engine to just RF makes no sense. You should find a different game to prove your engine is the most advanced racing physics engine known to GM.

Yal: You're basically describing the racing engine in RF :P We use GM's built-in 2D collisions for stuff like player-player collision and colliding with boxes.
  • 4

#16 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 05:57 PM

It was his idea to compare it to yours. I made the claim it is the most advanced because it is the most advanced. If there were more advanced ones after 20 posts someone would have linked to them, but they cannot because no such thing exists.


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#17 ShadeSpeed

ShadeSpeed

    Procedural Generation King

  • GMC Member
  • 771 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 06:21 PM

It was his idea to compare it to yours. I made the claim it is the most advanced because it is the most advanced. If there were more advanced ones after 20 posts someone would have linked to them, but they cannot because no such thing exists.

 

What you've created is nothing special. It's not hard to make realistic physics based engines. You didn't even attempt to create a .obj file importer - which isn't hard.

 

Good job (sarcasm).


  • 1

Marketplace Resources

 

code.png page.png video.png


#18 -LEWA-

-LEWA-

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 350 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 06:50 PM

Well, i have to say that this is pretty neat. Didn't look at the source-code but it's definitely a good thing for beginners to look into other peoples code to experiment & learn at the same time.

 

But i have one question regarding the example:

Why do i have to be bombarded with a ton of logos at the start of the exe? (I think they were a total of 4)

One of those logos even is displayed twice (the "vegan" one) > at first i thought that i somehow restarted the exe, but no. The logo gets displayed twice.

Those aren't even skippable.

 

I understand that you want to get credit for something you have done, but that is a bit extreme. (at least make those skippable)

 

Now, i tried the exe and while i have to say that while this is neat, it's not that advanced technically.

After a bit of driving around i noticed that this is just simply a 2D car physics with 3D graphics applied to it. The car is just placed on a heightmap with the correct rotation and translation applied to it.

As far as i saw you also don't take the height and rotation of the car into consideration. I tried to place myself on the steepest angle possible. > The car behaved exactly the same as on the flat ground. (It didn't even roll down the hill.)

 

I just made a quick youtube search of 3D racing games made in GM and found this:

 

That's basically the same thing (with a bit more refined drifting.) If the creator would apply a simple heightmap transformation to his 3D car model (which isn't hard) it would be technically the same thing as yours.

 

Even that one is pretty nice:

 

 

As i said, your engine is pretty neat. But it's a bummer that the "3D" part of it doesn't really apply to the car-handling and physics part of the engine. (Which makes it effectively a 2D Drift engine.)

Don't overpromise anything. I understand that releasing something which was done by your own hands is exciting ... but don't exaggerate with bold claims.

Keep it realistic and have fun programming. :) (That's what we all are here for.)


Edited by -LEWA-, 14 May 2015 - 06:59 PM.

  • 5

signature.png


#19 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 07:03 PM

in essence, the reason I did this is because GM is too slow so I opted to use the built in collision_line functions rather than craft a supremely 3d function.

 

If you use bilinear interpolation along the four z points of the polygon's corners, you can do it in linear time :whistle:

 

I also considered your idea of using the path spline earlier on but that would cause problems.

 

And now you're just trying to sound smarter than you are :P If you're talking about z-fighting between the terrain and the 3D primitive you draw to represent the road, you can solve that by just drawing the polygons slightly above the ground (znear should be enough in Studio, aka default 0.01 above the ground, but in GM8.1 you need to use 1 pixel above the ground).

 

And if it isn't that... what problems would it cause, more exactly?


  • 1

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#20 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 10:03 PM

 

It was his idea to compare it to yours. I made the claim it is the most advanced because it is the most advanced. If there were more advanced ones after 20 posts someone would have linked to them, but they cannot because no such thing exists.

 

What you've created is nothing special. It's not hard to make realistic physics based engines. You didn't even attempt to create a .obj file importer - which isn't hard.

 

Good job (sarcasm).

 

Do you even read pony. I made an obj importer a while ago. The purpose of this is NOT loading models. It's a physics engine, loading models is trivial and irrelevant to the purpose of a physics engine. Why would I waste time reinventing the wheel for trivial non-essential things? Would you prefer it if I used simple blocks like the other one? No, they you would complain about the graphics, because for some reason that has some unneeded importance.

 

"It's not hard to make realistic physics based engines"

Really now? Why then are there no GM games with them? Because its hard and especially hard to have them with a decent frame rate. 

 

GM Engineer produces racing games with small maps, 2d flat roads with 2d physics, and yet still somehow manages to have laggy unplayable framerates. And he continually asks that his unfinished games get featured, I find it cute and humorous. I haven't tried his flight sim yet maybe he had better luck with the framerates there.

 

I played the forest game in the video, the physics are completely 2dimensional. The game maxes at 5 frames per second, completely unplayable. GM Engineer's physics model needs a complete redesign, whatever he is currently using is much to laggy to be ported to 3d.

I doubt that his engine is 3d for several reasons. One reason is because all of his roads are flat, which is to hide the fact that the base engine is really 2d, otherwise why would he hide the engines best features? He also includes 3d cone physics in one of his games, but this is probably to hide the fact that the car physics only work in 2d.

 

Now if his engine really is 3d (which it probably isn't) there are some more problems. Even at a high framerate you'll notice that both of the videos feature low-speed sedans. Whilst you may be blown away by the HD looking presentation and nice looking suspension on the car you will find that the actual velocity of the car is rather low speed, and not at all suited for a high speed racing game. The dirt road is there to mask the fact that the actual physics of the engine is unsuited to high speed racing. In short, there's much added fluff like fancy graphics and shader effects, and added in suspension effects to mask the fact that it's not a high octane racing game. Now if the physics really are 3d, and for some reason he just added in totally flat roads for no good reason, having 3d physics does not necessarily make it game-ready. For example, 3d Rad has a 3d racing physics engine but its absolutely rubbish for game development, the car physics are ridiculous and theres severe input lag. No serious developer would ever consider using it.

 

"your engine physics are fake 3d"

No they are not "fake 3d." You do drift differently on the slopes, if the car is not sealed to the ground the car slides down slopes. It's very easy to spot but not if you do it deliberately, because there is a such thing as a car brake. If you are slow on a hill the car automatically brakes so you don't roll off it. I did this for developers who were interested in using this for games where you can exit the car. It's really annoying in free-roaming games to exit a car and have it roll down the hill, it's quite unrealistic. However, if you are on a hill and the car is not sealed to the ground the car will slide down it. Your conclusions that these are fake physics are simply untrue. It's easy to spot also, if you travel up a hill at low speeds with low momentum it is much slower than either a flat surface or high momentum. Try it on the terrain, you'll notice that you go slower up hills.

 

"The earlier comment about the steering being too sharp at high speeds"

Reason is in race cars they have a thing called "race steering". It's a safety feature that increases the steering wheel weight and makes turning much smaller of an angle. Instead of yawing the wheels at 30 degrees, it increases the steering wheel weight so the driver can only yaw them at 5 degrees at high speeds. Otherwise the car might flip out. I am a bit torn, since computer mice have no force feedback or weight feature how do I go about this. Should I add a "flip out" animation if the car turns too sharp at high speeds, or do I just lock the steering to a reduced angle at high speeds? The reason it feels weird to you and "too sharp" is because you are expecting the car to flip out and it doesn't, it just continues steering like crazy taxi or one of those fast moving older films, lol. I suppose the third option is that I make it mega-drift when you turn sharply (I already programmed it to do this, but for some reason it doesn't seem to be consistent, which is why I am labeling it as a minor glitch for now.)

 

"bold claims"

these claims really weren't that bold, there really isn't any competition. Still waiting on links to prove me wrong, so far I've dispelled all the contenders.

 

And now you're just trying to sound smarter than you are  :P If you're talking about z-fighting between the terrain and the 3D primitive you draw to represent the road, you can solve that by just drawing the polygons slightly above the ground (znear should be enough in Studio, aka default 0.01 above the ground, but in GM8.1 you need to use 1 pixel above the ground).

 

And if it isn't that... what problems would it cause, more exactly?

 

 

It has nothing to do with z fighting and it's really simple. A Gm path is like a spline. You generate a polygonal road from the spline. The problem is that road is polygonal, and the spline is curved. Your collision plan was to retrieve them from the path, not the road. The collisions will not match up. The car will retrieve data according to the spline, not the rendered road on screen. So you will see artifacts, like the car appearing to go through the road itself. And this is exactly what you see in Snidr's Racing Friends (though in his instance I am not sure if it is exactly because of this reason, or simply lazy or incorrect collision maths.) 

It's not a matter of "road matching terrain" its a matter of "car matching road."

Now you might try and circumvent this problem by either making a hyperdetailed road to match the path. There will still be artifacts and it will just make the game lag more from the detail. So then you might have the bright idea to instead, make a non-curved path. However not only is this tedious but it rarely looks nearly as nice as an automatically generated road from a curved path. I mean, you might as well make the track by hand, then. Also I have a hunch and I'm fairly sure you may  still run into collision problems from using this method, for example the edges of walls. If you use the equidistant approach you will collide into edges of walls that don't exist. You see when you generate a road using triangle strips it kindly makes walls on the outside of curves longer than ones inside, which is nice to render and good for gameplay. But this data is not easy to obtain from simply checking the spline. You would actually have to make a spline seperate from the path that contains additional data containing the length of each wall on left and right. At this point you might as well just go with my original technique of polygon checking because you wont be saving any speed.

 

If you use bilinear interpolation along the four z points of the polygon's corners, you can do it in linear time  :whistle:

 

And now you're trying to sound smarter than you actually are. Why the hell would I need to use bilinear interpolation? That would just add more unneeded lag. It doesnt even solve the lag probem, the "polygon" is really just a line. The edges of the walls are defined as lines, 2 points in order to both reduce the amount of ds_list calls and jump on GM's built in collision_line routines. (Built in routines are usually speed boons.) what you propose would save no time, not even linear time (Whatever that is supposed to mean in this context?


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 14 May 2015 - 10:10 PM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#21 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 10:30 PM

Why the hell would I need to use bilinear interpolation? 

 

Duh, it gives you the z coordinate directly. You could avoid clipping by having all wheels snap to the Z coordinates of the ground, rotate in the direction of the normal of the ground at that point, and then angle the car body according to the position of the wheels (assuming slopes don't go steep enough to have you worry about the car flipping over, because at some point this won't look realistic anymore).

 

Also, if you used Studio, you would have access to the YYC, making your code as fast as compiled code. The implementation of collision_line uses precise collision checking (one check for each pixel of the line) so more or less anything using pure maths is faster than it.

 

 

The problem is that road is polygonal, and the spline is curved.

 

The road isn't continuous, but she splines aren't either. Nothing stops you from computing them with the same granularity as the road polygons (if you for some reason prefer crappier-than-necessary collisions) and it's possible to make a polygonial road of any granularity, depending on what hardware you're targeting. (From the looks of it, you're going for Windows 7 and Windows XP :P)

Basically, there will only be collision discrepancies when you use different granularity for splines and polygons, but since we have access to a modulo function in GM, there's no reason to have them be different.

 

 

And TBH, if the latest installment of Fire Emblem, a series that has been running for almost 20 years, has characters' cloaks phazing through their legs in more or less every single cutscene, who cares about the wheels of a car phases through the ground occasionally? Oh, you.


  • 0

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#22 -LEWA-

-LEWA-

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 350 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 10:32 PM

 

Whilst you may be blown away by the HD looking presentation and nice looking suspension on the car you will find that the actual velocity of the car is rather low speed, and not at all suited for a high speed racing game.

Just wanted to make it clear:

By posting the videos i was referring to the actual car physics and NOT the graphics...

 

While it is true that the physic engines of both of those videos are 2D, i have to say that i also didn't really notice that your physics engine really is 3D. (more info about that further down below.)

 

 

"your engine physics are fake 3d"

No they are not "fake 3d." You do drift differently on the slopes, if the car is not sealed to the ground the car slides down slopes.

Well,  i have to say that my experience from the demo differs. Tried the demo a second time. The car just stays at a steep 45-50 degree angle without sliding down the slope or showing any kind of movement at all.

Also didn't notice any change in the car handling while driving at different angles. (As i said, it looked to me like 2D physics with an applied heightmap transformation to it.)

 

If there are indeed mechanics built-in which do calculate those 3D physics, then i would suggest you to tweak some of the physics values to pronounce them much more. (Because as it currently stands, it doesn't really show those features in the demo.)

 

Just giving feedback. No need to take offense.


Edited by -LEWA-, 14 May 2015 - 10:53 PM.

  • 0

signature.png


#23 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 11:17 PM

i took defense not offense. Reread my post. I also said if the wheels are hugging the ground it does not slide on the slopes. Are you aware of G-forces? Have you ever been to a carnival ride and went on the G-force machine? It's sickening. If anything, the car would slide UP the slopes not down them. Run the game again but with G-forces in mind, and remember what I said about the car not sliding down slopes while parked. I suppose in the next update I could have the car move down slopes at slow speeds, not just when drifting, but also keep in mind that on dirty roads the tires keep the car locked in place, like skis. 

 

yal

that's an old method and it's already been done by some other gmc'er. The wheels poke through the ground near the edges. Rotating a car based on a normal is the wrong approach to car physics, car physics should be done on a peer wheel basis. A

 

As for the granularity, I don't believe mod is the function you need I think floor or ceil is what you are looking for. However, there is a reason I used the method I chose (polygonal on a road) rather than spline. Number one it primes the developer with the ability of easy understanding of how to add custom user made model roads. Use a spline syystem and you are stuck with roads that cannot split into other roads. Now I'm aware that my system generates roads using a path sline however it also generates a triangle list (not pr_trianglelist, a ds_list) to match the road polygons. In theory this makes theoretical custom road inserting much easier to implement in the future

the second problem is that You would have to calculate extra values for the left and ride sides of the spline, since with my automatic road gen method the left and right sides of the road are not equal length, only parrallel and equidistant. This is a good thing but this will make you collision checking using pure spline much harder to implement


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#24 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 11:43 PM

As for the granularity, I don't believe mod is the function you need I think floor or ceil is what you are looking for. 

 

Those only allows integers, div and mod allows arbitrary values for the dividend.


  • 0

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#25 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 11:51 PM

What? You just put floor(value/10)*10 and that changes the granularity to 10.


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#26 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 14 May 2015 - 11:59 PM

What? You just put floor(value/10)*10 and that changes the granularity to 10.

 

Yes, but the multiplication is a (double-) float operation. Total 2 float operations and one cast to integer.

(value - (value mod 10)), on the other hand, also changes the granularity to to 10, but only does one float division and one integer addition (aka, a faster operation).

 

The effects of this optimization are not so apparent in 8.1, though, but on the other hand it only uses two operations instead of three and thus there's less interpretation overhead which speeds up it as well.


  • 1

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#27 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 15 May 2015 - 12:06 AM

I thought you meant integer the other way, like floor(.1/10) etc which would just return zero always.

Anyway, you don't need any calculations when you think about it, the granularity's been done for you, just enter path_pos(.1) or path_pos(.2) if the granularity is ten. 

Also, I'm not sure what you plan on doing, just send me the engine with the spline collisions and prove to me it can be done. Without the wheels sticking through the floor, and with accurate edge detection of the road, including z height grabbing, with the road collisions matching the exact visual polygons.


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 15 May 2015 - 12:08 AM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#28 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 15 May 2015 - 12:25 AM

Anyway, you don't need any calculations when you think about it, the granularity's been done for you, just enter path_pos(.1) or path_pos(.2) if the granularity is ten. 

 

normal paths doesn't have support for all this data, but I'm using a ds_grid

 

Not to mention that GM's paths aren't 3D, so I need a custom structure in either case.

 

Also, don't try to change the subject - we're talking about the collisions here, not the path center position.

 

 

 

 

just send me the engine

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No.


  • 0

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#29 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 15 May 2015 - 12:31 AM

I was under the impression that ds_grids were 2d. 

I don't see how you can get any speed advantages from it over using a ds_list.

I've never used grids before but I read they are slower than ds_lists. Using them to define a 3d spline seems clumsy.


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#30 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 15 May 2015 - 12:41 AM

I was under the impression that ds_grids were 2d. 

 

They are. But I arrange data like this:

[x1][y1][z1][more stuff] ---> x axis of grid

[x2][y2][z2][more stuff]

[x3][y3][z3][more stuff]

|

|

V

y axis of grid

 

 

One ds_grid access is still faster than 2 ds_list accesses, so I don't see the point of making a ds_list of ds_lists.


  • 1

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!


#31 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 15 May 2015 - 09:07 PM

New update. Runs on Gm81 and Gmstudio.

 

Fixed the car oversteering bug. Added some improvements to the physics and a new track.

 

To run on studio import the gm8.1.

Then ignore the minor error.

 

Viola.

Video here proving this one is the best.


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#32 Tulloch

Tulloch

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 602 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 17 May 2015 - 08:20 PM

I'm a bit confused. You're comparing a project with countless hours to a project made in 72 hours? The video seems a bit *too* confident.
Plus it just looks like you're aiming for glitches in one, but trying to play flawlessly in yours.

Not saying your engine is bad by any means, but that style of advertising isn't my cup of tea


Edited by GHZteam, 17 May 2015 - 08:23 PM.

  • 2

JOIN THE INDIE GAME DEV COMMUNITY.
TullochCo.com -- Help. Create. Learn & Connect Indie Developers
http://forums.TullochCo.com

 


#33 Lolligirl

Lolligirl

    HEYYEYAAEYAAAEYAEYAA

  • GMC Member
  • 181 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 17 May 2015 - 08:26 PM

Since Race Friends was dragged into this: RF was made for a jam. We made the engine, the level editor, the levels, the characters, cars, backgrounds, textures, we also had to find fitting music, record sounds and basically make an entire game. In three days. Obviously we had to cut some corners when it came to physics, and couldn't tweak them as much as we'd like. Comparing a pure physics engine to just RF makes no sense. You should find a different game to prove your engine is the most advanced racing physics engine known to GM.

 

I'm a bit confused. You're comparing a project with countless hours to a project made in 72 hours? The video seems a bit *too* confident.
Plus it just looks like you're aiming for glitches in one, but trying to play flawlessly in yours.

 

It's really hard to brag about a physics engine being better than another when you have rational comments like this in the thread. We had to focus on so much more than just the car physics in our 72 hours during the jam, and since then, Race Friends has gotten crazy amazing (the screenshot in TheSnidr's signature is much closer to what it looks like now). The version you're using is extremely outdated, and thus an incredibly ridiculous comparison.

 

Please try to promote the engines you make on their own merits and not via a smear campaign.


Edited by Lolligirl, 17 May 2015 - 08:27 PM.

  • 6

LTCicon.pngTDCicon.pngRFicon2.pngPDicon.png

The Little Tornado, That Doggone Cat, Race Friends, Poker Defense

My Language Blog - Tips, tricks, and resources from yours truly for learning languages! | #gmc IRC - Join us!


#34 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 18 May 2015 - 10:31 AM

I'm a bit confused. You're comparing a project with countless hours to a project made in 72 hours? The video seems a bit *too* confident.
Plus it just looks like you're aiming for glitches in one, but trying to play flawlessly in yours.

Not saying your engine is bad by any means, but that style of advertising isn't my cup of tea

Actually the original version of this was only made in 48 hours.

 


Smear campaign

It was only a de-smear campaign. Some people were posting biased opinions that this was inferior physics to Racing Friends so I had to start a de-smear campaign to save Vega Physics's good name.

The video says it was "laborious hours of work" it doesnt ever say it took significantly more hours of work than Racing Friends. You claim I only showcased "glitches." However it's not a glitch if it happens all the time and in every level. It seems more that they are not glitches, but design flaws. I also tried to showcase that your physics are the same whilst vertical or upsidedown but I think that's harder for users to catch. Which works fine for your game but it's trying to show them it's not actual car physics but hover physics. And remember there is no such thing as bad publicity. No doubt users are frantically looking to play your game in order to "check it out" to see if they can glitch it themselves and give their "spin" on which physics are better.


Edited by GreatandWiseOne, 18 May 2015 - 10:39 AM.

The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#35 back

back

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 12 posts
  • Version:None

Posted 18 May 2015 - 10:20 PM

I am sorry.



#36 GreatandWiseOne

GreatandWiseOne

    GMC Member

  • Banned Users
  • 79 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 18 May 2015 - 11:11 PM

I am sorry.

bout what?


The age old dillemna - 3D Car on 3D Terrain. Over 500 fps. Only 1 script. Maybe works on Studio. Download now.

2vcg7b7.png <3d Car Physics Explained. Vega Drift Physics 3d> 2dl2lug.png

The most advanced drift and car physics in GM.                         


#37 Ethanicus

Ethanicus

    Ethan L!

  • GMC Member
  • 199 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 18 May 2015 - 11:33 PM

New update. Runs on Gm81 and Gmstudio.

 

Fixed the car oversteering bug. Added some improvements to the physics and a new track.

 

To run on studio import the gm8.1.

Then ignore the minor error.

 

Viola.

Video here proving this one is the best.

Oh, please. You obviously just attacked every single glitch you could find in RF, emphasis on "single."

You kept straight on the track in your game.


  • 3

...in the Twilight Zone.

*slaps frantically*

The GMC is dead! Long live the GMC!

"So GMC goes down for about 2 weeks, then the new Phoenix GMC 2.0 rises from it's ashes on a new URL while the old and burnt out GMC languishes in archive heaven." -Nocturne


#38 Thorgi

Thorgi

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 13 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 22 May 2015 - 07:05 PM

If something is the best at what it does, it will speak for itself in that regard. If you say that something you created is the best at what it does, no one is going to take that at face value because you've got an obvious bias, being the creator of it.

 

As a neutral party, I'm looking at this all and thinking that your project could be quite good, but the attitude shown in presenting it makes me not want to try it at all. No offence, and I'm sorry it comes off that way, but it does.


  • 1

#39 Yal

Yal

    Even though the GMC may be gone, our love will prevail eternally

  • Global Moderators
  • 11774 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 23 May 2015 - 08:10 PM

By the way, the topic starter is banned and can't defend himself anymore... I guess the engine isn't completely useless, though, so I won't close the topic, but please don't try to start any discussion since it's kinda futile at this point.

 

I've added a notice about this to the first post, just in case.


  • 1

- The above is my personal opinion and in no way representative of Yoyogames or the GMC, except when explicitly stated -

 

Open this spoiler for my games:

Spoiler

Some useful game engines, music and other resources at affordable prices:

My collection of game resources at itch.io

 

New user? Can't draw but want to look unique? You can request a new avatar in this thread!