Jump to content


Photo

Why all relevant GM games arent made with the YYC compiler?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
52 replies to this topic

#1 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:05 AM

So I just took a look at the files of many GM "triple III" games.. then I realized that all those games included a data.win file... that means that the game was compiled with the VM instead of the YYC c++... 

 

The games I´ve checked

 

  • Hyper Light Drifter(Preview)
  • Nuclear Throne Update 98(last)
  • Downwell
  • Crashlands
  • Undertale
  • Nidhogg
  • Risk of rain 
  • The aquatic adventure of the last Human
  • Downwell
  • Home
  • BlackHole

*All other relevant games were made with an older version of gm.

*Update: I´ve been informed that console builds of some of this games, actually use YYC(Nuclar Throne confirmed). So it seems that devs dont like to use yyc for pc builds...

 

So what´s happening?? Nobody cares about the YYC performance boost(tipically around a 40-60% bost)? And is not like the YYC gives you extra bugs... or does it?(I havent got any real issues with it)


Edited by Karurosu, 13 February 2016 - 01:15 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#2 zbox

zbox

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2618 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:32 AM

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.


  • 0

#3 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:38 AM

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.

 

I been able to fix many "YYC issues" with almost no effort, for example if you use a switch stament with a  default before the cases, and if the c++ compiler compiles the code to an else if, you are going to have a bug there.  

 

In general, almost all of the issues caused by the YYC are just because sloppy code grammar.

 

And is not just a performance boost, it also makes your game harder to decompile, yeah (gms decompiler already exist.. well unleast for undertale, and sprites/sounds)


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 01:52 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#4 BeveledEdgeCo

BeveledEdgeCo

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:48 AM

 

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.

 

I been able to fix many "YYC issues" with almost no effort, for example if you use a switch stament with a  default before the cases, and if the c++ compiler compiles the code to a else if, you are going to have a bug there.  

 

In general, almost all of the issues caused by the YYC are just because sloppy code grammar.

 

And is not just a performance boost, it also makes your game harder to decompile, yeah (gms decompiler already exist.. well unleast for undertale, and sprites/sounds)

 

The example you gave is not sloppy code though. If you have a situation like this:



default:
case 1:
    //Stuff
    break;
case 2:
    //Stuff
    break;
case 3:
    //Stuff
    break;

You have delineated cases but if something doesn't fit then you want to default to a particular case. This follows DRY while being explicit about what's happening (you're not omitting case 1). 


Edited by BeveledEdgeCo, 12 February 2016 - 01:48 AM.

  • 0

#5 zbox

zbox

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2618 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:55 AM

 

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.

 

I been able to fix many "YYC issues" with almost no effort, for example if you use a switch stament with a  default before the cases, and if the c++ compiler compiles the code to an else if, you are going to have a bug there.  

 

In general, almost all of the issues caused by the YYC are just because sloppy code grammar.

 

And is not just a performance boost, it also makes your game harder to decompile, yeah (gms decompiler already exist.. well unleast for undertale, and sprites/sounds)

 

The short of it is, if it takes extra time and there is no benefit, why bother.

 

Decompiling isn't really a concern. If someone wants to decompile your game, they will in some form because it's something that not even big publishing companies can control. YYC or not. So like I say, takes extra time for no benifit. It works as is, why change.


Edited by zbox, 12 February 2016 - 01:56 AM.

  • 0

#6 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:56 AM

 

 

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.

 

I been able to fix many "YYC issues" with almost no effort, for example if you use a switch stament with a  default before the cases, and if the c++ compiler compiles the code to a else if, you are going to have a bug there.  

 

In general, almost all of the issues caused by the YYC are just because sloppy code grammar.

 

And is not just a performance boost, it also makes your game harder to decompile, yeah (gms decompiler already exist.. well unleast for undertale, and sprites/sounds)

 

The example you gave is not sloppy code though. If you have a situation like this:

default:
case 1:
    //Stuff
    break;
case 2:
    //Stuff
    break;
case 3:
    //Stuff
    break;

You have delineated cases but if something doesn't fit then you want to default to a particular case. This follows DRY while being explicit about what's happening (you're not omitting case 1). 

 

 

err.. nope, I was refering to this kind of case in specific:

 

 

Switch(var) {

default:

//do

break;

case bug:

//dont compile

break;

}


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 02:00 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#7 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:57 AM

My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.


  • 1

qNDVrhl.png


#8 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:59 AM

 

 

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.

 

I been able to fix many "YYC issues" with almost no effort, for example if you use a switch stament with a  default before the cases, and if the c++ compiler compiles the code to an else if, you are going to have a bug there.  

 

In general, almost all of the issues caused by the YYC are just because sloppy code grammar.

 

And is not just a performance boost, it also makes your game harder to decompile, yeah (gms decompiler already exist.. well unleast for undertale, and sprites/sounds)

 

The short of it is, if it takes extra time and there is no benefit, why bother.

 

Decompiling isn't really a concern. If someone wants to decompile your game, they will in some form because it's something that not even big publishing companies can control. YYC or not. So like I say, takes extra time for no benifit. It works as is, why change.

 

 

no benefit? Hyper light drifter was having performance issues, if HearthMachine choose to use the YYC, performance wouldnt be a problem anymore.

 

An it actually doesnt take any longer if you have good coding habits


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 02:00 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#9 zbox

zbox

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2618 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:03 AM

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.


  • 1

#10 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:06 AM

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.

 

Games runs good on my pc since I have a core i5/gtx 960... but what about arm cpus/mobile devices?? In many cases, is worth it


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 02:07 AM.

  • 2

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#11 FoldingFormula4

FoldingFormula4

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:18 AM

I agree.


99V1GdJ.png


0CJrA1u.gif


0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif


0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif


0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif


0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif


0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif


0CJrA1u.gif


  • 0

99V1GdJ.png0CJrA1u.gif


#12 zbox

zbox

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2618 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:19 AM

 

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.

 

Games runs good on my pc since I have a core i5/gtx 960... but what about arm cpus/mobile devices?? In many cases, is worth it

 

Once again, yes. But they work as is.


  • 0

#13 FoldingFormula4

FoldingFormula4

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:21 AM

0CJrA1u.gif

0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif

0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif

0CJrA1u.gif0CJrA1u.gif

0CJrA1u.gif

 

This pyramid of ducks are made with YYC, it's also a Triple AAA game, just pointing that out there


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

me too :D


Edited by FoldingFormula4, 12 February 2016 - 02:21 AM.

  • 0

99V1GdJ.png0CJrA1u.gif


#14 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:48 AM


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?

 

 

Oh, definitely. YYC code works slightly differently. In fact we installed a failsafe to our saving system to help prevent corrupt save data. It works perfectly fine under normal compile, but when compiled under the YYC, it outright deletes your save data permanently whenever the game tries to save. This fault made it into a public build, and for 4 days, until we rolled back the update, anyone who played the game would lose their save. It was quite devastating and we haven't fixed the failsafe yet, and won't release an update until it's either fixed or removed from the code.

 

We also had some issues with switch statements not being able to properly read characters, causing the entire block to be called (made our game's procedurally generated dungeons rather... crowded), which we worked around by using numbers instead, and we also had to rewrite a bunch of scripts to fix weapon durability being utterly broken under the YYC compile.

 

My advice is to test your game in YYC regularly. My team pursues YYC compile despite how buggy as crap it is due to how intense our game's code can be. In fact it calls a 400+ nested for loop every step for drawing tiles (tile streaming, which reduces the world generation time by a large margin at the loss of a lot of performance).

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.


Edited by 11clock, 12 February 2016 - 03:02 AM.

  • 1

qNDVrhl.png


#15 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 02:56 AM

 


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?

 

 

 

We also had some issues with switch statements not being able to properly read characters, causing the entire block to be called (made our game's procedurally generated dungeons rather... crowded), which we worked around by using numbers instead,

 

 

emm just Ints should be used in switch staments(same for arrays), thats any language standard.

 

Use macros for readability


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 02:58 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#16 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 03:01 AM

 

 


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?

 

 

 

We also had some issues with switch statements not being able to properly read characters, causing the entire block to be called (made our game's procedurally generated dungeons rather... crowded), which we worked around by using numbers instead,

 

 

emm just Ints should be used in switch staments(same for arrays), thats any language standard.

 

Use macros for readability

 

 

Well it worked perfectly fine in the normal compile. We used characters because that was how we wrote our dungeon rooms in code. 'w' is wall, 'c' is chest, etc.


Edited by 11clock, 12 February 2016 - 03:03 AM.

  • 0

qNDVrhl.png


#17 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 03:02 AM

 

 

 


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?

 

 

 

We also had some issues with switch statements not being able to properly read characters, causing the entire block to be called (made our game's procedurally generated dungeons rather... crowded), which we worked around by using numbers instead,

 

 

emm just Ints should be used in switch staments(same for arrays), thats any language standard.

 

Use macros for readability

 

 

Well it worked perfectly fine in the normal compile. We used characters because that was how we wrote our dungeon rooms in code.

 

 

gml uses general data types, remember?


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 03:03 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#18 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 03:09 AM

 

 

 

 


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?

 

 

 

We also had some issues with switch statements not being able to properly read characters, causing the entire block to be called (made our game's procedurally generated dungeons rather... crowded), which we worked around by using numbers instead,

 

 

emm just Ints should be used in switch staments(same for arrays), thats any language standard.

 

Use macros for readability

 

 

Well it worked perfectly fine in the normal compile. We used characters because that was how we wrote our dungeon rooms in code.

 

 

gml uses general data types, remember?

 

 

Hmm, well we're still more angry about the whole "update that deleted people's saves for 4 days because it failed to work in the YYC" thing.


  • 0

qNDVrhl.png


#19 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 03:17 AM

 

 

 

 

 


My game on Steam is YYC compiled for Windows. We haven't YYC compiled it for Mac yet since we haven't looked into it yet.

 

You had any issues or something? And if so, can you give some advice?

 

 

 

We also had some issues with switch statements not being able to properly read characters, causing the entire block to be called (made our game's procedurally generated dungeons rather... crowded), which we worked around by using numbers instead,

 

 

emm just Ints should be used in switch staments(same for arrays), thats any language standard.

 

Use macros for readability

 

 

Well it worked perfectly fine in the normal compile. We used characters because that was how we wrote our dungeon rooms in code.

 

 

gml uses general data types, remember?

 

 

Hmm, well we're still more angry about the whole "update that deleted people's saves for 4 days because it failed to work in the YYC" thing.

 

 

Have you asked for help? Im interest in how to solve that too


  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#20 Cpaz

Cpaz

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 03:35 AM

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.

 

 

 

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.

 

Games runs good on my pc since I have a core i5/gtx 960... but what about arm cpus/mobile devices?? In many cases, is worth it

 

Both good points. I'll throw in my two cents.

I'll take nuclear throne as an example, I used to run on an Acer laptop, (not bad, but left allot to be desired) NC stuttered at a few points, I couldn't visually see the stutter, but more felt it. Since upgrading to a full sized desktop, It's felt much smoother. Would it benefit from the YCC? Yes. But it works on a crummy Acer laptop (with an mobile intel celeron processor) so I can't exactly complain.


  • 0

Check out my projects:
In "Progress":
ARANA (Top-down, hack 'n slash, rpg-thing)
Fast Action Heroine (Side scrolling, action, platformer)


#21 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 03:44 AM

 

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.

 

 

 

I'm not disagreeing and saying that its not better. Just not worth it, you bought the game, it runs, you play it. All is well.

 

Games runs good on my pc since I have a core i5/gtx 960... but what about arm cpus/mobile devices?? In many cases, is worth it

 

Both good points. I'll throw in my two cents.

I'll take nuclear throne as an example, I used to run on an Acer laptop, (not bad, but left allot to be desired) NC stuttered at a few points, I couldn't visually see the stutter, but more felt it. Since upgrading to a full sized desktop, It's felt much smoother. Would it benefit from the YCC? Yes. But it works on a crummy Acer laptop (with an mobile intel celeron processor) so I can't exactly complain.

 

 

It would be hard for Rami to change the code to make it work with YYC.. I had seen his code before(NT)... quite messy stuff

 

Also, worth to mention, since Gm doesnt have anything like TimeDeltaTime, performance drops would cause gameplay logic issues. So its very relevant to keep the framerate constant


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 03:46 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#22 BeveledEdgeCo

BeveledEdgeCo

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:42 AM

 

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.

 

Yeah this is how I feel. Not worth wrestling with a bad engine, no matter how "accessible" it is for beginners.


  • 2

#23 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:47 AM

 

 

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.

 

Yeah this is how I feel. Not worth wrestling with a bad engine, no matter how "accessible" it is for beginners.

 

 

emm I actually think is more about  theirs  sloppy code fault, than of  gms bugs


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 06:23 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#24 NakedPaulToast

NakedPaulToast

    GM Studio/Mac/Win

  • GMC Member
  • 8808 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:51 AM

The majority of those were probably last compiled when the YYC wasn't bundled for free but had to be purchased separately for $300


  • 2

If the Bible truly is inspired by God, you would think that somebody as omnipotent and all-knowing would have known to get his message out using TCP instead of UDP.

 


#25 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 06:09 AM

 

 

 

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.

 

Yeah this is how I feel. Not worth wrestling with a bad engine, no matter how "accessible" it is for beginners.

 

 

emm I actually think is more theirs about sloppy code fault, than gms bugs

 

 

There have been numerous times where our game was working fine until an update, then it broke and we had to fix things, in the stable branch. It's getting tiring.

 

This discussion is starting to deviate from the YYC topic a bit, so I'll leave my rant in a spoiler.

Spoiler

  • 0

qNDVrhl.png


#26 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 06:16 AM

 

 

 

 

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.

 

Yeah this is how I feel. Not worth wrestling with a bad engine, no matter how "accessible" it is for beginners.

 

 

emm I actually think is more theirs about sloppy code fault, than gms bugs

 

 

There have been numerous times where our game was working fine until an update, then it broke and we had to fix things, in the stable branch. It's getting tiring.

 

This discussion is starting to deviate from the YYC topic a bit, so I'll leave my rant in a spoiler.

Spoiler

 

 

Why you team is using scripts rather than just write the code in each obj event, seems like your team is using scripts on everything. 

 

Can you talk about the bugs?

 

I also work with c sharp and c++, but I dont have any issues with the lack of custom methods in gm, yeah, I dont even have to use user defined events at all, I just dont found it neccesary...

 

ps. In C sharp? Thats just such a weird option... also... from game maker to an engine from scratch? doesnt sound too good


Edited by Karurosu, 12 February 2016 - 06:21 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#27 Sethor

Sethor

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 10:07 AM

Could be because sometimes YYC breaks your game and if you are midway through a project they may not be as easy to fix... also if your game already runs at required speed without YYC then there is no point in the production environment. The users don't care about what is going on behind the scenes.

 

 

The first thing I recommend to everyone starting to work on anything: Use a version control system like Tortoise SVN or create and use GMZ and APK repository folders. Before you compile, save it in a well organized manner:

 

2016-02-11_GameName-YYC1.gmz

2016-02-12_GameName-YYC1.gmz

2016-02-12_GameName-YYC2.gmz

 

It's easy and ensures that you always have up-to-date backup files. Save, save, save. :-)


  • 0

#28 lolslayer

lolslayer

    GMC Member

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

Posted 12 February 2016 - 10:17 AM

Can we contact Heartmachine? Then we know stuff for sure :)


  • 0

#29 rwkay

rwkay

    YoYo Games CTO

  • YoYo Games Staff
  • 2937 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 10:26 AM

If you have a bug with YYC then FILE A BUG - I have not seen anything specific about a save issue, if you have filed it then let me know the number and I will take a look.

 

As I write this we have no known YYC issues (not saying there are none just I do not know about it).

 

If we do not know about it then we cannot fix it, and if you want a bug fixed promptly then you have to take Beta or even nightly builds from us to be able to use that fix - stable lags a lot behind what we currently have on our desks (as it should).

 

Russell

 

P.S. Any team using YYC it is there choice and if they do not feel the need to use it, that is up to them.


Edited by rwkay, 12 February 2016 - 10:26 AM.

  • 2

#30 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 01:43 PM

If you have a bug with YYC then FILE A BUG - I have not seen anything specific about a save issue, if you have filed it then let me know the number and I will take a look.
 
As I write this we have no known YYC issues (not saying there are none just I do not know about it).
 
If we do not know about it then we cannot fix it, and if you want a bug fixed promptly then you have to take Beta or even nightly builds from us to be able to use that fix - stable lags a lot behind what we currently have on our desks (as it should).
 
Russell
 
P.S. Any team using YYC it is there choice and if they do not feel the need to use it, that is up to them.

I haven't filed the bug because I didn't write the failsafe code for my game (another team member wrote it, and he refuses to use YYC for testing since he doesn't trust it, and ignores the team requesting to test with it, it is frustrating) and I don't really know how it works.

Also I seriously don't have the time to file a report for every bug I come across. GMS is not beta software, I expect it to work. The people under the beta branch are supposed to be the ones looking out and reporting bugs. If I cannot rely on the stable release of GMS to be, well, stable, there is a problem.

Also I really dislike the way the stable and beta branches are updated. There is a bug in the stable branch that causes GMS to freeze up on close on my machine, and it was fixed in the beta branch only. This isn't the only time a bug was fixed only in beta. It almost feels backwards.

Currently Stable and Beta branches don't feel like what they are titled to be. They are more like "Old Beta" and "New Beta."

Edited by 11clock, 12 February 2016 - 01:53 PM.

  • 1

qNDVrhl.png


#31 rwkay

rwkay

    YoYo Games CTO

  • YoYo Games Staff
  • 2937 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 04:07 PM

That is an amazingly bad attitude as software is never 100% (see all the bugs in every piece of software known to man) if you see a bug report it (or never grumble about the bugs that are present) and then we can fix it for everyone, otherwise you are relying on us finding everything and we are not necessarily doing what you are doing to expose the bug in the first place.

 

Beta and Stable are not branches in GMS they are streams and Stable comes from the Beta stream i.e. we have Beta versions that are released until we have one that we think is stable enough and then we declare that one stable, it does not mean it is 100% stable, just we deem it to be stable enough... now over time that becomes more brittle as all the target SDK's and OS's change but the Beta one is much more up to date.

 

Russell


  • 0

#32 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 04:39 PM

That is an amazingly bad attitude as software is never 100% (see all the bugs in every piece of software known to man) if you see a bug report it (or never grumble about the bugs that are present) and then we can fix it for everyone, otherwise you are relying on us finding everything and we are not necessarily doing what you are doing to expose the bug in the first place.

 

Beta and Stable are not branches in GMS they are streams and Stable comes from the Beta stream i.e. we have Beta versions that are released until we have one that we think is stable enough and then we declare that one stable, it does not mean it is 100% stable, just we deem it to be stable enough... now over time that becomes more brittle as all the target SDK's and OS's change but the Beta one is much more up to date.

 

Russell

 

I don't expect it to be 100% stable, but stable enough, like you said. The issue, though, is that there are so many bugs that it feels like beta software. it doesn't meet the standards of a "stable" release.

 

I know people who are still using GM8 because of how unstable GMS can be.

kPoT8D7.png

 

My team hasn't filed a lot of these bugs because they happen so frequently that reporting them all would slow down development, and it's faster to just make a workaround than wait for the next stable release, which could be a matter of months. We don't work with the beta update because of really bad experience with it. It's unreliable for a large project.

 

The YYC bug we encountered about the save system, though, is something I would totally report due to how big it is, but I haven't done this one because I wasn't the one who wrote the code for it. The one in my team who worked with the save system would be the one to submit the bug (which he won't because of reasons stated before, he refuses to work with the YYC and it's causing problems since the rest of us use the YYC and test on it regularly).


Edited by 11clock, 12 February 2016 - 05:01 PM.

  • 0

qNDVrhl.png


#33 rwkay

rwkay

    YoYo Games CTO

  • YoYo Games Staff
  • 2937 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:02 PM

we don't release it to stable without checking it, these issues are not happening here and have not, but the current beta has fixed them because it was reported and we worked with the bug reporter to fix it...

 

your team has a bad attitude!

 

Russell


  • 1

#34 NakedPaulToast

NakedPaulToast

    GM Studio/Mac/Win

  • GMC Member
  • 8808 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 05:12 PM

I don't expect it to be 100% stable, but stable enough, like you said. The issue, though, is that there are so many bugs that it feels like beta software. it doesn't meet the standards of a "stable" release.

 

I know people who are still using GM8 because of how unstable GMS can be.

kPoT8D7.png

 

My team hasn't filed a lot of these bugs because they happen so frequently that reporting them all would slow down development, and it's faster to just make a workaround than wait for the next stable release, which could be a matter of months. We don't work with the beta update because of really bad experience with it. It's unreliable for a large project.

 

The YYC bug we encountered about the save system, though, is something I would totally report due to how big it is, but I haven't done this one because I wasn't the one who wrote the code for it. The one in my team who worked with the save system would be the one to submit the bug (which he won't because of reasons stated before, he refuses to work with the YYC and it's causing problems since the rest of us use the YYC and test on it regularly).

 

 

Sometimes you just have to call Bullcrap.


Edited by NakedPaulToast, 12 February 2016 - 05:13 PM.

  • -1

If the Bible truly is inspired by God, you would think that somebody as omnipotent and all-knowing would have known to get his message out using TCP instead of UDP.

 


#35 11clock

11clock

    Mech. Game Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 2735 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 12 February 2016 - 11:14 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.

 

Yeah this is how I feel. Not worth wrestling with a bad engine, no matter how "accessible" it is for beginners.

 

 

emm I actually think is more theirs about sloppy code fault, than gms bugs

 

 

There have been numerous times where our game was working fine until an update, then it broke and we had to fix things, in the stable branch. It's getting tiring.

 

This discussion is starting to deviate from the YYC topic a bit, so I'll leave my rant in a spoiler.

Spoiler

 

 

Why you team is using scripts rather than just write the code in each obj event, seems like your team is using scripts on everything. 

 

Can you talk about the bugs?

 

I also work with c sharp and c++, but I dont have any issues with the lack of custom methods in gm, yeah, I dont even have to use user defined events at all, I just dont found it neccesary...

 

ps. In C sharp? Thats just such a weird option... also... from game maker to an engine from scratch? doesnt sound too good

 

 

Because it's good programming practice to not repeat code. It's called "loose coupling." You know those times where you have to change a line of code, then have to change another line of code that was meant to operate under the same way? That is called "tight coupling." In loose coupling, where you have a script, you just have to change the script and all uses of it will update. It saves a lot of hassle, well, until the scripts start to pile up in that folder and subgroups. It gets really messy. In a real programming language, you have methods that belong to the class that initializes them, and you have "static" methods, which work more like GMS's scripts do. There are also "private" methods, which can only be called by other methods in the same class. This is to simplify those other methods. You can also simplify that private method with another private method, and then with another pri-... you get the idea. You can do something like this in GMS, but they are all "static" and can be used by anything, since they are not initialized by any classes. This could lead to very poor code organization and structure.

 

For example, in a traditional programming language, you can code a class called Dog, which has methods Bark() and Bite() defined within the class. Easily readable methods. In GMS, you're stuck with event_user(0) and event_user(1), unless you make Bark and Bite scripts and put them in a folder called Dog in Scripts in attempt to organize it. But it's not organized. You can't edit Dog by opening up Dog's code. You have to go to the script folder and open it from there. It is cumbersome and annoying. It may sound minor, but it really builds up after 3 years on the same project...

 

I can't talk about the bugs, since I don't really remember any specific ones besides the most recent failsafe problem I already mentioned. It has been a long time since I actively worked on that game.

 

No we are not making our next project from scratch. We're using an engine that uses C#. I won't specify what it is because my negative stance on GMS in this topic would make it look like I am promoting YoYo Game's competition, but if you look around the forums you can tell which engine I am switching to. I will just say that the first impressions on the different engine are amazing, and hopefully it will continue this way. Note that I am not ditching GMS at all, in fact I am making ByteStack with it. I just don't think it's a good choice for a large project from my own personal experience. The structure of GMS simply isn't built for it. Yes I know Undertale and Crashlands and whatever, well good for those developers. They made GMS's structure work for them. But it's not suitable for my team.


Edited by 11clock, 12 February 2016 - 11:22 PM.

  • 1

qNDVrhl.png


#36 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 13 February 2016 - 12:42 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At the moment my team is really fed up with YoYo Games for their buggy releases into the stable build of GMS, and we are moving to a completely different development environment. GameMaker is great and all for prototypes and small games, and I'll still be using it for those, but for large projects, ew.

 

Yeah this is how I feel. Not worth wrestling with a bad engine, no matter how "accessible" it is for beginners.

 

 

emm I actually think is more theirs about sloppy code fault, than gms bugs

 

 

There have been numerous times where our game was working fine until an update, then it broke and we had to fix things, in the stable branch. It's getting tiring.

 

This discussion is starting to deviate from the YYC topic a bit, so I'll leave my rant in a spoiler.

Spoiler

 

 

Why you team is using scripts rather than just write the code in each obj event, seems like your team is using scripts on everything. 

 

Can you talk about the bugs?

 

I also work with c sharp and c++, but I dont have any issues with the lack of custom methods in gm, yeah, I dont even have to use user defined events at all, I just dont found it neccesary...

 

ps. In C sharp? Thats just such a weird option... also... from game maker to an engine from scratch? doesnt sound too good

 

 

Because it's good programming practice to not repeat code. It's called "loose coupling." You know those times where you have to change a line of code, then have to change another line of code that was meant to operate under the same way? That is called "tight coupling." In loose coupling, where you have a script, you just have to change the script and all uses of it will update. It saves a lot of hassle, well, until the scripts start to pile up in that folder and subgroups. It gets really messy. In a real programming language, you have methods that belong to the class that initializes them, and you have "static" methods, which work more like GMS's scripts do. There are also "private" methods, which can only be called by other methods in the same class. This is to simplify those other methods. You can also simplify that private method with another private method, and then with another pri-... you get the idea. You can do something like this in GMS, but they are all "static" and can be used by anything, since they are not initialized by any classes. This could lead to very poor code organization and structure.

 

For example, in a traditional programming language, you can code a class called Dog, which has methods Bark() and Bite() defined within the class. Easily readable methods. In GMS, you're stuck with event_user(0) and event_user(1), unless you make Bark and Bite scripts and put them in a folder called Dog in Scripts in attempt to organize it. But it's not organized. You can't edit Dog by opening up Dog's code. You have to go to the script folder and open it from there. It is cumbersome and annoying. It may sound minor, but it really builds up after 3 years on the same project...

 

I can't talk about the bugs, since I don't really remember any specific ones besides the most recent failsafe problem I already mentioned. It has been a long time since I actively worked on that game.

 

No we are not making our next project from scratch. We're using an engine that uses C#. I won't specify what it is because my negative stance on GMS in this topic would make it look like I am promoting YoYo Game's competition, but if you look around the forums you can tell which engine I am switching to. I will just say that the first impressions on the different engine are amazing, and hopefully it will continue this way. Note that I am not ditching GMS at all, in fact I am making ByteStack with it. I just don't think it's a good choice for a large project from my own personal experience. The structure of GMS simply isn't built for it. Yes I know Undertale and Crashlands and whatever, well good for those developers. They made GMS's structure work for them. But it's not suitable for my team.

 

 

Sorry, but I think that your team is just havin issues because of obsesive compulsive code structure, to begin with, since you are using scripts everywhere, you are taking a big performance hit there, second, custom events arent that useful as custom methods, since all events in gm are voids and you cant pass arguments to events, so it actually isnt really useful. Yeah, it can improve organization and stuff... but it comes with a performance hit and In almost all cases, can be replaced with regular staments or scripts.

 

Idk, maybe if you have 40k+ lines of code, gm could bring little issues because of structure, but me and many others devs havent experience that hassle, I think your team is just being needlessly picky there. 

 

Certainly, I believe that those bugs that bringred the updates, were just because of bad coding practices in your project, since some recent updates maked gml more "strict" broken some sloppy code.

 

emm... so you´re using Unity. Since you´re making procedural generate levels, and wont recommed using unity because it lack grid functions and 2d functionality in general, since its mainly a 3d engine... If your team is looking for a more advanced engine, there are engines "more" dedicated to 2d like godot. 


  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#37 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 12:43 AM

Agree with everything 11Oclock has said in this thread. Also switching to "well-known C# engine" for my next large project. The lack of real classes in GM has made working on my large project more of a pain in the ass than it needs to be, and GM really does feel buggy, even after all these years. Been waiting for news on GMS2.0 forever, but haven't heard anything in a very long time.

 

I'll always love GM, and I'll constantly use it for prototyping and smaller games, but GM's sweet-spot really does seem to be small to mid-sized projects to me.

 

 


Sometimes you just have to call Bullcrap.

Call it all you want. GMS constantly throws random errors and hangs on me. I started using 3D sound in my game the other day, and suddenly, it takes ~30 seconds for my game to close. GMS ate one of my projects a few years ago. Just deleted all the objects on me. It was great. Good thing I keep backups! I don't have any other programs I feel I need to protect my work from, though! GMS is surely the best version of the software yet, thanks to all of the features they've added over the years, but I never had any of these stability problems with older versions of the software. Maybe I just never made big enough games back then...

 


emm... so you´re using Unity. Since you´re making procedural generate levels, and wont recommed using unity because it lack grid functions and 2d functionality in general, since its mainly a 3d engine... If your team is looking for a more advanced engine, there are engines "more" dedicated to 2d like godot.

Godot doesn't support console release, though. Unity already has some great 2D functions in its Beta channel (much more advanced and useable than GM's room editor, from what I've seen on youtube), and has a lot of modules built by users that support 2D development. With a little elbow grease, I think it can make a very good 2D engine. Ori and the Blind Forest, Broforce, and Galak-Z were all made with the program.


Edited by jimthegreat1012, 13 February 2016 - 12:54 AM.

  • 1

#38 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:02 AM

Agree with everything 11Oclock has said in this thread. Also switching to "well-known C# engine" for my next large project. The lack of real classes in GM has made working on my large project more of a pain in the ass than it needs to be, and GM really does feel buggy, even after all these years. Been waiting for news on GMS2.0 forever, but haven't heard anything in a very long time.

 

I'll always love GM, and I'll constantly use it for prototyping and smaller games, but GM's sweet-spot really does seem to be small to mid-sized projects to me.

 

 


emm... so you´re using Unity. Since you´re making procedural generate levels, and wont recommed using unity because it lack grid functions and 2d functionality in general, since its mainly a 3d engine... If your team is looking for a more advanced engine, there are engines "more" dedicated to 2d like godot.

Godot doesn't support console release, though. Unity already has some great 2D functions in its Beta channel (much more advanced and useable than GM's room editor, from what I've seen on youtube), and has a lot of modules built by users that support 2D development.

 

Havent check the beta chanel in a while, but still if Unity really has improved for 2d, I would have to pay more than $1k to have access to those builds, even then its till a 3d dedicated engine, with ide, functions, etc all made for 3d stuff, maybe I could change my mind in a year and a half, but not yet. Also there is the performance issue, for a 2d game, Unity is going to take 10x more memory and 4-6x more proccesing hit, and the game exe is going to be greater... really dont like that. 

 

Actually, Godot supports some consoles, you just have to ask to godot devs and have a license. Good thing, is free open source, sou you can add stuff you need.

 

And as for game maker, well I think that the engine has proven to be a good one, I mean, correct me If Im wrong, its the only "open to public" engine that have many popular and critically aclaimed(many 90+ at metacritic) games, that were made by ridiculous small sized and ultra low budget "teams", Im talking about of 1-2 people.  In contrast to unity, that doesnt even have 1 popular game made with unity 2d(Ori was made with models and all the 3d stuff)


Edited by Karurosu, 13 February 2016 - 01:10 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#39 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:18 AM


Actually, Godot supports some consoles, you just have to ask to godot devs and have a license. Good thing, is free open source, sou you can add stuff you need.

Any source for that? That'd be awesome if it's true, but their homepage only lists the ps3 and the Vita. Not exactly consoles I care about developing for, when the PS4, Xbox One, and Wii U have been out for years already, with Nintendo's next console probably around the corner. =P

Edit: Did you change it from "home" consoles to "some" consoles, or did I misread your post? Either way, Godot's console support isn't much to get excited about, hahah.

 


And as for game maker, well I think that the engine has proven to be a good one, I mean, correct me If Im wrong, its the only "open to public" engine that have many popular and critically aclaimed(many 90+ at metacritic) games, that were made by ridiculous small sized and ultra low budget "teams", Im talking about of 1-2 people.  In contrast to unity, that doesnt even have 1 popular game made with unity 2d(Ori was made with models and all the 3d stuff)

GM has definitely has some good fantastic games under its belt, and can definitely work for large projects. That doesn't mean it's ideal for large projects. Unfortunately, yeah, every major engine has some problems right now when it comes to 2D games. Like I said, Unity's 2D stuff is still only available in the Beta channel for now, so I can't personally say anything about it besides that what they're building looks very exciting. I'm hoping GMS2 puts up a strong fight, since I don't need any of the 3D bulk Unity adds, but as far as I can tell, GMS2 might not even have a release date by the time Unity's 2D tools are available, hahah. :x


Edited by jimthegreat1012, 13 February 2016 - 01:22 AM.

  • 0

#40 Ninety

Ninety

    I just want to see if the mods will waive the character limit.

  • GMC Member
  • 846 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:23 AM

Uh... Unity's 2D tools have been in the stable release for ages. I'm looking at them right now. They are also 100% free.

 

I get you guys want to defend GM, but you don't need to make up stuff about competing engines to prove your point.


  • 0

ka0eZdt.png
twitter | soundcloud | gmcomicified | ask.fm | homestead | itch.io | TIGsource

 

goodnight, sweet prince


#41 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:25 AM

....We're talking about Unity's new 2D tools, Ninety. Autotiling, smart sprites, and a bunch of other extremely cool looking things that are going to turn Unity into a much better 2D engine than it currently is. Look them up on youtube, since I don't think it's a good idea to link those videos here... :P

 

About "making things up to defend GM," yeah, I have to say that yes, Karu's "Unity will use 6 times more CPU and 10 times more memory for a 2D game than GM would" is pretty crazy sounding, hahah!


Edited by jimthegreat1012, 13 February 2016 - 01:28 AM.

  • 0

#42 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:31 AM

 


Actually, Godot supports some consoles, you just have to ask to godot devs and have a license. Good thing, is free open source, sou you can add stuff you need.

Any source for that? That'd be awesome if it's true, but their homepage only lists the ps3 and the Vita. Not exactly consoles I care about developing for, when the PS4, Xbox One, and Wii U have been out for years already, with Nintendo's next console probably around the corner. =P

Edit: Did you change it from "home" consoles to "some" consoles, or did I misread your post? Either way, Godot's console support isn't much to get excited about, hahah.

 


And as for game maker, well I think that the engine has proven to be a good one, I mean, correct me If Im wrong, its the only "open to public" engine that have many popular and critically aclaimed(many 90+ at metacritic) games, that were made by ridiculous small sized and ultra low budget "teams", Im talking about of 1-2 people.  In contrast to unity, that doesnt even have 1 popular game made with unity 2d(Ori was made with models and all the 3d stuff)

GM has definitely has some good fantastic games under its belt, and can definitely work for large projects. That doesn't mean it's ideal for large projects. Unfortunately, yeah, every major engine has some problems right now when it comes to 2D games. Like I said, Unity's 2D stuff is still only available in the Beta channel for now, so I can't personally say anything about it besides that what they're building looks very exciting. I'm hoping GMS2 puts up a strong fight, since I don't need any of the 3D bulk Unity adds, but as far as I can tell, GMS2 might not even have a release date by the time Unity's 2D tools are available, hahah. :x

 

 

emm I thought godot supported ps4, im gonna ask, as for xbox one, wii u... emm well, you really think you can get a license to develop for those consoles?? Sorry but, most probably you wont get one, same as almost every single indie dev out there

 

I checked the Unity 2d alpha around october... actually there werent many nice 2d features there. And later I´ve checked the roadmap, the 2d stuff was delayed... so things looks slow there. So by the time Unity add some 2d essential features for 2d stuff(september update, 5.6 ), there is gonna be gms 2 realeased already... and it really seems to be huge update, Mike said many times that they are changed a lottt of stuff, even gml... soo

 

-hahaha?


Uh... Unity's 2D tools have been in the stable release for ages. I'm looking at them right now. They are also 100% free.

 

I get you guys want to defend GM, but you don't need to make up stuff about competing engines to prove your point.

 

....We're talking about Unity's new 2D tools, Ninety. Autotiling, smart sprites, and a bunch of other extremely cool looking things that are going to turn Unity into a much better 2D engine than it currently is. Look them up on youtube, since I don't think it's a good idea to link those videos here... :P

 

About "making things up to defend GM," yeah, I have to say that yes, Karu's "Unity will use 6 times more CPU and 10 times more memory for a 2D game than GM would" is pretty crazy sounding, hahah!

 

Err nope, I have 5.3, and many of the 2d stuff from the october alpha, just isnt there. Also It got delayed from 5.4 to 5.6(6 months) :P


Edited by Karurosu, 13 February 2016 - 01:32 AM.

  • 0

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#43 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:34 AM

emm I thought godot supported ps4, im gonna ask, as for xbox one, wii u... emm well, you really think you can get a license to develop for those consoles?? Sorry but, most probably you wont get one, same as almost every single indie dev out there

Yes, I will get a license for all three consoles. Just because you can't doesn't mean I can't. ;)

 


here is gonna be gms 2 realeased already... and it really seems to be huge update, Mike said many times that they are changed a lottt of stuff, even gml... soo

Wasn't GMS2 supposed to be released last year? They haven't shown anything of it yet. Do you really believe it's going to be released this year?

About GML being much different in the next GM....I won't say anything, but don't hold your breath...

 

And laugh at some of the 2D stuff on Unity's roadmap being delayed all you want. At least they have a public roadmap that they keep updated. I'm pretty confident they'll get the 2D stuff worked out sooner rather than later. A lot of Indie games are 2D. I'm sure they want a bigger slice of that pie. :)


Edited by jimthegreat1012, 13 February 2016 - 01:36 AM.

  • 0

#44 Ninety

Ninety

    I just want to see if the mods will waive the character limit.

  • GMC Member
  • 846 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:36 AM

Unity's 2D stuff is still only available in the Beta channel for now


This is what I was addressing. You stated that Unity's 2D features were only available in Beta and I said they weren't. That is an entirely different thing to new features.

 

But we're getting off topic :P


  • 0

ka0eZdt.png
twitter | soundcloud | gmcomicified | ask.fm | homestead | itch.io | TIGsource

 

goodnight, sweet prince


#45 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:38 AM


This is what I was addressing. You stated that Unity's 2D features were only available in Beta and I said they weren't. That is an entirely different thing to new features.

Read through the thread. I said earlier that I was specifically talking about the Beta features. ;)

 


Err nope, I have 5.3, and many of the 2d stuff from the october alpha, just isnt there. Also It got delayed from 5.4 to 5.6(6 months) :P

...I was agreeing with you!

 


But we're getting off topic :P

Yes, we are! I'm done, before we get this thread locked. Tsuka's already circling us like a shark. :'D


Edited by jimthegreat1012, 13 February 2016 - 01:44 AM.

  • -1

#46 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:45 AM

....We're talking about Unity's new 2D tools, Ninety. Autotiling, smart sprites, and a bunch of other extremely cool looking things that are going to turn Unity into a much better 2D engine than it currently is. Look them up on youtube, since I don't think it's a good idea to link those videos here... :P

 

About "making things up to defend GM," yeah, I have to say that yes, Karu's "Unity will use 6 times more CPU and 10 times more memory for a 2D game than GM would" is pretty crazy sounding, hahah!

 

Just tested a game, Game Maker version was running with just 15mb of ram, while the Unity version was taking 36mb... when the gm version was running at 2x-3x the res of the Unity vers (didnt know how to change that, but wrver)

 

Also, exe size in gm is 2.4mb, while in unity 15.3mb, 7x more heavy


  • -2

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#47 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:47 AM

That's when you have an empty project running. Go ahead and build Ori in GM and then in Unity. Let me know how both engines perform when you actually have a game running in them. :P


Edited by jimthegreat1012, 13 February 2016 - 01:47 AM.

  • 2

#48 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:49 AM

That's when you have an empty project running. Go ahead and build Ori in GM and then in Unity. Let me know how both engines perform when you actually have a game running in them. :P

 

Ori is 3d stuff you know, it would run better with fancier effects in Unreal 4 :P


  • -2

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-


#49 jimthegreat1012

jimthegreat1012

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:52 AM

...Ori is a 2D game that uses parallax scrolling (like on the SNES!) and a few 3D models. Yes, it would run better in Unreal 4 or Unity than it would in GM. Like pretty much any other game you could hope to make.


  • -2

#50 Karurosu

Karurosu

    GMC Member

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

Posted 13 February 2016 - 01:56 AM

...Ori is a 2D game that uses parallax scrolling (like on the SNES!) and a few 3D models. Yes, it would run better in Unreal 4 or Unity than it would in GM. Like pretty much any other game you could hope to make.

 

When you said a "few", you meant all except background and menu stuff right? 

 

Firts off, GM isnt made to create games like Ori(its almost all 3d for god sake, and pls, that dinamic parallax stuff can only be achieved with a proper 3d engine ), second it could be done better with Unreal than Unity.


Edited by Karurosu, 13 February 2016 - 03:44 AM.

  • -3

If you´re reading this, it´s because I´m already dead. So if you want to communicate with my afterlife me,  send an email to: carlosmlg109@gmail.com -Available for hire, programmer and pixel artist-