I Wanna Make A FlatShaded 3D Polygonal World War II Flight Simulator

Moderator
Posts: 450
Joined: 2003.08
Post: #46
Nick Wrote:Seems to me to be as useful as programming TI-82 games Smile.

Except TI-82 game programming is a great waste of math classes etc, when there isn't access to a computer.

Alex
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #47
True, but there's TI-83 and TI-89 for that. Rasp
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,066
Joined: 2004.07
Post: #48
akb825 Wrote:True, but there's TI-83 and TI-89 for that. Rasp
Personally I've always wanted to play with a TI-92. 3D graphing abilities and multiple colors always sounded fun to play with Smile.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #49
I TI-92 is basically a TI-89 but with more pixels and memory. (and a QUERTY keyboard) The TI-89 is also capable of 3D, BTW. AFAIK, none of the TI calculators had color support...
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: 2003.10
Post: #50
The TI-83 ruined my math education. I just wrote programs that, when given an equation, would shoot out all the steps involved in solving it.

I had a 31% at my midterm. I studied hard that year Wink
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #51
You wouldn't imagine how much worse it would have been if you used a TI-89 instead. Judging from the fact that it has a "solve" function where you input a formula and what you're solving for, and it does it all for you. Also, it can do things symbolically, and give you exact answers (like with fractions, sin, cos, etc. not worked out into decimals) It can also do all your calculus for you. It is quite an amazing calculator, but you also need to know when not to use it for those reasons.
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,199
Joined: 2004.10
Post: #52
I wasted too many class hours in high school writing tank wars for my TI-86, back in '94. It just drove me crazy that their language had no local variables... everything was global.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 682
Joined: 2002.11
Post: #53
Hehe, I hold the all-time high score for my school in a sidescroller for TI-83/84 called Phantom Star. A tad over 7,300. (And I still have a 97 math average Smile ) At one point, I was writing a text adventure for it.

Did you know they have snood for these things? Snood!

My web site - Games, music, Python stuff
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #54
akb825 Wrote:Since you kept on arguing the point, I assumed that you were still adamant on getting the game to run on System 6. My mistake on that part. Smile
I do -- it's just that apparently it's not gonna be possible to be scaleable from "System 6" to "OS X" lol

So I've the "OS X"/"Unity"/"GarageBand" part down.

And with all the suggestions that I've been getting for what ta do for "system 6", can ya give it to me in a nutshell, akb?
Is this right ....
1] Learn C++
2] 3D Math & Physics
3] Programatic Flightmodeling


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 613
Joined: 2004.09
Post: #55
I have been pretty straight forward and even fairly optimistic about your ideas. Let me make this as clear as possible.

You have a better chance of going to a moon in the next 12 months then of writing a flight sim to work on System 6. Scaleable or not, it dosnt matter. If you had a budget of $200,000 and a team of people who have a background in OS 6 programming it would still take you months. As a single person with almost no programming background it is as near impossible as anything ever has been.

Do yourself a Favor, forgot Classic, Forget System 6. Focus on OS X and never think about anything else. Get Unity and start small.

Take it or leave it but its good advice.

Kyle Richter
DragonForged.com
Twitter: @kylerichter
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #56
Nick Wrote:I've kinda been following this and I wondered something.
Even though you (CaryMG) don't seem to have any intention to do so anymore ...
I do lol

Nick Wrote:.... why did you ever want to support System 6? .... good luck on your path to game creation.
When Steve Jobs introduced the Macintosh -- I've seen the video -- it was incredibly sexy.
An all-in-one computer in a design that, when most people think of "computer" envision precisely that -- an all-in-one box-ish device.

[Image: AppleMacintosh2.jpg]
Apple Macintosh
*sigh* ....

Sure, the AMIGA's superior graphically.
But I think for whatever reason, people've given the Macintosh computer short shrift.
And it's Apple!

"System 6" is the pinnacle of the boxmac OS, that's why I wanna use that -- using a Golden Age system [the world's first 16-bit computer] with the Golden Age's best Macintosh computer OS.

Thank you for the well wishes -- and when I win the "OMG Cup 2007" for "Eagles Of Honor", I'll be sure ya get a free copy!


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #57
I was cutting you some slack because I thought you finally decided that supporting System 6 at this time was futile, especially considering your lack of experience, but here's the cold, hard facts to get it working on System 6. This is what you'd need to learn:
Learn not only C++, but C and assembly.
Learn the 3D math and physics as you said
Learn how to model the objects, and make them as low poly as possible
Learn how to make everything as fast as possible
Get an ancient computer and compiler

All this would take you years. Learning C/C++ and assembly to a proficient level would take months at best. Learning 3D math and physics, depending on your background, can take anywhere from a month (if you already have the basics down) to maybe as much as a year. (if you don't have much background at all) To learn how to model, maybe a couple of weeks. It would then take you a few months to learn just how to create a 3D engine of your own, and will then probably take you between several months to a year to actually optimize it down as much as you could. Even at that point, it may not even work below a '040 or even a PPC processor. You would likely have to work on various engines for several years in order to get the experience necessary to optimize it down to run on an '030, let alone an SE/30. Keep in mind that all these estimates are most likely rather conservative. If you factor in life/job/etc., it can take you much longer.

If you really want to get a System 6 version done, and take several years in the process, be my guest. Just don't be surprised if you're working on it for the next decade. By then, even PPC support would be more or less phased out. If I were you, I'd stick to just the "OS X part" of using Unity and GarageBand.
Quote this message in a reply
CaryMG
Unregistered
 
Post: #58
kodex Wrote:Scaleable or not, it dosnt matter.
If you had a budget of $200,000 and a team of people who have a background in OS 6 programming it would still take you months.
As a single person with almost no programming background it is as near impossible as anything ever has been.
Do yourself a Favor, forgot Classic, Forget System 6. Focus on OS X and never think about anything else. Get Unity and start small.
My heart's broken -- and you've no idea how much I really mean that lol

If you're absolutely sure that that's the case -- I assumed it wasn't given programming today over that of "System 6". -- then I'll put my dream of making a beautiful "System 6" flatshaded 3D polygonal World War II Macintosh SE/30 computer flightsimulator in storage for a bit ....

kk: "OS X"/"Unity"/"GarageBand" -- that's it ....


Later!
Smile Smile Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #59
I'm truly sorry that your dream is shattered, but sometimes we have to make sacrifices. You will just have to amend your dream slightly, so while you won't be able to make a System 6 WW II simulator, at least you can still get the same "feel" along with some other modern enhancements, such as dynamic lighting, higher resolution etc. in place, and still make a cool game. Good luck on getting your project going. If all goes well, hopefully you'll be almost as satisfied with your final product as if you were able to make it work on System 6.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: 2005.04
Post: #60
Quote:1] Learn C++
2] 3D Math & Physics
3] Programatic Flightmodeling

And these things we'll no doubt keep you busy for a long while, if you're intent on conquering this mountain you really have to do it one step at a time. That is unless you are a super-ultra-mega genius.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply