Simplifying loves learning curve

[Creecher]

I noticed that there doesn't seem to be any 'unionized' pathway for learning love or lua.that bothers me cause even though I worked hard to learn what I know now I know others won't have the patience to do that .that's why I made these simple modules to help people

simple modules.zip

(774.92 KiB) Downloaded 256 times

I will make more in the future

These are a collection of super simple examples without clutter and confusion of code and other concepts

[BrotSagtMist]

Sorry to say but i actually think they are cluttered and confusing and will leave people more confused than before.

As for lua, the unionized learning way is to read PIL. Cant be stressed enough, the official doc is the first thing to read yet people seem to search all over the place.
As for löve, the idea is not new, take https://github.com/love2d-community/LOV ... e-Browser/ for example.

[GVovkiv]

There also sheepolution, that also works fine: https://sheepolution.com/learn/book/contents
You (as someone who learns lua and love2d) can read it after PiL to better understand things.
Also, why not just read like love wiki? It includes all information that you need to know about love stored in organized way, with examples.

[Bobble68]

There also sheepolution, that also works fine: https://sheepolution.com/learn/book/contents
You (as someone who learns lua and love2d) can read it after PiL to better understand things.
Also, why not just read like love wiki? It includes all information that you need to know about love stored in organized way, with examples.

Yeah sheepolution is how I learned and is the best I've found imo. Tbh though the wiki is only useful if you already somewhat understand love or are looking for how to use something specific (I'm not a huge fan of ready made examples I'm not particularly fast at deconstructing how things work)

Side note, could be interesting teaching love with a love project, sort of like a guided tutorial - I wonder if it would be possible to run love within love. You could probably just execute an input string and set it all to a canvas, though that would have some flaws

[GVovkiv]

Yeah sheepolution is how I learned and is the best I've found imo. Tbh though the wiki is only useful if you already somewhat understand love or are looking for how to use something specific (I'm not a huge fan of ready made examples I'm not particularly fast at deconstructing how things work)

Well, I mean, you see function "love.graphics.newImage" and you might be interested: "oh, so love can create images? Interesting, I should try to load image in game and see how it looks!" or "love.graphics.newShader? Hm, so I can change colors and add effects? I should try it!"
For example, when I was invested in frameworks, I was playing around with raylib, which has nice cheatsheet https://www.raylib.com/cheatsheet/cheatsheet.html where you could see all functions and what they do. And if you not 100% sure what exactly some function does, you can google it. And it is valid and cool way to discover framework.

Side note, could be interesting teaching love with a love project, sort of like a guided tutorial - I wonder if it would be possible to run love within love. You could probably just execute an input string and set it all to a canvas, though that would have some flaws

Why? Why not just teach love by running love in OS, lol.

[Bobble68]

Well, I mean, you see function "love.graphics.newImage" and you might be interested: "oh, so love can create images? Interesting, I should try to load image in game and see how it looks!" or "love.graphics.newShader? Hm, so I can change colors and add effects? I should try it!"
For example, when I was invested in frameworks, I was playing around with raylib, which has nice cheatsheet https://www.raylib.com/cheatsheet/cheatsheet.html where you could see all functions and what they do. And if you not 100% sure what exactly some function does, you can google it. And it is valid and cool way to discover framework.

Learning directly from the wiki is a lot of information for a complete beginner - its great to learn about new and slightly less obvious functions (which, again, is great if you already somewhat understand love), but I'd never direct someone straight to wiki if they're just starting out unless they have a specific problem.

Why?

Why not? A nice user experience encourages people to keep learning, it's why tutorials are part of games now rather than having a separate instruction manual. Also because it would be an interesting technical challenge.

[pauljessup]

There's a learning curve? I thought Love was easier to learn the Godot, etc. Then again, I got my start with games with Allegro and C++ and DJGPP...so, maybe I'm more used to this way of doing things?

Although, I taught my son to do Lua and Love and he found it easier than the big name engines.

[GVovkiv]

Learning directly from the wiki is a lot of information for a complete beginner - its great to learn about new and slightly less obvious functions (which, again, is great if you already somewhat understand love), but I'd never direct someone straight to wiki if they're just starting out unless they have a specific problem.

What learning curve here tho?
Any library/framework, usually, is just bunch of functions that do something when you call them, that's it. There no deep L O R E behind them or something like that. Just function and what this function expects as argument and what will happens once this function will be called.

Love doesn't provide ten ways to draw text, there no 10 ways to play sound, there no 10 ways to load image file into object that needs texture. In Godot you can create resource and load it, you can load image file directly in editor, you can load via code and I think there more, so yeah, in case of engine you might want to have more explaining about all of this.
In love you have https://love2d.org/wiki/love.graphics.newImage. That's it. Everything else is up to you. And to learn about this function you need to open wiki and read it.
So, no, I think reading wiki/cheatsheet for library/framework is absolutely valid way to learn it, unlike engines, where you often need much more documentation and examples.

[GVovkiv]

There's a learning curve? I thought Love was easier to learn the Godot, etc. Then again, I got my start with games with Allegro and C++ and DJGPP...so, maybe I'm more used to this way of doing things?

No, love or any framework really, is going to be always easy then engine, it's not just you

[pauljessup]

Glad it's not just me, lol. Godot just confused me