LÖVE

T-Bone wrote:Would, as always, love gamepad support, but no biggie.

Will add it to the list...

I have a few questions about using LÖVE, considering I've been gone for so long.

• GUI libraries are still plentiful... is there a favorite that I should look into?
• Is AnAL being maintained and are there any animation libraries out there for animation position/scale/opacity/etc?
• What is the best way to scale graphics to different resolutions/aspect ratios?
• Are there any awesome libraries/code examples that I should be aware of?

Edit: I didn't mean to come off like an ungrateful douche, but I was under the impression that LÖVE was for prototyping only.

mike wrote:I was under the impression that LÖVE was for prototyping only.

There's no reason why that should be the case. In fact, one of the videos of Mari0 (a full game being developed using LÖVE) has over 1.5 million views on youtube. LÖVE is good for prototyping, but there's nothing restricting you from making real games with it.

mike wrote:

T-Bone wrote:Would, as always, love gamepad support, but no biggie.

Will add it to the list...

Might I suggest TLbind?

mike wrote:What is the best way to scale graphics to different resolutions/aspect ratios?

Might I suggest TLfres?

mike wrote:Are there any awesome libraries/code examples that I should be aware of?

Anything that starts with a "TL" or a "TE". But seriously, yeah, there's a whole bunch of great libraries for Love.

mike wrote:Edit: I didn't mean to come off like an ungrateful douche, but I was under the impression that LÖVE was for prototyping only.

It's great for prototyping since it's so fast and easy to work with. But I don't see any reason not run all the way to commercial games with it. At the very least, it'll save you the headache of cross-compiling.

mike wrote:Is AnAL being maintained and are there any animation libraries out there for animation position/scale/opacity/etc?

It is maintained in a sense that when there's a bug, I'll fix it, but nothing more, it's just intended as a drop-in replacement for the old inbuilt animations.

mike wrote: Edit: I didn't mean to come off like an ungrateful douche, but I was under the impression that LÖVE was for prototyping only.

Lolwut. Did you lose all your memory when you stopped devving?

Taehl wrote:Anything that starts with a "TL" or a "TE".

Self-whoring, I like that. I'm definitely replacing my shit A* implementation with yours. Any thoughts on a GUI library to use?

bartbes wrote:Did you lose all your memory when you stopped devving?

Yes, to be honest. I didn't really know how far things had progressed and was expecting a "Yeah, löve is great for simple stuff but I'd suggest you use bla or bladibla" answer from you guys.

mike wrote:Is AnAL being maintained

I believe it works just fine with the latest stable LÖVE.

mike wrote:and are there any animation libraries out there for animation position/scale/opacity/etc?

tween.lua will help you on that regard.

I've never understood the need for AnAL. What's wrong with the good ol' drawq? Keeping a bunch of (systematically generated) quads in a table and choosing between them isn't excactly a problem.

I very much enjoyed this game. One issue with the movement: Also,
on the code of level 1: And finally, interested in any "map" donations?

T-Bone wrote:I've never understood the need for AnAL. What's wrong with the good ol' drawq? Keeping a bunch of (systematically generated) quads in a table and choosing between them isn't excactly a problem.

First of all, it isn't that obvious. Especially for people learning programming, and how dt works in LÖVE. If you browse the forums, you will find lots of people asking about animations.

But there are other benefits - for example, efficiency. Animations are so common that every little syntactic sugar that you can find on them, helps. Programming games is hard enough without having to reinvent the wheel every time. The time you invest on managing your animations manually is time that you don't invest on making your game more interesting.

There is also the fact that it is community-shared code; likely tested by lots of people, so it'll probably have very little bugs. And if you find one, everyone can benefit from it. If you solve a bug in your code, no one will ever know.

Finally, programming a lib that solves a very easy, but terribly recurrent problem, is much more fun than one that solves a very hard, obscure problem that no one has. At least other people use it!

josefnpat wrote:I very much enjoyed this game. One issue with the movement:

Yes, I am aware of this. It has to do with how my pathfinding algorithm decides on where to go first, but I'm going to replace it with TLpath, which may fix these problems.

josefnpat wrote:And finally, interested in any "map" donations?

Yes yes and yes, but not yet. I'm going to rewrite most of the game for version 0.2, wherein I will do a better job of defining how the levels are created and once that is done I will ask for your levels which I may add to the final game (with your permissions, of course).