LÖVE

jjmafiae wrote:

NightKawata wrote:Instead of thinking, how about you actually do it?

i will when im finished with 3 other projects (that will take 1 or 2 year(s) to do)

Then why make a post about it now?

veethree wrote:

jjmafiae wrote:

NightKawata wrote:Instead of thinking, how about you actually do it?

i will when im finished with 3 other projects (that will take 1 or 2 year(s) to do)

Then why make a post about it now?

i wanna inform lovers about the idea this is a idea for every one !

Can't you do that on the IRC room or something? Oh, you can't. Oops.
Still, why even bother posting about something that you say you're going to do with no Proof of Concept, (look it up because I'm sure you don't know what that is judging from the topic) or rather, anything valid?

NightKawata wrote:Can't you do that on the IRC room or something? Oh, you can't. Oops.
Still, why even bother posting about something that you say you're going to do with no Proof of Concept, (look it up because I'm sure you don't know what that is judging from the topic) or rather, anything valid?

im quite happy not to have access to the IRC because its really distracting sometimes !

but still

raidho36 wrote:If you wanted to amaze me with emulating 3d via 2d textured primitives that are then internally rendered via OpenGL in plain and straightforward hardware accelerated 3d, with all the 3d transformations pre-computed software with a scripting language, then you should've first though how inadequate the very idea of rendering 3d that way. It's like shitting through your mouth: it's cool that you can do it, but you shouldn't actually use it in practice, you have an asshole for that.

I'm not sure if you were trying to insult me or jjmafiae because of the confusing longwinded way you seem to talk, in which case, I wasn't trying to impress you at all. But if you were directing that at him, I still take offense. Why do I do 3D in Löve? Because I CAN.

Jasoco wrote:

raidho36 wrote:If you wanted to amaze me with emulating 3d via 2d textured primitives that are then internally rendered via OpenGL in plain and straightforward hardware accelerated 3d, with all the 3d transformations pre-computed software with a scripting language, then you should've first though how inadequate the very idea of rendering 3d that way. It's like shitting through your mouth: it's cool that you can do it, but you shouldn't actually use it in practice, you have an asshole for that.

I'm not sure if you were trying to insult me or jjmafiae because of the confusing longwinded way you seem to talk, in which case, I wasn't trying to impress you at all. But if you were directing that at him, I still take offense. Why do I do 3D in Löve? Because I CAN.

good words!

Why do I do 3D in Löve? Because I CAN.

Look, I was trying to say that it's an anti-optimal solution, it wastes computer performance for nothing, and you don't even get decent 3d after all that.

*sigh* yeah this kind of approach to using processing power is really a modern programming plague. Once hardware stopped being scarce resource people stopped worth it and started waste it BIG TIME. Modern hardware is so powerful it can perform you real full-blown scientific calculations up to galaxies simulation, but instead it's forced to put all of it's efforts to process frameworks on top of frameworks on top of frameworks before it gets to actually do useful things. It's mostly would catching wind in webs, because, you know, when you have many enough webs they act like lousy sail, so if you put even more they would probably act like a decent sail, and screw jet engines we could've had instead.

raidho36 wrote:

Why do I do 3D in Löve? Because I CAN.

Look, I was trying to say that it's an anti-optimal solution, it wastes computer performance for nothing, and you don't even get decent 3d after all that.

*sigh* yeah this kind of approach to using processing power is really a modern programming plague. Modern hardware is so powerful it can perform you real full-blown scientific calculations up to galaxies simulation, but instead it's forced to put all of it's efforts to catching wind in webs, because, you know, when you have many enough webs they act like lousy sail, so if you put even more they would probably act like a decent sail, and screw jet engines we could've had instead.

Some people enjoy creating and learning by implementing an already-solved problem in their own way. In fact, it's very impressive what Jasoco has been able to do with LÖVE - his creations demonstrate much more of certain types of skills than most other projects made with LÖVE.

It's not something that can't be done hundreds of times easier and quicker in something like Unity, but it doesn't have to be.

I already said that yeah it's entirely possible and it's cool that he can do it, but this kind of thing should not be actually used. This is only proof of concept, just to show that it's possible. As a C programmer, I know that a lot of stuff is possible, so this demo didn't particularry impressed me. It would be impressive if it worked hardware-fast. Carmack invented that fast square root thing, it was very accurate and lightning fast, it was done via int math and black bit magic, and that was very impressive.

raidho36 wrote:I already said that yeah it's entirely possible and it's cool that he can do it, but this kind of thing should not be actually used. This is only proof of concept, just to show that it's possible. As a C programmer, I know that a lot of stuff is possible, so this demo didn't particularry impressed me. It would be impressive if it worked hardware-fast. Carmack invented that fast square root thing, it was very accurate and lightning fast, it was done via int math and black bit magic, and that was very impressive.

I wouldn't use your inefficient C code either! I only use handcrafted assembler code manually optimized for my CPU and my GPU. I also send my network packets by hand to make sure there's no overhead