Εγκατάσταση Steam
Σύνδεση
|
Γλώσσα
简体中文 (Απλοποιημένα κινεζικά)
繁體中文 (Παραδοσιακά κινεζικά)
日本語 (Ιαπωνικά)
한국어 (Κορεατικά)
ไทย (Ταϊλανδικά)
Български (Βουλγαρικά)
Čeština (Τσεχικά)
Dansk (Δανικά)
Deutsch (Γερμανικά)
English (Αγγλικά)
Español – España (Ισπανικά – Ισπανία)
Español – Latinoamérica (Ισπανικά – Λατινική Αμερική)
Français (Γαλλικά)
Italiano (Ιταλικά)
Bahasa Indonesia (Ινδονησιακά)
Magyar (Ουγγρικά)
Nederlands (Ολλανδικά)
Norsk (Νορβηγικά)
Polski (Πολωνικά)
Português (Πορτογαλικά – Πορτογαλία)
Português – Brasil (Πορτογαλικά – Βραζιλία)
Română (Ρουμανικά)
Русский (Ρωσικά)
Suomi (Φινλανδικά)
Svenska (Σουηδικά)
Türkçe (Τουρκικά)
Tiếng Việt (Βιετναμικά)
Українська (Ουκρανικά)
Αναφορά προβλήματος μετάφρασης
Κανόνες συζητήσεων και οδηγίες
Αναφορά ανάρτησης
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X21HQphy6I
otherwise then you get videos like this (see below) from people who show off their amateur nature by having zero understanding that the original game didn't have a complex physics engine, or even the hardware[www.google.com] to host a complex physics engine, and didn't treat each ground tile as an original object, but rather as one continuous object and actually the holes in the ground are objects too, etc. etc. ...and then they end up putting in a lot of hard work to over-engineer something to work around the problems they're encountering by trying to use a jackhammer as a screwdriver.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFuevwerX4s
Like, I'm going easy on where this guy is going wrong. Read the comments section of the video.
This is what happens when you're essentially provided tools like a jackhammer and then decide to do a job that would require a screwdriver. Now, Unity always confounded me for its interface complexity, but I'm pretty sure that even in Unity, you can write your own code and use that instead of the physics engine.
I'm not saying that there's no value in over-engineering solutions, because you'll learn about more modern tools that way, but it's still the wrong approach for what a lot of people are trying to do, these days, and will make their life in development a lot more difficult than it needs to be.
lol, lmao, read the comments on this one too :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGHI2qjXp7c
As long as you learn the basics, you can basically use script-kiddie tinkering tricks to make most of the things that you'd want work. You'd probably do well to get really good at being able to read basic programs that would be written in an introduction class, then getting really good at searching for code snippets online and reading what other people have written while making sure that you understand it, then getting really good at copying and pasting, and editing. And if that's as far as your programming experience ever goes, that's fine - at least it will serve you well enough to be able to construct the things that you want (probably).
It could be considered an esoteric programming language, I think.
https://www.google.com/search?q=define+esolang
Nintendo devs were very clever. They come up with really good implementation that doesn't require complex or esoteric code, but that is simple, easily understood, and does a lot by grouping things together or using approximations. The video below explains in greater detail how that and other mechanics in the game worked in the code.
The presentation in this video is extraordinarily cringe, imo, and I really don't like rewatching it, but it is really informative and relevant to this topic :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flaEOp5cago
Anyways, this video covers how the objects were managed in Super Mario Bros, at this timestamp range :
Yeah, I don't know if I could even be a game developer, since I'd easily just forget the basics and have to reopen a Google webpage, which is very tedious. I wish I could make my own game or fantasy, but I just don't think I could learn...
I don't know what you mean by me having a "hard time with programming in a way that a lot of other people don't" though. Why am I so, er, 'limited'?
But you can make your own game. It's not an impossible wish.
A lot of people think that comes down to terminal values and possibly genetic programming.
People have varying interests. - As much as certain groups of people think that we are or should be, or could be supposedly intimidated into being, all homogeneous, that simply isn't the reality.
People are diverse but also not so diverse as to all be alien to one another, and in the nature vs. nurture argument, sure some of your interests will be the result of environmental factors but plenty of them aren't.
For example, typically people have interests that align with their sex, and typically this aligns with expected gender-roles, but that's not necessarily going to be the case because boys can be super into people, emotions, and dolls and stuff, and girls can be disinterested in people but super into trucks, robots, and building things sometimes. (And no, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're trans either.) So while there seems to be strong genetic component here that aligns with sex, it's a bit more complicated than that - but ultimately the point is that there's strong reason to believe that genes do play a very significant role in what people will like and dislike in life.
To put it simply from a response that came from one friend to another where the other had an unconventional desire to experience things that would normally qualify someone as a victim :
"The heart wants what the heart wants."
You never tried writing a blackjack numbers game on the calculator in highschool?
Know what you want to create.
Know what tools you want to use to create it.
Know how to use those tools to do the thing you want to do with them.
What you're describing isn't a development problem. It's a motivation problem and a willingness to push through the hard parts of learning something.
Do some tutorials. Make some very simple games that have some of the mechanics you want in your final game.
git gud
Learn your tool, dive into it, figure out its functions and how they can be used.... Then, do the thing.
Advice: Do not focus on creating some huge wonderful mega-awesome thing by first starting from scratch and with a large bucket full of ignorance about how to use the tool you have chosen.... ANYONE who thought that would yield results would also get immediately discouraged. Start humble... do simple things... learn your tool... git gud.
There's nothing wrong about being discouraged.
You just have to decide if what you want to create is worth, to you, what you will need to do in order to create it.
So...
Are you willing to go through a lot of work in order to produce the thing? If not, that's fine - Billions of people decide upon the very same thing ever day.
But, if you are willing to go through all that learning and hard work just to eventually be able to start creating the thing... then maybe it will pay off? Or not?
It's up to you to decide what you're willing to do. Keep in mind that people who want to help others stay healthy may go through over a decade of training and grueling practical work... to become physicians. They wanted it bad enough, so they did that in order to get it.
Do you want to create the thing? If you want to do it earnestly enough, you'll learn your tools, practice, learn what is possible and maybe even invent some new possibilities...
If you don't, you won't. It's that simple.
Let's say it will take three weeks, devoting a few hours each day, for you to learn that tool well enough to be able to do what you want to do with it or truly know if it's not suitable for your purpose.
Is that work investment worth it to you?