I used to be a as3 game programmer. when I begin develop game, I would use a coding framework(suppose these called coding framework) like puremvc/mate/robotlegs plus other graphic framework like starling/away3d/featherUI. And now I am a C++ game programmer(novice), and I want to make a game using cocos2dx. But cocos2dx just a graphics framework, and I want to choose a coding framework like puremvc. I know puremvc has a c++ multicore version, but I found it very hard to learn because there no docs no example on the internet, I would not use puremvc-cpp until I found a good example or document.
I wonder to know that if other people that developing game with cocos2dx did not use any other framework? if yes, then what's mainstream framework for this situation. If no, then I am very sad.
Maybe this answer is late, but I'd like to suggest you a possible scenario: if you're learning to be a C++ programmer, then you'll surely find an easy path to move to the Unreal Engine to create your games.
About the chance to use the PureMVC implementation (standard or multicore), make sure to subdivide your game into 5 tiers:
ViewTech (Unreal, engine logic)
View (PureMVC Mediators, visual logic)
Controller (PureMVC Commands, game logic)
Model (PureMVC Proxies, entities logic)
DBTech (LightSpeed is my suggestion here, persistent logic)
PureMVC is feature frozen, so you can pick up any of the skeletal C++ examples from its main site and adapt them to suit your needs. So even if there are not much working examples out there, you'll still be able to build a prototype in less than 2 days.
This solution doesn't use Cocos2dx, but I think you'll have far more expressive power with these guidelines.
Hope this helps. Bye!
You won't need any extra frameworks when using cocos2d-x.
Cocos2d-x isn't just a graphics library - it's a whole graphics, input and audio framework. The framework itself promotes a certain type of architecture, so a coding framework like the ones you mentioned would probably not fit too well.
I suggest you have a look at the official samples (github) and use them as guidelines.
If you're using JavaScript to build your game, you might try the PureMVC JS port: http://js.puremvc.org
Essentially, PureMVC just want's to help you keep your model, view, and controller concerns separated, and it does so just the same in JS as it did in the AS3 world.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm looking to teach my kids programming, and it looks like I've narrowed it to two options:
jMonkeyEngine 3 (jME 3)
Unity 4.3
I couldn't find any "current" comparisons, and so I thought I'd ask:
Which is better jME3+ or Unity4.3+ for Teaching Programming vs Engine Benefits?
I'm not a game developer, but as a corporate & control systems developer I have experience in both C# and Java.
I'm currently leaning towards Unity4.3+ because:
From a Programming perspective, I think C# is a little cleaner than Java, though this means little if the Engine Coding & Object model encourage poor programming
Engine Benefits: Unity4.3+ will "supposedly" have upcoming support for both XBox One & PS4
Note: in fairness to jME, I will make note of this "pre-alpha state" iOS option for jME which is better than a marketing "supposed" perhaps: (http://hub.jmonkeyengine.org/wiki/doku.php/jme3:ios)
If they are equal in all other regards, which one has better Service integration?
Glad that you interesting in JME3.
I’m also working for a project that target making education programs (youngs and adults) in gaming enviroment.
If you going to let your children learn programming via game developing, it’s a good idea. But both JME3 and Unity are far more complicated to start with ( I assume your children are still young )… There are also few projects suitable for children to learn programming visually.
Greenfoot ww.java.com/en/java_in_action/alice.jsp
Alice ww.greenfoot.org/door
Kojo ww.kogics.net/sf:kojo
Those things (languages come with IDEs) have short learning curve and easy to get with, require minimum knowledge and suitable for children and starter. That’s the education side.
For the engine side. [This is my personal opinion]
I prefered JME.
I’m also left Unity ( did about 4-5 commercial games in unity my self) to go to JME. Before Unity, i also worked in Ogre, UDK, Torque and a lot other engines ( 10 more). I also worked with commercial engine in daytime job in C++, which code dirty as hell but run extremely smooth and cost millions dollar.
The reason is: Those engine tied you up with its limitation and pre-made sollutions. Of course that’s also half of the reason why you choose and engine at first. But when you hit that limitation, for example the license fee or the closed technologies. You will hate them as much as i did.
So that’s why i come to JME in a search of “complete” game developing and entertaining technology.
If you are an experienced Java and C#, in association with JME and Unity developer, i will name you a few things that can be *strong text*compared between the two:
License : free open source vs free / commercial
IDEs : Netbean – an open and extensible platform ( leading quality) vs MonoEdit (the most buggy IDE you can find on earth)
** The based technolgy:**
Graphics: OpenGL v2+ vs Modified renderer ( openGL compatiable v3+) Unity win in this one i suppose :( . It’s sad for a long term java developer like me seeing this. But we can improve the graphics from time to time i hope.
Data management: You choose ( H2, HyperTable, Neo4j …from Java world 100+ of those) VS Unity database
Data oganization: You choose (ES, OO, COD, data driven …) VS ES and data driven only.
Networks: You choose ( Java rocks in this one) VS Unity network ( high performance but never… ever defeat Java)
Cloud and distributed: You choose (Storm, Hadoop..) VS home grown "cloud techs”
Note that i still usually using Unity and JME3 at the same time, for my job and for my hobby. I used Unity 4 with fancy mecanim animation, sub stance material … at day, and using JME3 for research and improve it at night. IMO, JME3 is the game engine which worth to learn, and it will rocks and shine in the future!!!
Hope this help!
It's hard to make a comparison when I have never actually used Unity. I have seen demo's and it's interface however. But having used the jMonkeyengine for about 2 and a half years, I can say I am a happy customer :).
Unity probably has a bit more of everything: developers, users, bells and whistles, but there is a cost associated to that.
Similarities between the 2:
- Big communities (Unity is bigger)
- Many free tutorials
- Rapid development (here's a link to a couple ludum dares I've been involved with using jME http://www.ludumdare.com/compo/ludum-dare-28/comment-page-3/?action=preview&uid=16152, http://www.ludumdare.com/compo/ludum-dare-24/comment-page-1/?action=preview&uid=16152)
- Easy to distribute to Windows/Mac/Linux/Android
The jMonkeyEngine is completely free and all open source (New BSD License). So you can see all the inner workings of the engine, and even change it if you do not like something (of course you are welcome to commit the changes back :)). So you will learn a lot more by delving into the jME source code.
C# and Java is a debate that can go on for ages, but I don't think it should be a defining factor, they are very similar in nature. There doesn't exist a usable iOS version in jME, and I don't think there is any immediate plans for Xbox One and PS4, so Unity will win there.
JME is a bit more hardcore engine than Unity.
JME:
- strong community (english language mostly)
- OpenSource and free to use.
- has many cool tools. But Unity has much more i guess.
- Simple to compile and code with all platforms.
- Supports Linux. You can develop games in Linux OS.
Unity:
- Strong community (with many local communities and languages)
- Non free. But it has professional tools.
- Has javascript support. You can add scripts inside of the editor.
- Has really cool world editor. But coding is better in JME SDK.
I use JME. But it's hardcore in many cases.
It really depends on what you aim for.
The pro on unity is especially way to get assets into the engine (via the shop).
With jme3 you need to be able to at least partly work with blender/3dsmax or similar. Or use a graphic style where it does not matter (eg 2d or blockworld)
Also it has better state of the art features in terms of lighting and shadowing.
But you kinda need to pro license sooner or later, as even basic stuff as lod is tied to it
http://unity3d.com/unity/licenses and it is not that cheap.
The pro with jme3 is that it does not limit you. It is only a core engine but also not tailored for some use-cases.
As far as I understand Unity uses a kinda Entity-component system but without separate systems. (The components contain the logic)
In jme3 you are free to use whatever you want, and are encouraged to make a clean split between logic and graphic. You are free to use whatever programming type you prefer (eg ES,OO) As jme is jvm based you also have access to other jvm languages, eg for functional programming via scala.
So it depends on what your target(and budget) is, more about developing and their specifics, or more about making a own game.
Regarding the version controll,
JME3 works fine with git and svn and kind everything else. As there are no special files or logic tied to any of them.
I can't say I've ever used Unity but here are some things I love about JME3:
Completely free & open-source under BSD license
Awesome SDK based on awesome NetBeans
Deployment to Linux, Mac & Android (as well as windows) with 1 click, I have no idea if Unity can do this
Amazing active community, constantly creating new plugins and features (IOS deployment coming soon, possibly), they will also help you with any trouble you run into
Networking is awesome
Can use other Java libraries or features alongside
As far as features of the engine go, Unity probably has more. However, I highly recommend JME, it is a great engine. Somebody else said you need knowledge of blender, whereas with Unity they have an asset shop. While Blender knowledge is (very) useful, there are hundreds of websites online that sell or give away for free assets (for instance www.turbosquid.com).
I have to ask, is whomever you're teaching actually ready to program for a game engine?
If the first thing that has to be taught is a hello world script followed by learning what variables are, then both options do nothing but over-complicate what needs to be a simple learning environment.
Even if they have the basics of programming down, they should know what the basics of game programming are. They should know what a vector is and how matrix math works with some underlying understanding of how an engine operates.
I don't know about jME, but with Unity, this would be the point where they could actually write code that does something in which they can earnestly say they understand why (which should be the most important part of teaching someone). I describe Unity as the simplest, big boy toy out there. That still means they have to be ready for the big boy toys in the first place.
Oh, and stick with the free version of Unity. Most pro features are graphical elements like bloom lighting that don't effect a programmer's capabilities.
I'm working on a couple apps which require the use of OpenGLes 2.0. I made a prototype of one starting from a simple sample project. However, I wasn't very happy with the clutter that all of the OpenGL code caused. I think that all the clutter would cause issues if I kept extending the code.
So- Is there a good solution to working with OpenGL on a slightly higher level? I don't really need all the complexity and overhead of a game engine. I just am slightly frustrated I can't deal with OpenGL like this:
ShaderProgram shader(fragmentCode, vertexCode);
RenderBuffer renderBuffer(xResolution, yResolution);
You'll have to pardon the shameless self-promotion, but I've been working on just such a framework due to the exact frustrations you've been having. I grew so tired of the nonsense of having to properly initialize resources and then clean them up. Here is a sample from my XPG framework.
XPG::Texture2D tex("texture.jpg"); // automatically cleaned up
tex.bind(); // ready for use
I have built similar objects for things like vertex buffer objects (VBO). I am still working on it, but the OpenGL tools will certainly benefit you greatly. I have yet to see another framework make things this simple. If anyone knows of one, I would love to hear about it. The one I've been working on even works in Android. It should work in iOS, but I haven't tested it there yet. It does work on OSX though. :)
To see a high level demonstration, see the test module source code: interface and implementation.
I don't think the position somewhere between raw OpenGL and a complete engine would be effective. Suppose you have the ability to manage OpenGL objects like shaders, buffers, textures and others.
You will still need a loading logic to get the input data from somewhere. Engine has it.
You'll need tools to compose shaders in and test the scenes. Engine should have it.
You'll face hidden errors about incompatible vertex attributes - shaders - uniform parameters. Engine has to check the consistency and link those instances smoothly for you.
Hence my conclusion is: once you've decided to move forward from the raw GL, you'll eventually end up in an engine. Either in a long term if you do it yourself, or in a short term if you take an existent one.
More than that, I think the engine should provide you with an ability to create shader programs and render buffers in the way you want. And I wouldn't expect much overhead from these operations.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed last month.
Improve this question
Summary:
Can I program a "thick
client" game in C without reinventing
wheels, or should I just bite the
bullet and use some library or SDK?
I'm a moderate C programmer and am not
afraid to work with pointers, data
structures, memory locations, etc. if
it will give me the control I need to
make a great "thick-client" game.
However, I'm thinking of eschewing
high-level languages & frameworks for
the sake of power and control, not
ease of use.
I'm interesting in tinkering with a 2D fighting/platforming game as a side project sometime. I'm primarily a Linux server-side programmer with experience in Python, Ruby and PHP. I know that there are excellent frameworks in some of these languages, like PyGame. I am also aware of the success people have had with stuff like Air and .NET... but I have some concerns:
Performance: Scripting languages are notoriously slow. If I'm making a real-time game, I want it to be as snappy as possible.
Huge binaries: Using frameworks like .NET or scripting languages like Ruby often result in big CLRs or libraries that you wouldn't otherwise need. The game I want to make will be small and simple--I don't want its CLR to be bigger than the game itself!
Extra stuff: Honestly, I just don't like the idea of inheriting some big game library's baggage if I can wrap my head around my own code better.
I'm asking this question because I know I'm very susceptible to Not Invented Here Syndrome. I always want to program it myself, and I'm sure it wastes a lot of time. However, this works out for me remarkably often--for example, instead of using Rails (a very big web project framework with an ORM and GUI toolkit baked in), I used an array of smaller Ruby tools like rack and sequel that fit together beautifully.
So, I turn to you, SO experts. Am I being naive? Here's how I see it:
Use C
Cons
Will probably make me hate programming
High risk of reinventing wheels
High risk of it taking so long that I lose interest
Pros
Tried & true - most A-list games are done in C (is this still true today?)
High level of control over memory management, speed, asset management, etc., which I trust myself to learn to handle
No cruft
Use framework or SDK
Cons
Risk of oversized deliverable
Dependent on original library authors for all facets of game development--what if there isn't a feature I want? I'll have to program it myself, which isn't bad, but partially defeats the purpose of using a high-level framework in the first place
High risk of performance issues
Pros
MUCH faster development time
Might be easier to maintain
No time wasted reinventing common paradigms
What else can I add to this list? Is it a pure judgment call, or can someone seal the deal for me? Book suggestions welcome.
I believe you are working under a fallacy.
There are several frameworks out there specifically for game programming --- written by people with much experience with the complication of game design, almost certainly more tha you do.
In other words, you have a "High risk of performance issues" if you DON'T use a framework.
My current thinking is:
If you want to learn to program, start making the game engine from the base elements upwards (even implementing basic data structures - lists, maps, etc). I've done this once, and while it was a learning experience, I made many mistakes, and I wouldn't do this a second time around. However for learning how to program as well as making something cool and seeing results I'd rate this highly.
If you want to make a proper game, use whatever libraries that you want and design all of the game infrastructure yourself. This is what I'm doing now, and I'm using all of the nice things like STL, ATL/WTL, Boost, SQLite, DirectX, etc. So far I've learnt a lot about the middle/game logic aspect of the code and design.
If you just want to make a game with artists and other people collaborating to create a finished product, use one of the existing engines (OGRE, Irrlicht, Nebula, Torque, etc) and just add in your game logic and art.
One final bit of wisdom I've learnt is that don't worry about the Not Invented Here syndrome. As I've come to realise that other libraries (such as STL, Boost, DirectX, etc) have an order of magnitude (or three) more man-hours of development time in them, far more than I could ever spend on that portion of the game/engine. Therefore the only reason to implement these things yourself is if you want to learn about them.
I would recomend you try pyglet.
It has good performance, as it utilizes opengl
Its a compact all-in-one library
It has no extra dependencies besides python
Do some tests, see if you can make it fast enough for you. Only if you prove to yourself that it's not move to a lower level. Although, I'm fairly confident that python + pyglet can handle it... at worst you'll have to write a few C extensions.
Today, I believe you are at a point where you can safely ignore the performance issue unless you're specifically trying to do something that pushes the limits. If your game is, say, no more complicated than Quake II, then you should choose tools and libraries that let you do the most for your time.
Why did I choose Quake II? Because running in a version compiled for .NET, it runs with a software renderer at a more than acceptable frame rate on a current machine. (If you like - compare MAME which emulates multiple processors and graphics hardware at acceptable rates)
You need to ask yourself if you are in this to build an engine or to build a game. If your purpose is to create a game, you should definitely look at an established gaming engine. For 2D game development, look at Torque Game Builder. It is a very powerful 2D gaming engine/SDK that will put you into production from day 1. They have plenty of tools that integrate with it, content packs, and you get the full source code if you want to make changes and/or learn how it works. It is also Mac OSX compatible and has Linux versions in the community.
If you are looking for something on the console side, they have that too.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned XNA. Its a framework built around DirectX for doing managed DirectX programming while removing a lot of the fluff and verbosity of lower level DirectX programming.
Performance-wise, for most 2D and 3D game tasks, especially building something like a fighting game, this platform works very well. Its not as fast as if you were doing bare metal DirectX programming, but it gets you very close, and in a managed environment, no less.
Another cool benefit of XNA is that most of the code can be run on an Xbox 360 and can even be debugged over the network connection was the game runs on the Xbox. XNA games are now allowed to be approved by the Xbox Live team for distribution and sale on Xbox Live Arcade as well. So if you're looking to take the project to a commercial state, you might have am available means of distribution at your disposal.
Like all MS development tools, the documentation and support is first rate, and there is a large developer community with plenty of tutorials, existing projects, etc.
Do you want to be able to play your game on a console? Do you want to do it as a learning experience? Do you want the final product to be cross platform? Which libraries have you looked into so far?
For a 2d game I don't think performance will be a problem, I recommend going with something that will get you results on screen in the shortest amount of time. If you have a lot of experience doing Python then pyGame is a good choice.
If you plan on doing some 3d games in the future, I would recommend taking a look at Ogre (http://www.ogre3d.org). It's a cross platform 3d graphics engine that abstracts away the graphics APIs. However for a 2d project it's probably overkill.
The most common implementation language for A-list games today is C++, and a lot of games embed a scripting language (such as Python or Lua) for game event scripting.
The tools you'd use to write a game have a lot to do with your reasons for writing it, and with your requirements. This is no different from any other programming project, really. If it's a side project, and you're doing it on your own, then only you can assess how much time you have to spend on this and what your performance requirements are.
Generally speaking, today's PCs are fast enough to run 2D platformers written in scripting languages. Using a scripting language will allow you to prototype things faster and you'll have more time to tweak the gameplay. Again, this is no different than with any other project.
If you go with C++, and your reasons don't have to be more elaborate than "because I want to," I would suggest that you look at SDL for rendering and audio support. It will make things a little bit easier.
If you want to learn the underlying technologies (DirectX, or you want to write optimized blitters for some perverse reason) then by all means, use C++.
Having said all that, I would caution you against premature optimization. For a 2D game, you'll probably be better off going with Python and PyGame first. I'd be surprised if those tools will prove to be inadequate on modern PCs.
As to what people have said about C/C++/Python, I'm a game developer and my company encourages C. Not b/c C++ is bad, but because badly written C++ is poison for game development due to it's difficulty to read/debug compared to C. (C++ gives benefits when used properly, but let a junior guy make some mistakes with it and your time sink is huge)
As to the actual question:
If your purpose is to just get something working, use a library.
Otherwise, code it yourself for a very important reason: Practice
Practice in manipulating data structures. There WILL be times you need to manage your own data. Practice in debugging utility code.
Often libs do just what you want and are great, but sometimes YOUR specific use case is handled very badly by the lib and you will gain big benefits from writing you own. This is especially on consoles compared to PCs
(edit:) Regarding script and garbage collection: it will kill you on a console, on a recent game I had to rewrite major portions of the garbage collection on Unreal just to fill our needs in the editor portion. Even more had to be done in the actual game (not just by me) (to be fair though we were pushing beyond Unreal's original specs)
Scripting often good, but it is not an "I win" button. In general the gains disappear if you are pushing against the limits of your platform. I would use "percent of platforms CPU that I have to spare" as my evaluation function in deciding how appropriate script is
One consideration in favor of C/C++/obj-C is that you can mix and match various libraries for different areas of concern. In other words, you are not stuck with the implementation of a feature in a framework.
I use this approach in my games; using chipmunk for 2D physics, Lua as an embedded scripting language, and an openGL ES implementation from Apple. I write the glue to tie all of these together in a C language. The final product being the ability to define game objects, create instances of them, and handle events as they interact with each other in C functions exposed to Lua. This approach is used in many high performance games to much success.
If you don't already know C++, I would definitely recommend you go forward with a scripting language. Making a game from start to finish takes a lot of motivation, and forcing yourself to learn a new language at the same time is a good way to make things go slowly enough that you lose interest (although it IS a good way to learn a new language...).
Most scripting languages will be compiled to byte code anyway, so their biggest performance hit will be the garbage collection. I'm not experienced enough to give a definite description of how big a hit garbage collection would be, but I would be inclined to think that it shouldn't be too bad in a small game.
Also, if you use an existing scripting language library to make your game, most of the performance critical areas (like graphics) can be written in C++ anyway (hopefully by the game libraries). So 80% of the CPU might actually be spent in C++ code anyway, despite the fact that most of your project is written in, say Python.
I would say, ask yourself what you want more: To write a game from start to finish and learn about game development, or to learn a new language (C++). If you want to write a game, do it in a scripting language. If you want to learn a new language, do it in C++.
Yeah unless you just want to learn all of the details of the things that go into making a game, you definitely want to go with a game engine and just focus on building your game logic rather than the details of graphics, audio, resource management, etc.
Personally I like to recommend the Torque Game Builder (aka Torque 2D) from GarageGames. But you can probably find some free game engines out there that will suit your needs as well.
I'm pretty sure most modern games are done in C++, not C. (Every gaming company I ever interviewed with asked C++ questions.)
Why not use C++ and existing libraries for physics + collisions, sound, graphics engine etc. You still write the game, but the mundane stuff is taken care of.
There are alot of different solutions to the issue of abstracting and each deals with it in different ways.
My current project uses C#, DirectX 9, HLSL and SlimDX. Each of these offers a carefully calibrated level of abstraction. HLSL allows me to actually read the shader code I'm writing and SlimDX/C# allows me to ignore pointers, circular dependencies and handling unmanaged code.
That said, none of these technologies has any impact on the ease of developing my AI, lighting or physics! I still have to break out my textbooks in a way that I wouldn't with a higher-level framework.
Even using a framework like XNA, if most video games development concepts are foreign to you there's a hell of a lot still to take in and learn. XNA will allow you to neatly sidestep gimbal lock, but woe betide those who don't understand basic shading concepts. On the other hand, something like DarkBASIC won't solve your gimbal lock problem, but shading is mostly handled for you.
It's a sufficiently big field that your first engine will never be the one you actually use. If you write it yourself, you won't write it well enough. If you use third party libraries, there's certainly aspects that will annoy you and you'll want to replace.
As an idea, it might be worth taking various libraries/frameworks (definately make XNA one of your stops, even if you decide you don't want to use it, it's a great benchmark) and trying to build various prototypes. Perhaps a landscape (with a body of water) or a space physics demo.
I have been using IoC for a little while now and I am curious if I should use Microsoft's Unity framework (official name "Unity Application Block"). Does anyone have experience using it? So for I have been copying my IoC container code from project to project, but I think it would be better to using something standard. I think IoC can make a HUGE difference in keeping component based applications loosely coupled and therefore changeable but I am by no means an expert on IoC, so I am nervous to switch to a framework that will just paint me into a corner as a dependency I will one day want to walk away from.
I am using Unity with no real problems. I know a few ALT.NET type people warn against Unity but I really think that is just because of the history the MS P&P team have of writing bloatware. Unity is not yet bloated IMO and works well.
I took a look at the Unity Framework, but found it to be a little 'too big' for my needs (no, I can't really quantify that, it just seemed to require much more knowledge that other frameworks that I've been playing with... this was a while ago so it's possible that that's changed as Unity's been developed/refined).
My current IoC/Dependency Injection framework is Ninject. It's quick, fast, and I was able to go from reading the tutorials (about 10 minutes) to using it in a pre-existing project in about two hours.
If you're looking for a clean way to do dependency injection, I'd highly recommend checking it out.
I would say stick with the one you know until you feel confident with it and the whole concept. After what you'll have a better judgement to pick a framework which fullfill your needs.
I've played with CompositeWPF (aka Prism) - successor of Composite app block. From my experience Unity works much better as compared with previous version of ObjectBuilder. However it's up to you to evaluate IoC frameworks and choose one suited for your needs.
Unity tutorials & samples
Unity IoC Screencast