I'm getting into game development right now, and I want to do 3D games. I have been checking out UDK, Unity, and CryEngine 3 SDK. All of them, I can see, have their pros and cons. Unity, however, I am starting to rule out because I'm wanting to do Game Development as a job in the future. Since the Unreal Engine (which, as I understand, is 99% the same as UDK) and CryEngine 3 are the industry standards, apart from GameBryo etc.. (which I don't have money to buy as I'm 16 haha)
From what I understand the pros of UDK are:
Simpler (In terms of Scripting)
Runs on more computers than CE3
Industry standard, used in MANY top-notch games.
Kismet is really nice (for level-wide editing)
Development for iOS is possible, and free (minus the $99 fee to become an "Apple Developer"
Cross Platform (PC, Mac, iOS) for the UDK. UE3 (as I understand) is PC, Mac, iOS, PS3, Xbox360, and Android?
$99 to sell games, first $50,000 in sales is royalty-free
The cons are:
Must exit the editor to recompile the code every time you change the UnrealScript code.
Worse workflow than CryEngine 3
Soon to be replaced by Unreal Engine 4
Crashes often.
Not many tutorials.
The pros of CE3 is:
AMAZING Terrain Generator
True next-gen-top-notch graphics
Best water ever seen
Much better workflow than UE3
Rarely Crashes
The Cons are:
Must log in to use, if you lose Internet connection while editing, you won't even be able to save.
Expensive if you want to make commercial games.
Doesn't run on as many computers
Only on PC, PS3, and X360
More complicated scripting?
Is what I said the basis? Are there any pros or cons I have missed? Which do you recommend for a beginner (to game development, not programming in general. I am well versed in Python, know VB.NET, C#, HTML, and CSS) Is Unity a possibility for a game-development company to see potential in you?
EDIT: P.S. I thought I should mention this... I do not plan on making FPS as my main genre. I know it will be hard to do anything else with either UDK or CryEngine, but I don't mind. I need the learning experience. Mainly, can UDK AND CryEngine do this? I KNOW UDK can, but I'm only about 50% sure CryEngine can, I haven't seen many people ask this.
I'm learning UDK at the moment. Click on the welcome screen to access online video tutorials. This Buzz3D dude makes the best tutes ever. Although he uses an older version of UDK, I'm able to keep up and I've learned heaps. UDK is a very exciting editor. I plan on checking out CE3 at some stage. Dunno much about Unity. Might be good for developing to the upcoming ouya console (which is a bit of a dark horse for the industry).
I have played a little bit with UDK before and I think the pros and cons you mentioned are valid.
I don't know anything about the internal workings of game company recruitment, but I think for a beginner Unity3D is a choice worthy considering. Unity is not as powerful/productive/market-standard as UDK, but it does have some advantages:
C# scripting
Comprehensible documentation, tutorials and active community
Friendly and easy-to-use IDE, Script Editor and (most importantly) Debugging Tools.
Anyway, if you follow some tutorials it shouldn't take more than a few days to learn the basics of Unity and make some game prototypes. I would recommend it as a staring point even if you are going to migrate to another engine later.
Just on the pricing of each, Read the notea correction to UDK pricing.
Here is the cost of each currently
Crytek: For Indy Developers
-"Crytek require only 20% of the developer’s revenues from the commercial launch of their game." -I find this more appealing for sheer simplicity's sake
UDK:
-"US $99 up-front, and a 0% royalty on you or your company's first US$50,000 in UDK related revenue from all your UDK based games or commercial applications, and a 25% royalty on UDK related revenue from all your UDK based games or commercial applications above US$50,000*"
*Note there is this to,
-"If you are using UDK internally within your business and the application created using UDK is not distributed to a third party (i.e., someone who is not your employee or subcontractor), you are required to pay Epic an annual license fee of US$2,500 per installed UDK developer seat per year. This license fee only applies to UDK seats used for development; no license fee is required for hardware where only the resulting applications are installed."
Alright I am not the best but what this seems to be is if you are a small dev team you could get away with only one charge of 2,500 by listing every one under on "employer" but I am not even sure If it applies to indie devs.
LINKS:
Cryengine: http://mycryengine.com/index.php?conid=43
UDK: http://www.udk.com/licensing
Thanks for you post,
Robert
I don't see where you get the idea UDK crashes often and "doesn't have many tutorials"?
You can also get away with having to recompile each script change with a system called "archetypes", I won't explain in detail, but you get the gist.
if you try to get anything outside of CE3 other than an FPS, you're going to have to dig into their C++ code which I can tell you now is the least documented, least commented, code to date.
Related
I don't fully understand the complete development cycle and transition from general purpose boards to microcontroller-based serious industrial hardware.
Right now I use RPi or similar general purpose boards and follow this development process:
design hardware with SoC (RPi) in mind.
order/buy hardware
connect main board and peripherals
install OS (almost always Linux)
install libraries, applications, toolchain
create corresponding software with a previously installed toolchain
when the solution is working correctly, move hardware to an appropriate case.
deploy
It may include additional steps but the way I see it, everything is already designed, assembled and test before I even start my development. I only need to choose connect devices, connect wires and create a software. Software is mostly free.
The downside is that such solution lacks quality. I doubt hardware is able to withstand harsh industrial environment. It is also not small enough.
Now I am trying to dive into STM32/Quark/[any microcontroller] world. What I understood so far is:
buy a development board
create software
test
What confuses me is the part when you switch from dev. board to... What?
I mean dev. boards are not designed to be used in a final product, do they?
I guess a need a custom solution.
Do I need to design a custom electronic circuit, produce it by means of an external manufacturer and install my microcontroller and additional ICs there?
I see various presentation's of modern small-size CPUs and I what to know how to develop a device with them.
I want to get an understanding of a full development cycle of an IoT low-power device, but don't know to how to ask correctly.
This isn't really an answer, I don't have enough reputation to simply add a comment, unfortunately. The fact is, answering your question is not simple, there is lot to it. Even after four years of college in Electronic Engineering Technology it was hardly a scratch on what the "real world" is. One learns so much more in the workplace and it never stops.
Anyway, an couple comments.
Microcontrollers are not all equal thus they are not all equally suitable for every task. The development boards and the evaluation boards that are created for microcontrollers are also not all equal and may have focus on applicability to a certain market segment, i.e medical, automotive, consumer IoT, etc..
Long before you start buying a development or evaluation board you have to decide on what is the most appropriate microcontroller. And even, is a microcontroller actually the best choice? ASIC or FPGA? What kind of support chips are needed? How will they interface? Many chip manufactures provide reference designs that can be used a starting point but there are always multiple iterations to actually develop a product. And there is testing, so much testing that we have a "test engineers."
You list development steps is lacking greatly, first and foremost the actual specifications have to be determined for whatever product is being developed and from these specifications appropriate hardware is selected for evaluation. Cost is always a driving factor and so fitting the right device to the product and not going overkill is very important. A lot of time is spent evaluating possible products from their datasheets to determine what products seem to be the right fit. Then there are all the other factors such as the experience with the device/brand/IDE etc. All of that adds to cost of development plus much more.
You mention software(firmware) is free. No, software and firmware are never free. Someone has to develop it and that takes time and time is money. Someone has to debug it. Debugging takes time. Debugging hardware is expensive. Don't forget the cost of the IDE, commercial IDEs are not cheap and some are much more expensive than others and can greatly effect the cost to develop. Compare the cost of buying an IDE to develop for a Maxim Integrated MAXQ MCU to any of the multitude of AVR or ARM IDE choices. Last I checked there were only two companies making an IDE for the MAXQ MCUs. What resources are available to assist in your design you can use with minimal or no licensing fees? This is the tip of the iceberg. There is a lot to it, software/firmware is not "free."
So fast forward a year, you finished a design and it seems to pass all internal testing. What countries are you marketing in? Do you need UL, CE or other certifications? I hope you designed your board to take into account EMI mitigation. Testing that in-house isn't cheap, certification testing isn't either, and failing is even more costly.
These are a very, very, few things that seem to be often ignored by hobbyists and makers thinking they can up with the next best thing and make a killing in some emerging market.
I suggest you do a search on Amazon for "engineering development process", "lean manufacturing", "design for manufacturability", "design for internet of things", "engineering economics" and plan on spending some money to buy some books and time to read up on what the design process is from the various points of view that have to be considered.
Now maybe you mean to develop and deploy for your own use and cost, manufacturability, marketability and the rest are not so important to you. I still suggest you do some Amazon research and pick up some well recommended reading/learning material there that is pertinent to you actual goals. You may want to avoid textbooks, as they generally are more useful when accompanied with class lectures - plus they tend cost much more than the books written for the non-student.
Don't exclude the option of hiring the design and development of an idea out to a firm that specializes in it. It is expensive but is it more expensive than one-up in-house design and development? Probably not. How fast do you actually need your device? Will you lost if someone beats you to market? So many things to consider I could spend hours on this just pointing out things that may, or may not, even be relevant to you depending on what you actual goal is.
TL;DR There is a great deal to the design and development of a product be it marketed to consumers (such as IoT) or to industry. Specifications come first. The exact develop process is going to be influenced by the specifications. Your question cannot be easily answered and certainly not without knowing much more about your end goal. Amazon is a good source of books for really general questions like this.
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've been looking in to Nintendo DS development on behalf of my agency and begun using the devkitPro/libnds and PAlib, it seems ideal for our needs until we decide if it's a viable route for us and hopefully invest/apply for a development kit and licence.
My main concern is that, while developing and learning PAlib style is it possible to eventually take a project built in this fashion and have it licensed and published? I don't really want to invest a lot of time learning this to have to learn a completely different setup. Essentially I suppose is PAlib just for Homebrew? What do I need to learn for Retail development of DS games?
Many thanks,
Anton
No, PAlib based projects cannot be licensed and published. See also http://wiki.devkitpro.org/index.php/PAlib
Don't waste your time learning or using PAlib.
Unfortunately even just using properly supported homebrew libraries you'll still have a fair bit of work to do moving to commercial development.
To do retail development (i.e. to get paid for your product), you'll need to get a real dev kit from Nintendo. The homebrew dev kits do not necessarily work in the same way as the real one, and (most importantly) they don't have access to the real dev kit's libraries.
Thus, if you develop against the homebrew dev kit, you're going to have to learn an entirely new library (which probably works very differently) when you move to the real thing.
Now, that's not to say that the homebrew dev kits can't be useful - they are a way to get code running on a real DS. As long as everyone realizes that it's a throwaway prototype, perhaps that could be enough to convince someone to spring for a real dev kit. If you go this route, you'll at least have something of a spec (it should work like the prototype!).
I also would advise not mentioning to Nintendo that you did this. I'm not in the industry, but they are obviously antagonistic toward the homebrew scene - I'm unclear how they'll feel about developers who started out on homebrew.
I am thinking of going to the pragmatic studio iphone course, but am a little wary due to the price. I currently do contract work and therefore don't have a company that will pay the course costs for me, other than mine of course.
After travel, food, hotel and currency conversion the course runs up to over 3500.
Is it worth it?
I'm honestly not a fan of coding bootcamps or short duration courses in terms of cost/benefit.
If money wasn't an issue I would say go for it but since you are paying your own way and brought up the money aspect I'm going to assume that at least some consideration must be taken before dropping $3.5k.
I find that I can honestly absorb much more material and at greater depth by simply reading a book and attempting exercises or small projects myself. Certainly there are some tips & tricks that can be imparted to you through actual instruction that you might not glean right away from self-learning but those things won't be the bulk of the knowledge you have to learn.
These programs remind me of short duration certification bootcamps: expensive and of little substance. You have to be realistic, you are there for 4 days. You are going to learn how to setup the development environment, shown some canned examples that you follow along with illustrating the basics of the accelerometer, photos, and other iPhone basics.
Is that really worth it to you? To me, a serious professional developer would simply sit down with a few of the cocoa/iPhone books and start banging out some chapters on their time off.
So, in my opinion, save yourself some money and spend $90 bucks on some books and take a few days off work.
I hemmed and hawed about the BigNerd Ranch bootcamp and decided against it.
Classrooms are great, and you can really learn a lot, but I think I would benefit more from an advanced bootcamp for iPhone now vs one for newbies to the platform back them.
Knowing how stuff works makes it easier to learn how similar stuff works. Having a class on hardcore multi-threading, UI best practices, various networking patterns, and in-depth CoreAnimation...that is a bootcamp you could sell videos of, let alone pack to the rafters right now.
What I found was doing real projects and trying to make stuff teaches you far more than a classroom setting would, and faster. Get your hands dirty, and start making mistakes.
I personally have not been but I hear Bill Dudney is great. It sounds expensive but maybe you can right it off for tax purposes, that being said anytime you get a chance to learn something, it's probably worth it. If you think that you would like to make commercial iPhone apps, AND you think you can make at least $3500 dollars doing this, then I say go for it. If you think your just going to be doing this as a hobby or you think you'll make less than $3500 then I totally agree with Simucal.
P.S. Maybe you could write a tutorial on how to make iPhone apps after this. Also the networking section looks fun!
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.