|
I see Python all the time in games, especially because it's the better default Maya scripting language. I know a lot of tech artists have been fiddling with PyMel recently, which fixes a lot of the problems of working in Maya with Python.
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
Python is the defacto language of choice for tools guys (tech artists and tools programmers writing ancillary tools like build scripts, etc). LUA is used more for in-game scripting and UI.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
Let's be clear that we mean Python 2 and not 3.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:Python never really caught on. Because the CPython VM has a bunch of gross and nasty global state, and to fix it they would have to rewrite the whole thing. Lua (and mruby, the "new" ruby interpreter) did it right by requiring you, the programmer, to manually request synchronizing multiple VM instances. Which sucks, because a small lua-like python interpreter would own, if only because it would let me identify people who have conniptions about tabs vs spaces. In other news, the word gnarly has entered the general vocabulary of my office. Mission Accomplished. 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
SAHChandler posted:In other news, the word gnarly has entered the general vocabulary of my office. Mission Accomplished. I did that but with the word 'boosh.' All I had to do was write it as dialogue for a new character and have everyone listen to it for a week and a half too 
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
Sion posted:I did that but with the word 'boosh.' All I had to do was write it as dialogue for a new character and have everyone listen to it for a week and a half too
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
Got my ticket allocation for E3 finally. Last minute, to be sure, but I might have a spare ticket or two for a goon if you're just dying to get in...
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
GetWellGamers posted:Got my ticket allocation for E3 finally. Last minute, to be sure, but I might have a spare ticket or two for a goon if you're just dying to get in... I have not received any feedback on my tickets other then, we got your industry creds. No approval or denial. I'd love to be able to get in and am happy to help work your booth if you need it, my company cancelled their booth this year so I'm pretty free. Also, I have a recruiter friend looking for a manager/director of payments and fraud at a game company in Austin, PM me if you know anyone or are interested.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
SAHChandler posted:In other news, the word gnarly has entered the general vocabulary of my office. Mission Accomplished. I've been seeding "Rad" at work as well after I've started with the affirmative response to a job request as "Cool" and hearing that being used as a thanking response too. I'm gonna have a harder time seeding "Catastratunity" and "Fuckeulogy", mind you...
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
Since a few QA overuse the word, "literally" has become a thing in our office, along with substituting it with like words, such as "medically", "historically", "metaphysically" and "metaphorically".
Irish Taxi Driver fucked around with this message at 22:21 on May 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
I can't imagine a single instance where a QA report would need the word "Literally" except as a spelling error.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
GetWellGamers posted:I literally can't imagine a single instance where a QA report would need the word "Literally" except as a spelling error. I can. I can imagine plenty.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Need, though. There's nowhere in QA you would need to use the word, much less to such excess it becomes memetic.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:My main piece of advice: never leave in the middle of game development. Word will get around and nobody wants to hire the AI guy who will quit when the long days kick in. The only exception is if it's clear the company is going under, but then everyone else is leaving anyway Not sure if you're joking with this or not, so just in case... If you have a reason to leave, leave. (Better job, more pay, to join buddies, to move to an area you like more, whatever--they're all good reasons depending on your needs and circumstances.) Giving two weeks is always a good idea, as has been mentioned, but leave at whatever point in the dev cycle you feel like leaving. If you're really key to the team, and can do it, then give a bit more notice, but "this is a crucial time in development because X, Y, and Z" doesn't hold any water. "the middle of game development" could be literally (heh) years, and sticking around could be a very poor choice.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:30
|
|
|
GetWellGamers posted:I can't imagine a single instance where a QA report would need the word "Literally" except as a spelling error. Oh sorry it wasn't a QA report, it was feedback meetings were we'd discuss play experiences. aas Bandit posted:"the middle of game development" could be literally (heh) years, and sticking around could be a very poor choice. Metaphorically. Foster and I keep going back and forth in meetings with stuff to replace "Literally" with. Irish Taxi Driver fucked around with this message at 23:35 on May 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
Irish Taxi Driver posted:stuff to replace "Literally" with. For real bro.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
GetWellGamers posted:Need, though. There's nowhere in QA you would need to use the word, much less to such excess it becomes memetic. Observe.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
aas Bandit posted:For real bro. At least in MP? Is it prevailent in SP as well? I dunno if its metaphorically the whole office, I don't get down to SP often.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:46
|
|
|
aas Bandit posted:Not sure if you're joking with this or not, so just in case... Yeah, as long as you don't just straight up disappear with no notice and make a modicum of effort to ease the transition, you're not going to be black balled from the industry for leaving in the middle of development. Now, your coworkers might try to guilt you into staying because they don't want to have to find someone else, but remember that 1) studios lay people off all the time 2) your coworkers will be assholes if they try to make you choose them over your own career.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:46
|
|
|
aas Bandit posted:"the middle of game development" could be literally (heh) years, and sticking around could be a very poor choice. Agreed. This also plays into that guilt trip nonsense of newer guys who go through the thought process that working hard equaling working long hours. Most of the time those guys going crazy with long hours aren't really doing much with that extra time aside from burning out. If you see an opportunity then take it. Give your 2 weeks+ notice and go with it. Don't ever let that sort of thought process mess with your job prospects. Don't be that guy that feels like the company owes him since he was the last one out the door. This already happening now with all the bombs going off lately in VFX land so it's pretty common(hello Rhythm and Cues skeleton crew!).
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
I appreciate all the advice. I pulled the trigger this morning and it went surprisingly well. Most were sad to see me go, some a bit envious, and a couple begged for me to take them with me. My direct boss wanted to ask the owners to counter but there was no way they could even come close to matching. They are already giving me poo poo about leaving/abandoning them (in a joking way, not serious). So my first quitting experience could be considering "good".
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 00:00
|
|
|
Jan posted:Observe. FFFFFFFFFFF 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
GetWellGamers posted:FFFFFFFFFFF Thats also a great one. I love repro rates and repro percentages for holes in the geometry and other static stuff. What happened 12% of the time where you didn't see the hole?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
Jan posted:Observe. Hey HEY. ...I might be guilty of using this in every bug I write. Every. Bug.  (not literally) D1Sergo fucked around with this message at 01:15 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
Jan posted:Observe. That's literally the most unnecessary word to put in a bug report. 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
.
D1Sergo fucked around with this message at 01:13 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
"Observe" doesn't mean poo poo unless you say exactly what the drat problem is. If you say "Observe the particle effect of character x's sword not appearing during the boss cuscene" I will avoid smashing your skull like a cadbury creme egg foolishly held aloft by an annoying relative, but at that point why not just write "The particle effect on character x's sword does not appear during the boss cuscene"? This is not one of those "I Spy" puzzle games, jackass, just tell me what the problem is!
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Jan posted:Observe. I loving hate it when QA noobs use that. Observe. WELL OF COURSE they are expecting the result of the bug, explain what is happening you dumbass! I am repeating because boy do I love doing regressions. Especially ones with hosed up directions and then that loving word appears in the report. Sometimes I wanted to slap them upside the head with my lightsaber.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
Yo yo yo, hold your horses y'all, this a teachable moment. Not picking on D1 here. For any lurkers, here's why observe is less than ideal. Bug reporting is basically the same as technical writing with a much lower word count. You're trying to communicate a complex subject in a short time frame to someone who needs to learn that information and act on it quickly, usually within the span of a few minutes from when they start reading your ticket. If your tickets route through a producer or lead before they land in an engineer's or artist's queue, you have to make it understandable by more than one audience. This means your writing has to be not only succinct but concrete, since it will have a direct effect on how your ticket is prioritized, and everyone on the team wants that decision to be accurate. You also, personally, want that information to point to if a bug gets waived during crunch and a month later, some producer comes breathing down your neck about why it escaped into the final build by way of emails to the entire department, including your boss, and your boss's boss. (Not that I'm bitter, but I had the documentation to back me up.) In turn, this means you can't make a lot of assumptions about what you're communicating. What you think might be obvious in your screengrab might not be to someone who's been cranking for 14 hours straight. Or there might be two bugs in that same screengrab, and the one you're intending to point out with 'observe' isn't the same one the dev sees. This then turns into Ticket Pong because of a misunderstanding. I get that this is a habit, and lots of QA departments trained it into their staff, but it's really un-necessary. Instead, just put in a results section, and concretely describe what happens after you perform the repro. This can even double as your summary if it's short enough!
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:16
|
|
|
Observe this rad dude literally typing a wall of text about QA procedures. Boosh.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
... gently caress, I kind of get it. My bug Repro: 1. Set up thing 2. Press the button 3. Observe what happens when the character reaches point B Result: Problem A occurs Better bug: Repro: 1. Set up thing 2. Press the button Result: When the character reaches point B, Problem A occurs D1Sergo fucked around with this message at 01:26 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:22
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:Observe this rad dude literally typing a wall of text about QA procedures. Boosh. Sometimes I get lonely because I work freelance by myself at home all day, but then I remember people at the workplace who went out of their way to talk like this and I realize how beneficial this current situation is for my blood pressure.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:44
|
|
|
SUPER HASSLER posted:Sometimes I get lonely because I work freelance by myself at home all day, but then I remember people at the workplace who went out of their way to talk like this and I realize how beneficial this current situation is for my blood pressure.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
Shindragon posted:I loving hate it when QA noobs use that. Observe. WELL OF COURSE they are expecting the result of the bug, explain what is happening you dumbass! I've grown to sort of, maybe, kinda understand the whole "observe" thing. If the title of the bloody bug is "The NPC T-Poses when ..." Then writing "Notice how the NPC T-Poses" again at the bottom of the bug's description feels redundant as hell. Considering that a) we keep telling QA to use "good" English and be concise, b) Bug entering interfaces almost always have the bug's title right next to the description, unlike the bug reading interfaces. It's no wonder newer QA guys try and find a way to avoid sounding like a repeating idiot. That being said, for many testers, it grows into a very bad habit very quickly.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
Aramis posted:I've grown to sort of, maybe, kinda understand the whole "observe" thing. If the title of the bloody bug is "The NPC T-Poses when ..." Then writing "Notice how the NPC T-Poses" again at the bottom of the bug's description feels redundant as hell. See, I find nothing wrong with this. Think of it like a five-paragraph essay. You have your introductory statement, the evidence, and then the conclusion re-states the introduction drawing on the evidence. If your summary is "X Happens when you do Y", then at the end of repro explaining how you get Y to happen, saying "After you do Y, X will happen" seems like a nice finisher to the (hopefully) logical progression of steps you've outlined. Edit: Why'd you remove that? It was a perfectly valid post. 
GetWellGamers fucked around with this message at 02:03 on May 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
D1Sergo posted:... gently caress, I kind of get it. Yeah the first one is problematic because #3 conveys no useful information. You're telling me to observe something, which is meaningless if I'm not already playing the game trying to repro your bug, and if I am, you don't need to remind me that I should be looking for your bug because that's what I'm already doing anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
GetWellGamers posted:Why'd you remove that? It was a perfectly valid post. I realized they had a point regarding the word "observe" so I changed my tact, that's all. I have a bad habit of chronic post-editing 
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 03:34
|
|
|
I guess I don't really give a poo poo if the bug says observe. I do like having sufficient details, however. I've been getting some lovely bugs. Here is the worst thing ever: Getting a bug back as "not fixed" because of some other completely unrelated issue. I.E. "the sound effect still failed to play because the game crashed" or whatever. gently caress.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
baby puzzle posted:I guess I don't really give a poo poo if the bug says observe. I do like having sufficient details, however. I've been getting some lovely bugs. I keep getting bugs back within 5 minutes of me marking them fixed. You didn't get a new build yet! what are you doing offsite QA
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
Irish Taxi Driver posted:I keep getting bugs back within 5 minutes of me marking them fixed. You didn't get a new build yet! what are you doing offsite QA
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2013 04:48
|
|