|
Suspicious Dish posted:I mean, just a few years ago there was the hype with "cloud physics" and Crackdown 3 revolutionizing gaming. Now there's the hype with cloud gaming (Google Stadia). Complete dogshit imo, but hey, Google, find it out on your own dime.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
there are some games out there where the physics are an integral part of the game, and improvements in physics would improve the game directly (to a point) - kerbal space program comes to mind, maybe gmod. but these tend to be few and far between, and don't have aaa game budgets for physics r&dThermopyle posted:then why have graphics seen a lot of advancement? easy selling point. obviously very visual, easy to market in magazines and trailers and such
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:I wasn't saying that they would. one answer to that is that we *do* have advancement in physics engines -- soft-body dynamics are now doable real-time, as well as elastic materials. disney spent a lot of time modelling snow clumping physics systems for frozen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0kyDKu8K-k this is novel stuff. physics engines are a lot more stable, they can be networked with incredible stability and precision, and the modelling tools are much better now. cloth and ragdolls are now a core feature of games when they weren't 10 years ago. but the point is that there's no improvement where jon's looking, because what he wants to see is physics getting better in a way that impacts gameplay, and he's not going to find that, because as a core concept, a better physics engine does not magically improve gameplay. Suspicious Dish fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Dec 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 04:49
|
|
|
quote:Here's an example: remember those huge rotating gears in one of the early shareware levels of Duke Nukem 3D? Imagine if a general physics engine was controlling them instead of an animation loop. Suddenly the gears become more than just eye candy as one comes off its axle and rolls down the hall after you, Indiana-Jones style. Or imagine shooting a gear with a missile, causing it to roll down the hall and crush your friend who was about to frag you from behind! A real physics engine makes situations like these possible. This is from Chris Hecker, who wrote the timeless series that Havok based their research code off of. He also made incredible contributions to the character animation system in Spore, giving predictable weight and heft to player-designed procedural characters. He's put in the time and the effort and the research. But I think we can all look back at that first quote and laugh at how naive it was. The real world is not designed to make the most interesting spectacle happen, always. Games are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 04:59
|
|
|
boo_radley posted:Also, I knew Shift-JIS was a land of contrasts, but holy poo poo What are we supposed to get out of this tiny rear end picture of a graph
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 18:33
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:What are we supposed to get out of this tiny rear end picture of a graph eyestrain
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:then why have graphics seen a lot of advancement? Graphics are a way to both multiply the fun, and a very intuitive way to grasp the production value of a game, compared to "fun" which requires actual gameplay to understand. If the game is fun but looks like dogshit, you need a critical mass of people playing it to actually stand a chance, while you can toss a AAA-looking turd out there and get some takers just on looks alone. There's an implied correlation between production value and time spent on gameplay, which isn't necessarily accurate, but tends to get used as a simple proxy anyway. As far as multiplying the fun, high production values can affect immersion, which does a phenomenal job of making you want to continue playing. My best example for this is Elite: Dangerous. The gameplay itself eventually turned out to be shallow and repetitive, but the game FELT so good to play that I didn't care for far longer than I should have. Part of that was the graphics; it LOOKED really cool zooming around in your spaceship. Smuggling was one of the play styles in E:D, that involved going 5km out from the entrance to the rotating station (think 2001's Blue Danube scene), matching your orientation and rotation, firing your thrusters to max speed, then turning every system off and coasting. Turning off the systems wasn't just pressing a button, it was turning to the holigraphic menu to the side and tapping things off one by one. In addition to details about the stations, the ship traffic, etc as you came closer, you had ice crystals begin to form on your ship from the heat generating aspects being shut down. Once you passed the threshold (or as shortly before as you dared) you had to race to power up your thrusters, radiator, etc and turn and burn yourself to a stop before you smashed into the gorgeously decorated interior, then settle onto a raised landing pad to drop your cargo. All of this is easily doable via 1990s era 3D polygons, but if you tried selling someone on that today they'd just laugh at you. It's the exact same gameplay, but the immersion is ruined because the bar has risen so far over the last two decades that what was acceptable for Lucasarts's critically acclaimed Tie Fighter isn't acceptable today. You'd simply never be able to internalize the same way that the flat polyhedra floating around represented spaceships or space stations. If the ice forming on your cockpit appeared all at once as a texture swap and a crackling sound, it would feel foolish today (although it would be a state of the art detail in the 90s!) The ship controls being a holographic menu intuitively FEELS better than a flat panel which would have been the way to go then. And so on, and so on, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:then why have graphics seen a lot of advancement?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
I found the original https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shift_JIS#/media/File:JIS_and_Shift-JIS_variants.svg
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 22:53
|
|
|
It's JS, just select all the squares
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2019 23:10
|
|
|
I was gonna say just pick all except R3C1
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Kilson posted:I was gonna say just pick all except R3C1
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 03:15
|
|
|
e: nm
Jewel fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Dec 8, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:I said the same thing to somebody but they pointed out that box has a missing semicolon. Check 'em all. Isn't a semicolon optional in JS?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 07:08
|
|
|
That code seems to be pretty-printed output of a minimizer. The semicolons are only in places where they're needed to parse correctly on one line
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 07:42
|
|
|
It actually looks more like JS-form WebASM, which I think is what Mozilla first built a runtime for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 14:13
|
|
|
Not enough |0 around for that, I think?Kilson posted:Isn't a semicolon optional in JS? Yes, but the specifics are something of a horror.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Doesn’t JS still technically always need semicolons, it’s just that the engines will automatically insert them for you? (And won’t always insert them correctly?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
tankadillo posted:Doesn’t JS still technically always need semicolons, it’s just that the engines will automatically insert them for you? IIUC, the optional semicolon behavior has a standard now, but it was specifically designed to be backwards compatible with existing warts, so it's still a clusterfuck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
Kilson posted:Isn't a semicolon optional in JS? And semicolons at the end of function declarations, which is a bit weird.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 19:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
The Sleep call() is synchronous and if it internally uses a locking primitive that depends on the thread id it may cause a deadlock - you should review the code of Sleep() to make sure it's async safe just to be sure. /s
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 21:02
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:Yeah but they have semicolons on every line that isn't the last in a block. it's horrible style. "Semicolons on every line except the last in a block" is actually the official style in the Rust language
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
RPATDO_LAMD posted:"Semicolons on every line except the last in a block" is actually the official style in the Rust language That's how Pascal used to do it, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
RPATDO_LAMD posted:"Semicolons on every line except the last in a block" is actually the official style in the Rust language In rust semicolons separate statements rather than end statements. It's much like how commas work in most languages.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
Plorkyeran posted:In rust semicolons separate statements rather than end statements. It's much like how commas work in most languages. Okay, that's definitely Pascal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
redleader posted:there are some games out there where the physics are an integral part of the game, and improvements in physics would improve the game directly (to a point) - kerbal space program comes to mind, maybe gmod. but these tend to be few and far between, and don't have aaa game budgets for physics r&d Red Faction: Guerrilla, too
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
tankadillo posted:Doesn’t JS still technically always need semicolons, it’s just that the engines will automatically insert them for you? Yes - https://flaviocopes.com/javascript-automatic-semicolon-insertion/.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
When the interpreter gets confused you know you dun' goofed. Knowing all this, as per the article, why would anyone not just put the semicolons where needed, it's mind-boggling. It's simpler and clearer (for both the computer and the human reader) and therefore easier to read. But no, we gotta live on the edge.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
You show a lack of appreciation for modern programming orthodoxy, comrade. Semicolons are bad, and all heretics that advocate semicolons must be destroyed. Choose your opinions wisely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
RPATDO_LAMD posted:"Semicolons on every line except the last in a block" is actually the official style in the Rust language There's a little more to it than that. You omit the trailing semicolon if and only if you want the value of the expression to be returned from the enclosing block. If the enclosing block returns the unit type, then it's good style to have a training semicolon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
the js linter here is set up to error when you use a semicolon in a place that doesn't strictly need one i hate it
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
redleader posted:the js linter here is set up to error when you use a semicolon in a place that doesn't strictly need one Just write your code so every statement requires a semicolon, easy!
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
Gonna just litter this character everywhere that does literally nothing because uhhhh
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
Tanners posted:Gonna just litter this character everywhere that does literally nothing because uhhhh We were discussing semicolons, why are you all of a sudden complaining about people indenting their code?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
Semicolons or newlines, pick exactly one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
Also, semicolons-required or semicolons-forbidden, pick one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
Volguus posted:When the interpreter gets confused you know you dun' goofed. Knowing all this, as per the article, why would anyone not just put the semicolons where needed, it's mind-boggling. It's simpler and clearer (for both the computer and the human reader) and therefore easier to read. But no, we gotta live on the edge. there are exactly two situations in realistic code that will ever foil ASI: immediately using an array literal or an expression in parens on the next line, and putting return by itself on a line with the value you intend to return on the next line. i'm not saying omitting the semicolons is good, but you're very unlikely to run into those situations in practice, and the predominant auto-formatters have a slightly more sophisticated ASI model than the interpreter so they fix those problems by inserting a semicolon if it is indeed strictly necessary. however, if you're running it through a formatter, you could just have it stick a semicolon at the end of every statement anyway. ultimately the ASI wars are over, everyone just does whatever they prefer and then formats it in line with the rest of the codebase.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
CPColin posted:Also, semicolons-required or semicolons-forbidden, pick one. semicolons-only
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2019 22:52
|
|
