iDevGames Community-Built Game?

[Blacktiger]

I was wondering how many people here would be willing to collaborate on an iDevGames sponsored game. Something thought up and built up by the community and distributed as freeware to the mac community perhaps? (And no I hadn't asked Carlos about this yet, but hey if there is enough interest maybe he would be all for it!) If there is enough interest there will probably be a lot of conflicting ideas about what kind of game to make. We could handle that by having community votes.

[Corun]

There have been attempts at a community made game before. Mostly via the #idevgames chat room on irc.freenode.net.

The most recent was called "Factory Fury".

We encountered problems due to the fact that no-one really had enough time to devote to it. The other main problem was that OneSadCookie made us use ruby for it ;-).

Anyway, the moral is, that it sounds like a good idea on the drawing board, but it's not easy. Feel free to try, though, I'll certainly help if I have time, and it's not in ruby ;-).

[OneSadCookie]

We decided to do this on #idevgames a while ago, came up with the "Factory Fury" concept, created an IRC channel, subversion, even got some basic stuff working, but it died due to lack of time on the part of the major contributors.

Before that, there was Inkubator and the Hooptie project, which befell a similar fate...

Feel free to try again (or to try to revive Factory Fury or Hooptie), but be warned that this is not an undertaking that's particularly likely to succeed.

[wyrmmage]

sounds like a good idea to me...we'd want to make sure to have a very extensive, detailed design document and as up-to-date documentation as possible :)
I don't know how much I could help out, but I'd be happy to help whenever I have some spare time ^_^
-wyrmmage

[Blacktiger]

sounds like a good idea to me...we'd want to make sure to have a very extensive, detailed design document and as up-to-date documentation as possible :)

I think documentation is one of the keys to making a project like this successful. One of the things I've noticed with a lot of open source games is that a new programmer is expected to either read a lot of code to figure out the game, or ask one of the 'team experts'. If they just provided a few documents (such as the overall architecture in a diagram or to-do lists and more detailed explanations of each module), new programmers could quickly pick up an unfinished part of the game to contribute.

Also, it seems to me that using the forums to work on the design and control votes would allow newer people to just read through some of those posts to see why certain decisions were made, as well as to see how the game is progressing.

[unknown]

Hooptie was great I wish the code was still around.

[backslash]

I think the problem is that people are generally more interested in writing code than documenting it. Maybe if the game making tools/libraries competition happens, we could base a community project on some of the wonderful new stuff it produces.

[ThemsAllTook]

I think documentation is one of the keys to making a project like this successful. One of the things I've noticed with a lot of open source games is that a new programmer is expected to either read a lot of code to figure out the game, or ask one of the 'team experts'. If they just provided a few documents (such as the overall architecture in a diagram or to-do lists and more detailed explanations of each module), new programmers could quickly pick up an unfinished part of the game to contribute.
Keep in mind that you can't design everything up-front. Big Design Up Front (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Design_Up_Front) can look like an appealing way to develop software on the surface, but in the real world, it almost never works out. Agile software development (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development) tends to fare much better in my experience. Not to discourage writing any documents at all... Just be sure to keep them to a realistic scope. For a not-too-complex game, a few pages of description is probably plenty.

[BeyondCloister]

For a project were none of the team are very likely to ever meet face to face then some initial design and documentation would definitely be required.

Unless it was all to be discussed via voice communication then the chat room texts and other communications will go some way to providing some of this documentation.

The article about Agile Software development does mention the following which may causes issues for the development team format for iDevGames.

Agile methods emphasize real-time communication, preferably face-to-face, over written documents. Most agile teams are located in a bullpen and include all the people necessary to finish software. At a minimum, this includes programmers and their "customers" (customers are the people who define the product; they may be product managers, business analysts, or actual customers). The bullpen may also include testers, interaction designers, technical writers, and managers.


Also seeing as a big aim of this project would be for beginners / intermediates the following quote from the article is relevant:

Agile software development has been criticized because it will not bring about the claimed benefits when programmers of average ability use this methodology, and most development teams are indeed likely to be made up of people with average (or below) skills.

[unknown]

The only thing you need is a good idea, the rest is just details (or obstacles which can be easily overcome).

[wyrmmage]

eh....maybe, but that depends on how many programmers are working on the project. If its under three, you really do just need a good idea, but if its over that amount, things can become rather difficult (and people end up wasting a lot of time doing something that ends up not integrating well with another upgrade someone else is working on).
-wyrmmage

[FreakSoftware]

We decided to do this on #idevgames a while ago, came up with the "Factory Fury" concept, created an IRC channel, subversion, even got some basic stuff working, but it died due to lack of time on the part of the major contributors.

I prefer the term "on-hold." :rolleyes:

[OneSadCookie]

eh....maybe, but that depends on how many programmers are working on the project. If its under three, you really do just need a good idea, but if its over that amount, things can become rather difficult (and people end up wasting a lot of time doing something that ends up not integrating well with another upgrade someone else is working on).
-wyrmmage

"three" is fairly arbitrary, but you're definitely right that too many programmers spoil the broth. And (for better or worse) iDG is a community of programmers, so that's who pops up when you suggest "community projects".

How about running it differently -- Nut out a simple game design document, then split it into bite-size features, and each week, collectively decide on a feature to implement, but implement it in a code-base that's your own. Obviously you can share ideas, help each other, etc., even share code bases between steps, or work together on a feature for a particular step, but it ensures that language and style wars can't break out, and the number of programmers per project is low (~1).

[wyrmmage]

that would probably work pretty well, the only problem that I see with it is that it might become a problem when someone drops out of the project and we don't find about bugs in his/her code until after they're gone. Then fixing it (could) be a pain.
-wyrmmage

[diordna]

Thus demonstrating the importance of writing well-documented, well-structured code.

[Muskrat]

Hi iDevGames!

I just thought I'd relate my interest in this to everyone, I'd love to participate. Well, I'm pretty inexperienced at this whole game making thing so really I'd just like to watch other people participate and maybe I could learn something! (But I'm not a total noob; I'd like to try helping too.)

[OneSadCookie]

If somebody drops out, nobody's affected, because nobody else is using their code...

[Bjoernke]

I personally think that many developers doing their own projects to get a similar game is more of a contest then a collaboration effort, even if code sharing is possible/encouraged.

From my limited knowledge regarding collaborative efforts on the net (not face to face), only those concepts survive that have a clear vision, and a small sub group of the whole project clearly labelled head honchos (max 5-7 ppl for huge participant numbers). I'd suggest having 2 or 3 trusted peoples (because of possible sudden missing in action happenings) ideally in a democratic frame (can be voted off), to be leading the effort, not necessarily by doing code, but by doing everything else (homepage, non-code related documentation, rule setting, contact keeping, later on advertisement...).
If there are powers given to the "project leaders", it's possibly good to think of Montesquieu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Secondat_Montesquieu), and divide the powers into three parts, but we probably won't have enough people to warrant that.

As a non-c related language coder, I think I could try to do a head honcho as described above, but I am not feeling as being particularly part of the elite participants on idg, and don't know if people would see me as trustworthy.

Another good gauge about the possible longevity of a project is how well tasks are assigned, any project where no one feels responsible or involved will die within minutes.

Anyway If there's interest into such an approach, I could try to draft a "constitution" for a possible future idg community project.

[unknown]

so the big question is Does anyone have an idea for a game?
:p

[DoG]

so the big question is Does anyone have an idea for a game?
:p

<burp>MMOORORPG!</burp>

[diordna]

Well, I do, but I have this thing about keeping my ideas to myself until I can use them in contests. ;)

[FreakSoftware]

http://www.freaksw.com/wiki/index.php?FactoryFury

[skrew]

Maybe there should be a contest to decide what game to make based on a design document and/or mockups?

Personally, for a hobbyist collaborative effort, I believe that there are a few types of games that you can rule out:

Casual games, mostly because of their lack of depth for the longevity of the project
MMORPG's because of the logistics involved
Overly complex graphics engines, so that everyone can actually play the game
and perhaps overly voilent/extremely gory games as not all members are over age or find those types of games tasteful

[BeyondCloister]

A casual game would be the better option for the following reasons:

* It would let people see how the whole collaborative project worked.
* Better chance of getting something finished.
* Useful for other people to pick up and take in their own direction.
* A nice warm up act for a more in depth game for the team to work on next.

[igame3d]

Casual games, mostly because of their lack of depth for the longevity of the project


Casual games are THE market. Electronic Arts is switching its focus from games that take four years, teams of dozens, and $50 Million to small casual games, with tight groups and only $7 Million budgets.

Casual games should be the focus, something that is going to grab any gamer and give them a five minute thrill before they get caught by their boss.

Priority should definately not be set on pleasing everyone everywhere, unless there is a plan to sell this game, then you target the masses, with Nintendo-esque fluff and cheese.

What the hell does "not all members are over age" mean?
Over age for what?
The discussion is games, not porn and snuff films.

There is no rating system for video games, except the ESRB and whatever Europe has, and we are not signatories to any of that.

Just put robots in and ramp up the carnage.....
ooh giant robot fighting game, Rampage meets Mortal Kombat meets Transformers.

There are zero good fighting games on the Mac, except maybe that ragdoll thing.

Robo-doll-Rampage...hmmm.

[AnotherJake]

Casual games are worth a LOT more than programmer geeks tend to think (including myself). I have to constantly remind myself that according to the numbers, Tetris sells, whether I like it or not (I still cringe to think about more Tetris though). Here's a good article on it:

http://news.com.com/Casual+games+get+serious/2100-1043_3-6071465.html

[wyrmmage]

a casual game is just about the only thing that I would consider for a starting community project. A casual project would allow for everything to be rough around the edges, if we needed it to be. Major design mistakes could be maded and corrected without causing months of work to be lost.
On the other hand, if we had a really in-depth game, it might make people feel more involved......I dunno... :blink:
-wyrmmager

[backslash]

The sort of smaller game that doesn't require masses of content to be created is more likely to get finished. And there's nothing to stop the community moving onto grander projects later. Perhaps having one or two little games completed would help to make everyone feel like the team can actually get things done and help to give people a sense of achievement. It would also act as a test run so that we could sort out how the whole thing was supposed to run.

[skrew]

Casual games are THE market. Electronic Arts is switching its focus from games that take four years, teams of dozens, and $50 Million to small casual games, with tight groups and only $7 Million budgets.

Casual games should be the focus, something that is going to grab any gamer and give them a five minute thrill before they get caught by their boss.

Priority should definately not be set on pleasing everyone everywhere, unless there is a plan to sell this game, then you target the masses, with Nintendo-esque fluff and cheese.

What the hell does "not all members are over age" mean?
Over age for what?
The discussion is games, not porn and snuff films.

There is no rating system for video games, except the ESRB and whatever Europe has, and we are not signatories to any of that.

Just put robots in and ramp up the carnage.....
ooh giant robot fighting game, Rampage meets Mortal Kombat meets Transformers.

There are zero good fighting games on the Mac, except maybe that ragdoll thing.

Robo-doll-Rampage...hmmm.

I'll probably get flamed more for this, but i personally think casual games are the death of video games as we know it. the more casual a game becomes the more simplistic the game play becomes and the focus is on eye catching special effects. Casual games deliver to an expanding audience of non-game playing people, and gamers alike, mostly in a profit based enterprise.

By not being overage i was giving an example as to when making a community based project you would have to do it in such a way that people aren't going to be offended by it for whatever reason.

Sure maybe you just do want to make a casual game and give someone a 5 minute thrill, but is that really a video game? maybe I'm thinking on too grand of a scale here or I'm not quite clear on what you classify as a casual game.

[aarku]

Let's focus this on the topic at hand, please.

[igame3d]

Sure maybe you just do want to make a casual game and give someone a 5 minute thrill, but is that really a video game? maybe I'm thinking on too grand of a scale here or I'm not quite clear on what you classify as a casual game.

I think you need to do some research on casual games.
Here's a version tracker search specifically games tagged as 'casual'. (http://www.versiontracker.com/php/qs.php?mode=basic&action=search&str=casual+game&srchArea=macosx&submit=Go)
And of course the ubiquitous wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casual_games) on them. Freeverse (http://www.freeverse.com/games/) has built their empire on casual games.
Also look at what iTunes is offering for games. (http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/games/)

As was mentioned Tetris is a casual game, you can pick it up and put it down randomly.
The investment is immediate, you don't have to read a bunch of documentation or search the web for a walkthrough,
most of the time you don't even have to the read or reset keyboard controls.

Nintendo Wii comes with default casual games, a quick fix of video game fun, relative to Nintendo's fans ideas on fun.

Think back to the arcades, if you are old enough.
One quarter, one five minute rush of adrenaline and either you got addicted or you moved on to the next machine.

Simple gameplay should be a goal. I don't know how many times I download the latest mac game and it
requires a thorough reading of the documentation to even find out if the game is going to be any fun, so it goes in the trash.

A game that is simple does not necessarily mean it is bad.
Look at the Marathon series and its Halo children, generally any popular FPS.
There is no complexity to this, you run, you shoot, you kill, you dodge, you pick stuff up and flip switches.
Thats it, nothing more.

Mini Golf games are wildly popular. Whats the gameplay?
Hit the ball in a hole, avoid obstacles. What makes one golf game or FPS game better than the last?
Graphics, simple non frustrating controls, and environmental variety.
Like books and movies FPS require strong character arcs and excellent Plot to stand out.

Any iDevgames colloboration should be a game that can be made in 21 to 90 days or less like the previous contests.
A great game can be expanded on, a game that has taken too long to develop will burn people out on the whole concept
and then it will be another five years before people even consider it again, always pointing to their last mass failure,
like the mantra that is repeated about Inkubator.

By the way, I'm not exactly a fan of these casual games (especially tetris, golf, and sort the colored tokens),
but I've been keeping my teeth on the pulse of the industry. Casual games are the market that is bringing
in increasing amounts of cash, while large complicated games are sucking resources and burning out developers.

[PowerMacX]

I'll probably get flamed more for this, but i personally think casual games are the death of video games as we know it. the more casual a game becomes the more simplistic the game play becomes and the focus is on eye catching special effects.

Counter example: http://www.handdrawngames.com/DesktopTD/Game.asp
(apparently highly successful (http://gigaom.com/2007/05/27/desktop-tower-defense/))

What I like:
1. Little effort involved in the creation of game assets (graphics, sounds)
2. Follows the "Easy to learn, hard to master" motto
3. Fun :)

[unknown]

i personally think casual games are the death of video games as we know it.

So you don't mind seeing microsoft putting in-game adverts in the latest hollywood blockbusters produced FPS game?

[BeyondCloister]

i personally think casual games are the death of video games as we know it. the more casual a game becomes the more simplistic the game play becomes and the focus is on eye catching special effects.

Where as the non casual games are not pushed forward by more fancy graphics engines requiring more powerful and expensive video cards that require replacing your entire computer.

Yet again it is time to call on the Nintendo proof that graphics are not the main drive for casual games.


Let's focus this on the topic at hand, please.

I think the debate on the pros and cons of the subject game are going to go on and on until someone steps in and says the project kicks off as of now, this is the website for it, this is the IRC channel for it and first task is select the game idea from A,B and Z.

[diordna]

Submit game ideas to me via PM. I will make a web site.

IRC channel will be #idggroupgame on irc.freenode.net.

Happy? :)

[igame3d]

Submit game ideas to me via PM. I will make a web site.


Thats kind of an odd request, coming from the guy who selfishly keeps his game ideas to himself in the hopes of being competitive with his peers.

I'm just cracking your marbles.

[aarku]

I think the debate on the pros and cons of the subject game are going to go on and on until someone steps in and says the project kicks off as of now, this is the website for it, this is the IRC channel for it and first task is select the game idea from A,B and Z.I agree. I just didn't want the discussion to shift to an overly lengthy tangent about the specifics of casual games, and it didn't. Yet. I think the focus should be on game ideas and plans and we should forget about labeling something as a casual game or not.

[wyrmmage]

well, we currently have 60% of the people saying yes, which seems like a high enough amount to get started on something :)
-wyrmmage

[unknown]

We gotta use chimpmonk physics in whatever we make yeah?:D

[Blacktiger]

I'm going to suggest the following 6-step process:

1. Determine some candidates for project leaders. Nominations should be made via a forum post (under a topic such as "Candidates") and the person nominated must agree that they would be willing to spend time doing "administrative" work.

2. Following nominations, project leaders will be voted on. I would suggest allowing people to cast multiple votes and then picking the top 2 or 3.

3. A mini-contest for the game idea should be run, the winning idea will be determined by another forum vote or by some panel selected by the project leaders.

4. A new topic for hashing out the idea fully should be created. Project leaders are responsible for ensuring appropriate documentation is generated.

5. A new topic for discussing the architecture of the software should be created. As with #4, project leaders are responsible for documentation.

6. At this point, the project leaders should divide the project into a set of small, but easily accomplished features and divvy them up amongst the coders, graphics artists, etc.

In this way, we have a small group of people that choose the vision for the project, but everyone has a say. New people can join the project due to the documentation and all of the forum posts that are archived. Also, there are only a couple of people to go to if you want to be involved in the project. The project leaders don't even have to do all that much work except possibly in the design phase.

[diordna]

That sounds like a bit too much bureaucracy and hullabaloo. I propose the following.
-New forum is made, ideas submitted in a topic and then voted on after a week.
-Leaders nominate themselves in another topic and are also voted on, during the same week.
-A wiki should be made for the game design, which will be let loose for another week.
-Leaders will refine the design, then dish out roles based on skills and volunteering.

All structure and administration beyond that should be determined by project leaders, of which there should be ~3.

Until the creation of the forum, #idggroupgame is where the party's at.

[unknown]

ok heres an idea,
it would be good to make somthing you can 1) get working fast and 2) make scriptable + a level editor for early on, so people without years of programming experience can contribute significantly.

so I came up with, 2d sidescroller..
You are being chased so use the environment around you + physics to get away or trap the monsters chasing you.

any thoughts?


edit: we should also probably have discussion in #idevgames because people will have to join one less channel and somthing like this could really improve the SNR ;)

[Muskrat]

Sounds fun. Something like a mix of Super Mario and Hapland?

And I agree that a simple idea will get the most progress and enjoyment out of this sort of project. I wasn't around when Factory Fury was being developed, but it looks pretty complicated and intimidating.

[diordna]

I PMed Carlos about a subforum.

I like unknown's idea, and another one I had was a shmup of some sort with very modularized internals, so less-experienced coders could try their hand at writing new powerups and enemies without needing knowledge of the rest of the system.

[Bjoernke]

I propose we should just start with a vote on 3 people, and then these will devise the further path, and put that one to public reviewing. That way, people can discuss the proposal, and it can be changed, or redone. But right now everyone is just shooting into his own direction (sometimes even into the back of others), and we'll be discussing until the internet collapses.

I also think that any "structural" steps like homepage, chat channel, wiki, etc. should be left for after this first step, which can be done easily within the existing idg channel and the general forum. Same goes for game style/kind/technology.

I suggest this approach:
Voting will start next week, with the following rules:

First topic: People can announce their availability to be voted as "project starter group" members for one week.
Then a second topic: People can use the build in poll system to vote for one of those for one week.

After that, the 3 people with the most votes will first set a not too distant date, until which they'll give out a structural proposal, about how future decision making steps are to be taken. (Including structural and organisational stuff, but not about the game topic itself).
The proposal will be commented by everyone, and the 3 people will change it according to that. (repeat as necessary).

One problem with this is slowness, and possibly a more rigid structure for the project. But in my opinion, that's just the way communities work, and if it works to set the rules for a state, it's good enough for us.

If no one has gigantic reservations against this, I (or someone else) can start the first threat next sunday.

If you do have reservations, please comment directly on the shortcomings you see. That way, we can come to a solution within our lifetimes, instead of just arguning one of the following points (or all of them) over and over:

This is too formal/casual
You always did <bad stuff> in the far distant past
This isn't gonna fly anyway
I want a rpg/fps/tbs/casual game/noncasual game/mmorpgssuxsoiammentioningthemeverytimeandeverywher e
Let's use my least/most favourite technology
Why don't we use a similar but in small details different approach just because I say so.

note: the list above is exaggerated on purpose, and not meant to devalue you, your opinion, or your will to participate. :love:

[Skorche]

To those who replied yes: How many of those were conditional yeses? I think it could be fun, but there is a small subset of the all possible idea that I would be interested in working on.

I think a sandbox style game might work the well. Anyone play incredible machine back in the day? Maybe something like that but more generalized in that you can build your own pieces within the game.

[Zwilnik]

Something that might be a practical project if there are a lot of people wanting to do different things could be a Mario Party or Super Bishi Bashi style game which is a group of linked mini-games. Bishi Bashi is ideal as it uses a bunch of almost random graphics so it's not critical to have one unified graphical style if you've got a bunch of artists with differing styles.

In theory you can split off groups of mini-games to different coder-artist-designer groups and glue them together with another game or UI.

[diordna]

I dunno, I think that would take away from the "team" aspect of it. But that's something to be discussed after a basic structure is formed.

I'm going to start a two threads, one for game ideas and one for self-nominations. I will start week-long polls the following week to vote on them.

[unknown]

I think there should be someone in charge of the direction of the project, the result of the project and the people in the project, and I also think there should be someone else to go to for technical details, formats, coding styles etc.

(For the record, bracket styles have zero effect on readability and anyone who claims they do should get better glasses. Indentation on the other hand...)

getting caught up on "technical details, formats, coding styles etc." would be a bad thing, best to not mandate that.

[ThemsAllTook]

Moved unknown's post from the self-nominations thread (http://www.idevgames.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14195).

This thread is for nominations only. Use the original participation poll thread for discussion.

[Najdorf]

I think the only way this could work is if everyone can do his one piece quite independently from others. So many mini games linked together somehow (like say, using one same character that appears in all the different games and progresses into some kind of story) to make "the game" could be interesting.

What about "Rob da killa blob"? :D

btw i propose shareware to get some bucks to iDG

[Bjoernke]

So, how many administrators does a community project need? What would be each administrators area of administering? How would the community get rid or change the area of an administrator, if it desires so?

[diordna]

We're not trying to start a small country here. I think you're overthinking things. All we need is one project lead, one head coder, and one art director. Roles could easily be combined. We have odd skill sets here, no need to limit people to one area.

The source will be open. If the community doesn't like someone, all they have to do is fork and leave him in the mud.

[Bjoernke]

Three leads sounds nice, and sharing all responsibility, while having clear roles seems a good idea too. However, I am not so sure about the forking thing. Most likely the project would just die if there's too much personal friction between the wrong people. Experimenting is nice to me, but some people might be dissapointed, depending on the outcome. We'll see how it turns out...

[wyrmmage]

I'd suggest that we make the game cross-platform as well? Might be a good exercise for everyone :)
-wyrmmage

[AnotherJake]

I'd suggest that we make the game cross-platform as well? Might be a good exercise for everyone :)
-wyrmmage
I think that is a bad idea for a few reasons:

1) It limits development to avoiding exclusively Apple APIs, which can complicate some things. One example: it's easier to use Quartz to draw fonts than it is to build a FreeType class to do it instead.
2) There are enough development decisions to make at every corner, and having to choose what would be an optimal API for cross-platform this feature or that feature will definitely brew some heated discussions. First thing everyone will say is to go with SDL, which is fine, but will help no one who wants to learn how to do it the `Apple' way.
3) Being as how I've done some cross-platform game development myself, I personally think it is much less fun than just going straight Apple.
4) Not that games shouldn't be cross-platform, but this is a *Mac* development forum so I don't see anything wrong with choosing Mac-only for a community project.
5) I don't think making it cross-platform as an `exercise' would justify the extra hassle. I think just getting the simplest game finished as a community project is exercise enough!

...I can't *wait* to see the language debates for this project. :rolleyes:

For the record, I put my vote in as being pure Cocoa all the way. For one, I like it. And two, it seems to be the least contentious language/API around here.

[diordna]

Eh, I'm in favor of using C. It's simpler. I assure you that Joseph Duchense agrees with me, though he may wish to speak for himself. But if people want Obj-C, then it's Obj-C.

As long as things are encapsulated, cross-platform or not shouldn't be a big issue. If you keep platform-specific things in their own little boxes, then to make things cross-platform will only require overhauling those pieces that directly interact with the system.

[Blacktiger]

True, but if the language chosen is objective-c then the game can't really be cross-platform.

[unknown]

I think we should code this in Ruby or something that isn't C or Objective C, although of course a little of of Objective C is probably required for getting the Cocoa app stuff together, and Chipmonk is in C but theres bindings for various other languages.

If we chose to do this in C 20% of development time would be spent debugging and tracking down memory faults, and the final product would have various crash bugs etc..

Ruby would be a better choice because you'd be able to code faster (don't have to recompile every build) there's already chipmonk bindings for it, everyone can already program in ruby (whether you think you can or not) and you would be separating out all the game specific stuff from OS specific stuff (ala OneSadCookies game shell), so the chances of making a windows or linux build are much higher.

edit: but I honestly think it would be best to totally ignore any ideas of cross platformness, just make it good on mac then if someone wants it on another OS they can port it.. instead of making OS interaction things (prefs, load/save etc) kinda horrid on all systems.

[BeyondCloister]

When deciding on APIs and stuff like a factor must be if the aim is to actually sell the game. The reason I mention that is often I see posts saying to use x,y or z when someone asks what to use. I then see posts saying that x,y and especially z are no good for commercial release.

Seeing as a lot of people here plan to release a commercial game at some point it would be best to go for something that can do just that.

[ThemsAllTook]

If we chose to do this in C 20% of development time would be spent debugging and tracking down memory faults, and the final product would have various crash bugs etc..
If we decide to go with the C family, it might be possible to solve this problem with a few coding standards and a bit of coaching where needed. I write in C all the time, and it's extremely rare for me to have any memory leaks, and I usually only crash in experimental code. I we had, say, a wiki page that laid out some very specific practices for allocating and deallocating things, and some general tips on memory management, we could have everyone read it before they started coding on the project, and potentially sidestep a whole lot of memory bugs.

[Blacktiger]

Personally, I'd like to use Ruby because while I ran through some tutorials and stuff, I have yet to get my hands dirty with the language. One of the other nice things about Ruby is the Ruby-Cocoa Bridge, so we could even do os-specific things through Ruby.

[diordna]

I've changed my mind. Ruby has my support. I hadn't remembered it before.

I have the same reasons as Blacktiger.

[Skorche]

For what it's worth, I've been working on a 2D MVC style scenegraph for Ruby that integrates nicely with Chipmunk. If it's ready by the time the project gets underway, I'd be happy to share.

While you could use C to program the higher level stuff in C, I really have to ask why you would want to in this day and age? While I agree that memory management in C isn't as bad as some would have you believe, it's still tedious and annoying. I myself find a hybrid Ruby/C approach to be far more efficient.

I'm not actually a fan myself, but what about Lua? Don't we have more people here with lua programming/embedding skills?

[mac_girl]

I'll be so surprised if you all manage to actually build and complete a game together ^_^'

[Blacktiger]

I'll be so surprised if you all manage to actually build and complete a game together ^_^'

:shock:

:(

:cry:

[Joseph Duchesne]

I'll be so surprised if you all manage to actually build and complete a game together ^_^'


It's happened before... but never on purpose :ninja:

I wouldn't mind trying ruby either. It could be fun.

I suggested C simply because it seems like a common denominator. Most experienced programmers have touched on it at least a bit, if just to learn Obj-C or C++. That said, I think that a scripting language or something like that would be great for flexible game development. I'm used to Lua myself, but I'm always interested in learning new things. *goes off to wikipedia Ruby*

Edit: I now oficially dislike ruby. That said, I'm working on that. Initial perceptions of programming languages are often wrong. (EG: BASIC=Good, C=Bad)

[igame3d]

Haha, beat up by a girl, you guys are officially nerds.