Visual, How Visual is Visual?

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Fri May 08, 2009 3:45 pm

[quote="Psmith":rfg66k44]It seems that those who initially "invented" programming conventions didn't spend much time thinking about what words really mean in English[/quote:rfg66k44]
Quite the opposite. Engineers spend much time considering what would be an accurate name for their inventions and concepts. For example, 'variables' sure is a better one than 'remembers', to be honest.

Also, using some terms directly from programming and the industry is a benefit for some people who want to move up to programming languages, who then already know some basic concepts. Finally, if you insist Construct's terminology is confusing or nondescriptive (which I have tried to show it is not, by comparing to a real programming language), then maybe there is another program out there you can go use like Kodu or Popfly. You don't have to use Construct if you don't like it, it's not like we're losing a sale or anything.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,946
Reputation: 178,528

Post » Fri May 08, 2009 3:49 pm

[quote="Psmith":56igxqot]And, from what I can gather, most of you are not even programmers, yet, for some reason you are attracted to the use of non-descriptive and counter intuitive terminology and structure. Many of you admit that you have failed to grasp "modern" programming languages, and that is why you have come here to learn Construct - which maintains that same programming paradigm that has given you such fits. Quite a dilemma for you, I should think.[/quote:56igxqot]

It isn't the names for stuff that was confusing, it was the crazy syntax and unwritten rules about how the code needs to be arranged, and lots of that underlying stuff that Ashley mentioned. All the random symbols everywhere interspersed with the text of the code, the way the code needed to be formatted, etc is what threw me off. The concepts I understood easily. Getting them to work, I did not.

[quote:56igxqot]This statement assumes that because the industry uses this standard of terminology that it automatically makes it the "best and most suitable". For whom, I might ask?[/quote:56igxqot]

People have been using the concept/term "variable" for at least hundreds/thousands of years. If you'd rather call it something else, then you have an issue with the very concept of language itself. Not even Einstein could have convinced the world to change the name. It's literally like claiming that the word industry isn't descriptive enough and deciding to call it something else. Then when you use your new made-up word everyone looks at you funny and has no idea what you're talking about. That's how language works.

[quote:56igxqot]And those of you who think you need to be proficient in advanced mathematics to make the simple things found in today's AAA games...[/quote:56igxqot]

Right, because shaders and rendering and physics and real-time ambient occlusion require no advanced math at all.
Moderator
B
87
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,397

Post » Fri May 08, 2009 4:03 pm

Renaming Variable to remember would be counter intuitive because If you remember somthing it should be the same thing every time. Where as a variable can change.


I dont understand why you think that Remember would be a better word for it.

And learning a programming logic is not hard what gets you is the syntax and even then its really only advanced stuff that get really complicated and hard to wrap your head around.

The more I use construct the easier it is for me to program and the more I program the easier it gets to use construct.
B
5
S
2
G
4
Posts: 632
Reputation: 2,829

Post » Fri May 08, 2009 4:32 pm

Guys , let's stop this argument.

It's fairly obvious Psmith wants to use this but doesn't know how , and is supposedly a failure on our part and not his , and since he does not understand simple concepts a 13 year old can understand (Je suis treize ans , aussi) he must have it his way and no-one elses.

Honestly, come the fuck on!

What is so hard about variables? Exclusion? Z Depth? Function?
I must say they are fairly obvious. What do you think EXCLUSION means? Oh , possibly excluding , but probably not. Z Depth? Oh , how about depth on the Z axis? Function? Oh , well if you have even gone near standard grade maths , you should know about functions.


Christ , the ignorance of this person bewilders me.
B
3
G
3
Posts: 83
Reputation: 1,041

Post » Fri May 08, 2009 4:36 pm

Locking, very silly argument.
B
3
S
2
G
5
Posts: 1,777
Reputation: 5,529

Post » Fri May 08, 2009 8:27 pm

Psmith... perhaps you haven't received the warmest of welcomes here, and for that I am sorry. But it seems you've been struggling with this issue for some time:

http://game-engine.visual3d.net/forum/s ... .php?t=941

http://www.blade3d.com/Default.aspx?tab ... sts&t=1394

Perhaps it's time to take some of that advice to heart... either learn the tools, or find a partner who can do the coding side of your project. Better that, don't you think, than pining away at the lack of "artist friendly" tools? Instead of scolding the creators of various software companies for not sharing in your vision of an artistic utopia where no code shall be suffered, spend your time seeking a solution to making your game. If you stubbornly refuse to learn, or stubbornly refuse to work with someone else, then you are your own biggest roadblock to making your game, not some perceived lack of proper tools or methods.

Take matters into your own hands. Take responsibility for the creation of your game. Let go this notion that someone else must cater to you. Stubbornness will get no games made.
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Previous

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests