5 ms·

The whole thing reads like a tragic waste to me. Too bad you couldn't code assembly on a C64/Amiga out of the box properly either. Now with the Raspberry 4 we f

by bullen 5y ago

The whole thing reads like a tragic waste to me. Too bad you couldn't code assembly on a C64/Amiga out of the box properly either. Now with the Raspberry 4 we finally after 40 years of corporate shenanigans have something where kids could make their own games and instead they are playing mobile games. I'm making an open 3D action MMO engine to sort this out. If your computer does not have a keyboard/mouse it's useless for eternity.

the_af 5y ago
Even before the Raspberry, with the rise of open source programming languages and libraries (or even commercial toolkits that are cheap), there was the possibility to make some pretty complex games! And indeed, some people made use of them. But for most people, it's easier to play games than to create them, just as for most people it's easier to read books than to write them. But tool-wise, we've been living in paradise for a long time now. Whether we take advantage of that is up to us.
- bullen 5y ago
  True, but the energy consumption is key: Raspberry 4 draws 1/3 of a C64 at 1000x perf, at 2Gflops/W not even the M1 (at 2.5Gflops/w) chip is hurting that stat with 5nm vs. 28nm for the Raspberry. Tools are peaking and linux with TWM from the 1987 is winning! ;) For more depth on my reasoning: http://move.rupy.se/file/park_engine.html http://move.rupy.se/file/park_engine.html
  - the_af 5y ago
    Why does energy consumption matter? In any case, I was able to start programming my first games using a pirated copy of GW Basic on a PC XT. That's all you really needed. Then I think around the 286 or 386 PC clones I discovered open source libraries like Allegro (a competitor of today's SDL), and it wasn't even pirated anymore! Really, all you need to program games.
    - bullen 5y ago
      Because, if you haven't noticed, we are running out of energy? Basic is not performant enough to make games that are interesting. If you could afford a 286/386 you are not really in the majority of the human population.
      - the_af 5y ago
        > "Because, if you haven't noticed, we are running out of energy?" Energy as an abstract concern is a very low priority for any hobbyist games creator. You care about building cool stuff. You only care about energy if it impacts your game. > "Basic is not performant enough to make games that are interesting." This is simply not true. There are even commercial BASICs that specialize in game creation. > "If you could afford a 286/386 you are not really in the majority of the human population." Nobody with an interest in videogame creation is. It was a very cheap 286 PC clone anyway; we couldn't afford a brand PC. But I acknowledge most people weren't programming at home back then. My point: Raspberries aren't at all needed for programming. Any computer would do. You don't need a magic device.
dmitriid 5y ago
> after 40 years of corporate shenanigans have something where kids could make their own games and have access to literally dozens of free game engines and are making their games en masse
- bullen 5y ago
  They are making games they don't own on knowledge they don't own, that they can't sell for real money without being exploited.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > They are making games they don't own They own those games > on knowledge they don't own On knowledge that is freely given to them that they can build on. Also, there's now an unbelievable wealth of knowledge available to forego any of those engines and develop everything from scratch if they so chose. > they can't sell for real money without being exploited Only... They can and they do sell for real money. No idea what "exploitation" you're talking about.
    - bullen 5y ago
      If your game is based on technology you dont understand you don't really own it until you can recreate that stack... this means litteraly nobody owns anything if applied to the extreme (OS + language) but if you use an engine that is semi closed you don't have control over your future. For the exploitation part: $0.30 + 2.9% Itch 10% Epic 15% Apple 30% Android/Steam/Nintendo/Sony 70% Roblox $1,500/yr Unreal $1,800/yr Unity 0-25% VAT ~30% Income TAX (Healthcare)
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        > If your game is based on technology you dont understand you don't really own it until you can recreate that stack This is entirely irrelevant to "I wish kids today created their own games". They do, and it's easier than ever to do so. > you don't have control over your future Let's see: people create and sell their own games, there's a veritable indie renaissance happening, young people can get into game development (or into programming in general) easier than ever, but... they somehow "don't control their future". > For the exploitation part So you want: everything to be free, but you also want people making games to earn "real" money (as opposed to fake money they are earning right now)?
hnusersarelame 5y ago
Minecraft? Roblox? VR Chat? What about the thousands of independent games made by kids and young adults that are created and posted to Itch.io and Steam every day? Does that not count for anything? >I'm making an open 3D action MMO engine to sort this out. Yes, I'm sure this will be the Unity killer that everyone is waiting for. rolls eyes
- foobarian 5y ago
  TBH this sounds exactly like Roblox. MMO being the key part there.
- bullen 5y ago
  None of those are source available with affordable commercial license. Minecraft is owned by Microsoft and has issues (does not run on ARM well and the Java/Bedrock are incompatible) Roblox is extortion and ugly. VR Chat is only VR. Neither scales. I'm trying my best, here is the status from 2 years back: http://talk.binarytask.com/task?id=5959519327505901449 http://talk.binarytask.com/task?id=5959519327505901449 Now I'm building the voxel world.
  - mrguyorama 5y ago
    >VR Chat is only VR. This is incorrect. VR chat (and Rec Room) has a non-VR client
    - bullen 5y ago
      Ok, but what is the point of a non-VR client? VR does not blend well with non VR unless the headset is the camera! Last time I checked both of those where 1st person not 3rd?
      - mrguyorama 5y ago
        "Flat" VR chat is perfectly fine for plenty of users, including large streamers and content creators. You get slightly more awkward manipulation but truth be told, VR chat doesn't use the VR for anything more than immersion. VR blends perfectly fine with non-VR actually, and there are many games that let you play as VR in a non-VR lobby. Check out Paranormal Activity on steam. The game was designed as a normal mouse and keyboard video game, with awkward controls and a strong horror focus, but they added a VR option so if you want, you can feel fully immersed while being chased by evil ghosts and you can pee your pants in fear while your friends stuck with a normal screen are only moderately afraid. For the two games in question, the non-VR client lets you play homemade games and chat with your friends or strangers who have VR or also happen to play the non-VR version of either. It's literally just a different control method, like using TrackIR in a racing sim.
criddell 5y ago
Assembly is nice, but not necessary. I don’t know about the Amiga, but the C64, Atari, and TI computers of the era either booted into a BASIC prompt or you could get there with one or two key presses. Many of us spent a lot of our youth making games and sharing them with our friends.
- DerekL 5y ago
  The Amiga did come with Basic, but in 1990, they switched to Rexx.
- the_af 5y ago
  Agreed with your overall point, but I have to mention that out-of-the-box C64 BASIC was so crippled, most game related I/O had to be done via POKE and PEEK, i.e. not really BASIC and as low level as it gets. Nevertheless, it was my first programming language ever.
shadowofneptune 5y ago
Kind of doubt that kids at the time would want to be programming EEPROMs for their games. Even if they had access to a 6502 assembler, the information on how to program a console game was esoteric and would be hard to find on bookstore shelves.

by bullen 5y ago

the_af 5y ago

Even before the Raspberry, with the rise of open source programming languages and libraries (or even commercial toolkits that are cheap), there was the possibility to make some pretty complex games! And indeed, some people made use of them. But for most people, it's easier to play games than to create them, just as for most people it's easier to read books than to write them. But tool-wise, we've been living in paradise for a long time now. Whether we take advantage of that is up to us.

bullen 5y ago
True, but the energy consumption is key: Raspberry 4 draws 1/3 of a C64 at 1000x perf, at 2Gflops/W not even the M1 (at 2.5Gflops/w) chip is hurting that stat with 5nm vs. 28nm for the Raspberry. Tools are peaking and linux with TWM from the 1987 is winning! ;) For more depth on my reasoning: http://move.rupy.se/file/park_engine.html http://move.rupy.se/file/park_engine.html
- the_af 5y ago
  Why does energy consumption matter? In any case, I was able to start programming my first games using a pirated copy of GW Basic on a PC XT. That's all you really needed. Then I think around the 286 or 386 PC clones I discovered open source libraries like Allegro (a competitor of today's SDL), and it wasn't even pirated anymore! Really, all you need to program games.
  - bullen 5y ago
    Because, if you haven't noticed, we are running out of energy? Basic is not performant enough to make games that are interesting. If you could afford a 286/386 you are not really in the majority of the human population.
    - the_af 5y ago
      > "Because, if you haven't noticed, we are running out of energy?" Energy as an abstract concern is a very low priority for any hobbyist games creator. You care about building cool stuff. You only care about energy if it impacts your game. > "Basic is not performant enough to make games that are interesting." This is simply not true. There are even commercial BASICs that specialize in game creation. > "If you could afford a 286/386 you are not really in the majority of the human population." Nobody with an interest in videogame creation is. It was a very cheap 286 PC clone anyway; we couldn't afford a brand PC. But I acknowledge most people weren't programming at home back then. My point: Raspberries aren't at all needed for programming. Any computer would do. You don't need a magic device.

dmitriid 5y ago

> after 40 years of corporate shenanigans have something where kids could make their own games and have access to literally dozens of free game engines and are making their games en masse

bullen 5y ago
They are making games they don't own on knowledge they don't own, that they can't sell for real money without being exploited.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > They are making games they don't own They own those games > on knowledge they don't own On knowledge that is freely given to them that they can build on. Also, there's now an unbelievable wealth of knowledge available to forego any of those engines and develop everything from scratch if they so chose. > they can't sell for real money without being exploited Only... They can and they do sell for real money. No idea what "exploitation" you're talking about.
  - bullen 5y ago
    If your game is based on technology you dont understand you don't really own it until you can recreate that stack... this means litteraly nobody owns anything if applied to the extreme (OS + language) but if you use an engine that is semi closed you don't have control over your future. For the exploitation part: $0.30 + 2.9% Itch 10% Epic 15% Apple 30% Android/Steam/Nintendo/Sony 70% Roblox $1,500/yr Unreal $1,800/yr Unity 0-25% VAT ~30% Income TAX (Healthcare)
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > If your game is based on technology you dont understand you don't really own it until you can recreate that stack This is entirely irrelevant to "I wish kids today created their own games". They do, and it's easier than ever to do so. > you don't have control over your future Let's see: people create and sell their own games, there's a veritable indie renaissance happening, young people can get into game development (or into programming in general) easier than ever, but... they somehow "don't control their future". > For the exploitation part So you want: everything to be free, but you also want people making games to earn "real" money (as opposed to fake money they are earning right now)?

hnusersarelame 5y ago

Minecraft? Roblox? VR Chat? What about the thousands of independent games made by kids and young adults that are created and posted to Itch.io and Steam every day? Does that not count for anything? >I'm making an open 3D action MMO engine to sort this out. Yes, I'm sure this will be the Unity killer that everyone is waiting for. rolls eyes

foobarian 5y ago
TBH this sounds exactly like Roblox. MMO being the key part there.
bullen 5y ago
None of those are source available with affordable commercial license. Minecraft is owned by Microsoft and has issues (does not run on ARM well and the Java/Bedrock are incompatible) Roblox is extortion and ugly. VR Chat is only VR. Neither scales. I'm trying my best, here is the status from 2 years back: http://talk.binarytask.com/task?id=5959519327505901449 http://talk.binarytask.com/task?id=5959519327505901449 Now I'm building the voxel world.
- mrguyorama 5y ago
  >VR Chat is only VR. This is incorrect. VR chat (and Rec Room) has a non-VR client
  - bullen 5y ago
    Ok, but what is the point of a non-VR client? VR does not blend well with non VR unless the headset is the camera! Last time I checked both of those where 1st person not 3rd?
    - mrguyorama 5y ago
      "Flat" VR chat is perfectly fine for plenty of users, including large streamers and content creators. You get slightly more awkward manipulation but truth be told, VR chat doesn't use the VR for anything more than immersion. VR blends perfectly fine with non-VR actually, and there are many games that let you play as VR in a non-VR lobby. Check out Paranormal Activity on steam. The game was designed as a normal mouse and keyboard video game, with awkward controls and a strong horror focus, but they added a VR option so if you want, you can feel fully immersed while being chased by evil ghosts and you can pee your pants in fear while your friends stuck with a normal screen are only moderately afraid. For the two games in question, the non-VR client lets you play homemade games and chat with your friends or strangers who have VR or also happen to play the non-VR version of either. It's literally just a different control method, like using TrackIR in a racing sim.

criddell 5y ago

Assembly is nice, but not necessary. I don’t know about the Amiga, but the C64, Atari, and TI computers of the era either booted into a BASIC prompt or you could get there with one or two key presses. Many of us spent a lot of our youth making games and sharing them with our friends.

DerekL 5y ago
The Amiga did come with Basic, but in 1990, they switched to Rexx.
the_af 5y ago
Agreed with your overall point, but I have to mention that out-of-the-box C64 BASIC was so crippled, most game related I/O had to be done via POKE and PEEK, i.e. not really BASIC and as low level as it gets. Nevertheless, it was my first programming language ever.

shadowofneptune 5y ago

Kind of doubt that kids at the time would want to be programming EEPROMs for their games. Even if they had access to a 6502 assembler, the information on how to program a console game was esoteric and would be hard to find on bookstore shelves.