3 ms·
> it certainly resonates with me! I recently started getting into Javascript 2D game programming. MDN has a nice simple straightforward tutorial[1] on how to
by cabalamat 3y ago
> it certainly resonates with me!
I recently started getting into Javascript 2D game programming.
MDN has a nice simple straightforward tutorial[1] on how to make a Breakout game in pure Javascript. Having read this tutorial, it all fits my brain. It's simple and I understand it.
There are also lots of frameworks you can use, e.g. Excalibur, which also has a breakout game tutorial[2]. This does not fit my brain: there are vast number of classes to learn, and how everything fits together is not obvious at all.
While I was reading the MDN tutorial I was thinking to myself how I could easily build a framework to automate a lot of the stuff. (No doubt many others thought the same!) If I did build such a framework I would understand it well. It would fit my brain. But would anyone else understand it? Possibly not.
I suspect that what makes a framework easy to learn is, above everything else, good documentation.
[1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Games/Tutorials/2D_Breakout_game_pure_JavaScript https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Games/Tutorials/2D_...
[2]: https://excaliburjs.com/docs/getting-started/ https://excaliburjs.com/docs/getting-started/
- davedx 3y agoYup that’s why I like babylonjs. It’s not so much good documentation but that the docs try hard to have working codepen style examples for almost everything you can think of doing with it. Code as documentation. Contrast with a lot of python docs where you usually get a docpage telling you what the arguments are and the return type but nothing else.