A survey for people who still try to make games

[DimensionWarped]

1. Are you a programmer?

2. If so to #1, do you understand Object Oriented Programming?

3. Do you know C#?

4. How about Java?

5. C++ then?

6. Do you know any number of design patterns?

7. What features would you want to see in an engine and toolset?

[FanGameRevolver]

1. studying to be one

2. Somewhat. Taking a course directly related to this, and doing well in it.

3. no

4. yes, I work best with java.

5. very little c++ knowledge

6. some

7. I still prefer game maker over anything else, The interface is simple but complex jobs can be accomplished with it as well. But its lacking a good 3D interface, something like that but geared towards 3D projects would be cool to see. Like a 3D room editor that can have 3D drawing elements previewed in it. For scripting toolsets I really like Netbeans and how it can catch possible errors before you even compile.

hope this helps!

[Candescence]

1. Currently learning /proper/ languages other than Javascript.

2. Somewhat, but I'm learning both VB.Net and C++, so...

3. Nope.

4. Nope, but I do know Javascript, does that count?

5. Started learning C++ three weeks ago.

6. Some.

7. Anything like Construct. Especially its event editor (beats MMF2's and GM's by a mile), and maybe scripting as an option as well. Especially for a 3D engine/toolset. For 3D, I'd prefer a 3D editor that is, well, simple and intuitive.

[Password]

1. Sure, but I don't normally use the "real" languages.

2. Not really.

3. Nuu.

4. A little, I guess.

5. Sometimes I've used it

6. A few. It's hard to remember..

7. Coding similar to GML and MMF2's event creator, automatic backups, and a simple and useful "toolbox" (list of objects that you can easily place in a room) and some features that make creating games faster would be nice (such as the object-rotating feature in Construct :3)

..and no MMF2-like random crashes ._.

[VectorSatyr]

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Only what it shares with C++

4. No

5. Yes

6. Read of them, but don't use them often enough to know them.

7. Simplicity (Ruby syntax preferable); portability; extendability with DLLs; automatic backups; inner workings are plainly visible (so more significant changes can be made through extensions). Preferably, the ability to change the rendering/audio system to whatever tickles my fancy without having to build around the native ones.

[Rawr]

Gonna take this from a different perspective...

1. No

2. N/A

3. Nope, but would like to learn

4. No

5. Same as 3

6. Nah

7. What features would you want to see in an engine and toolset?

Make it easy for a programming n00b like me to understand and create games in. I find that a lot of the time there is a lot of things too complex for someone like me, who is more of a graphics guy. I have ideas to make a game but I never truly act upon it because I have no clue how to program. I'm not out to make an epic game because I'm only one person. It'd be even more awesome if this engine/toolset was streamlined for making any sort of 2D platform type game, but thats an unrealistic expectation.

In short - something for lame graphics people like me to easily use =(

[OverbounD]

1. Are you a programmer?

I know GML, so no.

2. If so to #1, do you understand Object Oriented Programming?

I understand the basic concept.

3. Do you know C#?

4. How about Java?

5. C++ then?

No, No, I took a class on C++ in highschool so no.

6. Do you know any number of design patterns?

Design patterns? You mean like the states machine in Sonic Dash because I love that.

7. What features would you want to see in an engine and toolset?

I'm not a huge fan of the 128x128 level design system. I'd much rather see something 16x16 or 32x32. That said perhaps there could be a way to prearrange the 32x32 into a bigger tile that would then break apart into smaller pieces after. Giving you the option to interchange between 32x32 and 128x128 or whatever size for that matter.

[Shonumi]

1. Yes, been one for a while now. Currently trying to minor in CS.

2. Yes. Lots of it.

3. Same thing as Aero.

4. Yeah.

5. Hells yeah.

6. Probably, dunno the official names for most. Singletons, Prototypes, Interpreters, Iterators, to name a few

7. A flexible API, easy to use because tasks are succinct yet sufficient (I'm thinking more Python-ish) and thorough documentation. The last one is major for me. No matter how strange it is to use something in programming, good docs makes a huge difference in how anybody gets to use it.

[travelsonic]

1. Sorta, I guess - I'm taking lots of classes on programming for my comp. sci major, and when I have the time I still do some fun programming, so yeah.

2. Yup - I pretty much have to for my major. Know templates, classes [polymorphism & inheritance, etc], and application of OOP in data structures [linked lists, stacks, queues, binary trees, etc]

3. Yes. Took a class over the past spring. I like it very much.

4. Nope - will be taking a class on it this fall.

5. Yup, most of the classes I have taken used C++ as the programming language of choice.

6. Define.

7.

- The ability to keep a backup copy of the last version of the source code successfully compiled, that way if I completely bork something in building upon, or revising it, it is easy to roll back to a version I know works.

Other than that, I dunno - I'll get back to you on that.

[DimensionWarped]

@travelsonic: That already exists for anything that uses text files. It's called cvs/subversion/git/insert version control software suite here. You should look into it.

By the way, this topic is still interesting to me.

[luksamuk]

1. yes

2. yes

3, 4, 5: Nope

6: Well, kinda.

7: A friendly interface mixing easy code usage. I mean, we can't know how to use all the code of the universe without help. If it all was more simple, it'd be great.

[P3DR0]

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 = No.

7 = Something that I understand. :'D