Mal

If anyone has it I play a few days a week. I have a 385k dps Crusader (blessed shield) that I'm working on; farming rifts and all that jazz. If you have it, regardless of level and gear, hit me up: opdz purgatory

The one you quoted.

What I find ironic is the fact that I didn't even bother reading the press release. My interpretation came from nothing but the OP and it was just about spot on. Old news, folks.

They're saying that "let's play" video makers can legally create said videos as long as they are not producing a cash flow. My interpretation anyway.

Looks good, man. I'm not pointing fingers, but I will say that I hope you're doing the right thing if you're using code from other projects, which you yourself alluded to with Box2D, and are accrediting them. Keep it up. :)

Sent you a message on Skype.

> They dropped it because it would have been too much to convert to later versions of DirectX. They realized that some things just need to be done in C++, which is why most things you see in regards to DX11 tuts are in managed C++ (CLI). > > > > XNA is NOT poorly made. It has a nice math library in which all of its functionality makes sense, provides low level access to shader integration and has a very organized structure for game states. The only bad thing about XNA is its content management (admittedly, it's terrible). > > > > And also, if XNA was so bad and poorly made, why is MonoGame so damn popular? It is literally a multi-platform re-write for XNA. I adore XNA's content pipeline. In my opinion its one of the premier highlights of XNA; default and custom processors, out of the cryptography, memory management, etc. MG's content pipeline pales in comparison (its just about non existent). Another nice fact: Unity's backend is Mono, therefore its helper libraries (like MathHelper) are direct "rewrites" or implementations of XNA. :)

> Never said you could, dippy. Sir, I would like to inform you that I quit dipping. :)

> oh no, im just saying that all everyone thinks about is C#. there's other languages out there, like Java. You can't use Java with Unity, silly.

> All the fanboys Oh, shush. You're just mad that no one said "VB.NET". :p

> Dont use XNA. Its a poorly made WRAPPER for Direct X, Microsoft is the makers and dropped it because THEY felt it was garbage and a waist of time… so what does that tell you? And do not listen to any of that. :) Microsoft is partnered with Unity3D (the company) now for Xbox one development. C#/XNA/Unity. Can't go wrong.

And in a few weeks you've done more than 90% of the people here. And you're using what? Unity. I love and hate these topics; makes me want to pull my hair out and cry from excitement at the same time. Lol. Looks like you're using a few things from the asset store; looks good. ;)

Visual C# 2012 Step by Step by John Sharp. Its an eBook. Its what I used to learn; between that book and pluralsight I was at around intermediate in approximately a month. A year later in dabbling in expert level concepts/paradigms. Well, 2 years later as of now, but a year ago I was getting on up there.

C#. You'll never need anything more than Unity, you will never have a need to go any closer to the metal to support learning C/C++ (unless you want to program for a living), and C# isn't going anywhere for a very long time. Ps. Don't concern yourself with cross platform deployment; Unity takes care of all that. Even if you use XNA you're still looking at 85-90% of the desktop market share. :)

Its impossible to prevent DLL or code injection; you can only make it more difficult.

VB6 is a COM language compiled to native; Wikipedia states that new external third-party functions that utilize part VB6 source code and part machine code make it faster than C++. Bottom line: VB6 is faster than .NET depending on how its used/written. Growlith was correct when he did that performance issues were due to how EO was written. He was also correct in saying that there is a significant list if pro's for moving to newer technology; one of those being the fact that .NET applications run far more efficiently across just about every CPU architecture because that's exactly what it was designed to do (JIT, IL).

> To each their own. Those of us who do have the knowledge to write it from scratch have moved on. ;)

There's other options that could potentially payout versus time spent dramatically, especially if you're familiar with C syntax. Unity, XNA/MG, even Java and libGDX.

Edited for pending release.

> No, programmers don't even need you to do that for them. Why would I use your code over my own? There's no use. If I want to use an engine, it should be complementary and specific like Eclipse. Even an experienced programmer would step away, just look at Netgore. It didn't make it nor will Mavra with that design mindset. You just tried to refute the entire ideology behind open-source software, Unity, UDK, Frostbite, and every other "engine" in existence. Congratulations on your nomination for a Darwin award. :)

> Eclipse is very easy to use, that's why it does well. The language doesn't matter to the developer, it only matters to the programmer. You're drooling over semantics, Seth. Application Developer* I can get a game screen and an object moving in that screen (state machine) in less than a minute, no joke. That means Mavra is easy to use, right?

**Change Log for Pending Release (10/05/2014)**: * Added Vector2Extensions.cs to Physics namespace, Includes: * _Vector2 Orbit(Vector2 origin, float degrees)_ The above function returns a translated Vector2 that creates an orbiting effect centered around the given origin at the specified degrees (converted using MathHelper.ToRadians) per call. Example of Use: ``` var position = new Vector2(10, 15); var origin = new Vector2(10, 10); position = position.Orbit(origin, 1.5f); ```

**Change Log for Pending Release (10/04/2014)**: * Added _Physics.Collision_ namespace. Includes: * CollisionEventArgs * CollisionHandler * IPhysicsComponent2D * PhysicsBody2DBox * PhysicsBody2DCircle * Added _Graphics_ namespace. Includes: * IDrawableEntity * DrawableEntity * Added extension methods for List in conjunction with List * List()._PhysicsBody2DCircles()_; * List()._PhysicsBody2DBoxes()_; * List()_.UpdatePhysicsComponentPositions(Vector2 newPosition)_; * Fixed issue with LinkLabel's CenterText property not properly aligning text with collision box. The point of these additions is to offer direct physics support within DrawableEntity which game objects can inherit from. DrawableEntity includes a **List PhysicsComponents** that stores physics objects. Physics objects have their own ObjectTag (string, name of the object they belong to), position, and offset. This is all abstracted away and decoupled from game specific code. DrawableEntity also contains a HandleCollision event that can be subscribed to and that is raised when a collision occurs. CollisionEventArgs returns an ObjectTag; it specifics the name given to the physics object that was collided with and is set at run time via a constructor. This provides the necessary utilities for each object to know what it collided with and for you, as the developer, to determine the appropriate action based on that information.

> These community type things never work out. Too much vision and not many people wanting to follow. Basically, you will have a lot of disorder in the project. People wanting to do different things/etc. You really did not read all of his proposal, did you? He stated that people could post resource requests and others could voluntarily pull that request and fill it at their leisure. Of course you're going to have a million and one ideas; that's the whole point.

> The old games are dead, make something new inspired off of them. Move on. And I quote, "to **reinvent** the games we knew and loved." Wall Ball is a nod to Pong. -insert unannounced space shooter title here- is a nod to Space Invaders and Centipede. Two perfect examples of works that could have potentially benefited from a collective like what he just proposed.