azure

@SeeingBlue: > This was not constructive. Constructive criticism is informative. "stop being lazy" is hardly informative. If your intention was to suggest a different language based on speed, then you should have stated so right off the bat, & not later in the thread in order to defend yourself. > > You did it again here.This is also not constructive. You don't just go around making statements without any points to back that statement up. If you really believe your statement to be true then you should have a reason for that belief & you should share it when you spread that belief. Otherwise you just look like a "know-it-all with no proof. You should probably go back and actually read my argument. You'd be rather surprised at how wrong you are. Secondly, the world doesn't need you to save it so stop trying. In fact the person who needed to respond to my criticism did so in a reasonable manner. I don't consider this a serious project, not at all. This is just a practice for concept and structure. I'm only using XNA because I haven't reached my DX/OpenGL classes. Once that happens, on to C++ for me. I actually missed this among the rabble. For that I apologize. If this isn't a serious project, then do as you please. Personally C++ is perfectly acceptable, although Stephan may have other things to say about it. :D

@Socuine: > Don't worry, I'll just steal them and claim them as my own. > > Good job btw! ;D! Best of luck with that. ;)

From what I've seen it looks like fun.

I started to answer your requests without being rude, but as I got to about 6, I realized your asking us to make your whole game for you. I stand by my No.

No.

@Jungle: > Yes, because Terraria isn't a serious game at all. :roll_eyes: > > Seriously Azure, I know it isn't the best language out there, but you're a "designer", not "programmer". If you don't know any languages yourself, I suggest that you stop trying to thwart other's efforts with your usual "inb4" posts. He's trying to contribute to the community, not start a stupid debate with Windows and Linux fan-boys. I'm just going to ignore most of that since you're 14 and you don't even know what you're talking about. ;) I will point this out though Why have I posted this: Because I want CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, this community is full of great minds, and that is equal to many great ideas. My constructive crit was to move to a programming language that's faster, and it or one of it's variants work on any platform you could choose. Windows, Mac, Linux, Mobiles, Consoles… What?

@JeffSventora: > Until my skills are good enough to do so, not happening. And at that point I'll be working on a serious project. Anything made with c# isn't a serious project. "INB4 Stephan."

@JeffSventora: > I've grown more towards the C/C++ Syntax so that was the big thing for me in choosing C#. You should stop being lazy and do C or C++ then. ;)

@Lightning: > Code the new AI in a way that assesses a few routes to the player, checking for block tiles and other players etc. I'm sure at the moment the NPC AI only assesses the tiles around it for blocks, hence the "I move away from tree, then I move towards the tree again" movement on the NPC's part. Checking a few tiles ahead in the players' direction may be the way to go. You could also give the npc a simple targeting system where it looks for the closest player in it's attack range, and then uses the method you describe to find said player. :D That combined with projectiles, npc casting, etc would make things much more interesting. edit: I though I could write this post better. -

@Aeri: > There's most definately one out there, I've seen it lurking in the dark recesses of the **Tutorials > Source** section I don't know for sure, but I could have sworn there was something about path finding.

@Aeri: > Leave it like that. It's better when you can safe-spot enemies and it gives mages a slight adantage. Counteract that with higher price for mana potions or hefty mana charges for spells. If you still want to code it in it would be pretty difficult to do, methinks. That's a shoddy solution at best, but it would suffice for people who can't program /slight/ ai into their game.

@Fuu: > No. ;D I'll see your no and raise it to a Hell No. :D

Uh… His shaping and shading is completely different from breeze, and yeah rmvx looks nothing like this.

"Meh?"

Loli, you took my wallet and ran… I hate you... 10/5

@Jungle: > Ive never played Zelda or Pokémon, so I guessed that last comparison :P > > Yeah, the sprites are really unique. I'd classify them under "cute", but the detail and pallet suggest otherwise. Very nice. The style is still undergoing changes, but it's the cute and lulz factor that we really like. I know bunny and love seeing how the sprites especially are evolving.

@Jungle: > How is that RMVX at all? To me, it looks like breeze mixed in with Pokémon if anything. Specifically it's zelda minish cap mixed with pokemon… ;) style wise, the sprites are his own.

@shadowdeath: > These are great sprites! > But seriously, they remind me of RMVX. :D … Maybe you should look at an RMVX sprite...

Oh look the thread has been derailed into a Notch sucks thread. Way to discuss things kids.

@Socuine: > And you get your info from .. What? Actually when I read that and look hard, the sprite looks like it's /in front/ of the grass not on top of it.

@Kusy: > There is no such thing as HD pixelart. Pixelart is pixelart. It might be high quality. But Fuu's graphics are exacly the same "definition" as that thing you posted. Stop overusing that term and realise that not everyone is capable of doing that kind of graphics. > > Also, you can't create a 32x32 tile using vector tiles and keep the quality when converting it to any non-vector graphics format. You would have to rewrite the engine to use svg graphics. > > Long story short, Skull Kid got his package hard about nice looking pixelart with good shading and can't understand that there are maybee 3 people capable of doing those kind of graphics here while 2 of them are not active anymore. Oh look someone who's getting it. It's wip, but we're actually going for that clean nintendo-ish style.

No one cares.

@Spork: > It's more like a cloud. Even "the cloud" needs some where to store data?

@Robin: > You should base your opinion on the fact that it's physically impossible to store the amount of data needed to give solid data to every atom. > > Polygons were used for a reason and until our computing and storage power develops substantially we won't be able to replace that. This is what I took away from Notch's blog post

@Aeri: > I thought so. Robin's engine _seems_ pretty simple to use if you're not mucking about with the source at all. That's the thing though, "You have to muck about in the source."