Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[#freeprime]

Maybe you can't port GG2 to GM8.1 or GMS 1.4/2 but how about rewriting the game from scratch then? I know that it's a lot of work and etc but looks like there's no other way.

While we do like to complain about some issues, porting the game to a new version of GM is still orders of magnitude less work than a rewrite

about the porting, has anyone entertained the thought of using vanguard as a base?

[Heapons]

Well, I may be in a bad position to say that but... sounds like a great idea to use Vanguard since it's both not made in GameMaker and has some similarities with GG2.

[BlackDoomer]

Well, I may be in a bad position to say that but... sounds like a great idea to use Vanguard since it's both not made in GameMaker and has some similarities with GG2.

What is Vanguard?

[Kevin Kuntz]

Vanguard's Overwatch But GG2

[Saniblues]

GMStudio or GMS2 would be a better target for a port/remake imo since it has support for a lot of things out-of-the-box, particular steam's p2p networking api which would remove the need for porting forward.

[BlackDoomer]

GMStudio or GMS2 would be a better target for a port/remake imo since it has support for a lot of things out-of-the-box, particular steam's p2p networking api which would remove the need for porting forward.

Both of them are intended more for creating games for tablets, and poorly designed in general.

[Phantom Brave]

There are three reasons why I never looked into adding "interpolated fixed timestep" style framerate-independence into GG2: (note: physics is synonymous with physics plus game logic)

1) Game maker.
2) When done with a lot of headroom, it increases the input latency floor. Instead of "framerate interval/2 plus frametime plus ticktime" average latency, you have "framerate interval/2 plus frametime plus tickrate interval plus ticktime" average latency. By design, ticktime is almost always higher than the framerate interval, because people use small physics framerates like 15 or 20.
3) You need to implement some kind of delta time anyway. Sometimes a user really cannot even run the physics simulation at 20 ticks per second.

I have no issues with updating GG2 to newer versions of game maker.

As for other platforms like python or C++, I made a toy game maker-like language in rust that I called gammakit: https://github.com/wareya/gammakit but it's not gonna go anywhere unless someone gives me a million dollars or something.

It's not actually difficult to make something resembling very early versions of GG2. What's hard is making something with support for a very wide range of available functionality so that you don't have to dig into and extend the platform while using it. Having to do that causes bad structural problems unless you are one of the very most skilled AND EXPERIENCED of programmers. This is what killed benetnasch/kotareci.

edit: I fucked up writing point 2 originally, so I rewrote the math explanation. If you're still confused, here:

Code: [Select]

think_time : time between simulation of a frame's physics/logic beginning and finishing
render_time : same but for rendering
think_interval : time from the beginning of one physics/logic tick to the beginning of the next physics/logic tick
render_interval : same but for rendering
sequential_interval : when you think -> render -> repeat, think_interval and render_interval are exactly this, and think_time and render_time add up to less than or equal to this

when you do things the way game maker currently does, you get this average latency:

think_time + render_time + sequential_interval/2

when you use interpolated fixed timestep, you get this instead:

think_time + render_time + render_interval/2 + think_interval

[PrOF]

If the registry functions work, or if the Faucet Audio extension is done, I'd be happy to upgrade to 8.1, although performance has never been an issue for gg2, and the lag is only felt because of the lack of client-side input prediction, which will never be implemented, so I believe it won't make a big difference
Making a version of gg2 using this type of interpolation could be interesting, but I don't know how much effort that'd take

[BlackDoomer]

Making a version of gg2 using this type of interpolation could be interesting, but I don't know how much effort that'd take

Not so much, I believe, since GG2 already supports different timings (30 and 60 FPS) internally.

[#freeprime]

curious to know if you successfully ported gg2 to 8.1 and whats really in the way because from what i can gather, there's a solution to all the previous problems?

[PrOF]

Just to be sure, the repeat in the init script is useless, right?

Code: [Select]

repeat 1 {
instance_create(128, 256, circle);
instance_create(128, 320, circle2);
}

[BlackDoomer]

Just to be sure, the repeat in the init script is useless, right?

Absolutely. It was added only for stress testing purposes.

Also please note that game_init() was supposed to be called from the extension package, to behave just like an entry point. According to my concept of using GM, there should be no implicit programming in the source (ie, code NOT in scripts, predefined instances in rooms, drag-n-drop, code in Room Creation, etc.). That's the reason of commented out room_instance_* functions.