Did you try other combinations? Or is it just with Ctrl?
My keyborad isnt broke because I can do “Ctrl+C” , but I cant use
I first noticed it when I played CS , my Ctrl key is for duck , and as
I pressed it I couldnt move left+right while ducking (while pressing
So , its not that it doesnt work at all , there are cases which it
works and cases which it doesnt work.
I think its the combination between Ctrl and A that doesnt work…is
there a way to check it out?
is it a specific case where it doesn’t work or it doesn’t work at all
anywhere? give us an example as to where it works and doesn’t work. it
could be your keyboard is broken.
sorry if that doesn’t help
Its not so much a problem, more a preferance. When i write code, I like
to know exactly whats going on, and exactly why im putting a line here
or there. When i worked with SDL, it seemed to me, that tooooo much
relied on implementation with SDL, it took over the input control, the
window control etc, and it did it with code that kind of confused me. I
guess my main grip was that I was goign to have to spend time relearning
a bunch of stuff, when i could just as easily done it with GLUT, (be it
a tad slower for input) but i dont think the way im using it realy
matters all that much.
I dont know if SDL is faster at drawing a window though? Anyone know the
performace hit, or enhancment of using SDL to swap buffers and
I too have an R9700Pro and I think that it was worth the money spent.
As I said: “But the thing is that many people want their product ready
fast (the industry at large tends to like that)…” :) Really, it is
good that things like that excist and that it gives a painless landing
for people that are interrested in the field, but don’t have the
patience or will to learn the low-level. _But_, are we really in such
a need of graphics programmers (in the consumer market), that we
actually need to do stuff like this? I wrote my first OGL app with glut
but directly after that moved to my own base code. I don’t know, it’s
just my opinnion, but it just makes me think if we’re taking graphics
programming to the level where you just produce game engines like you
produce car engines on a production line.
Radeon Pro 9900 as of nw is just a hype. Its supposed to “crush” GeForce
FX (whever it comes out as a commercial prod.) I know of serious probs
with GeForce FX. nVidia for the first time, is in second place.
All the word that’s floating around is - its the neXt best thing…
when is not something anyone would answer
I think the DX SDK itself comes with pretty neat tutorials.
Before developing DX stuff you have to be used to Win32 implies you
know enuf anyways.
Ok btw - http://nexe.gamedev.net
Its a good place to start (based on the popular nehe.gamedev.net)
C# was implemented so that Visual Studio .NET would make sense
A far as better interfaces are concerned… hmm lets see, dont we have
anything called C++ and COM already?
Well the real reason for C# to come out was that it could incorporate
modules from EVERY language that exists for Windoze. That is the reason.
In JAVA there is a problem with using C++ modules. They have to be
implemented in a particular form.
Dont you remmeber the story of the Big Blue doing the same? They would
sell a computer(sorry Mainframe) to corporates and give the Fortran
language along. Else you get none.
Every OS has a fav. Language. it was C++ earlier. Now its become C#
However there is nothing new in C#. < Pun intended >
Replace “JAVA” with C#
Replace “SUN” with Microsoft <whatever font they use>.
However as a language and grammar fan, I do say that C# makes things
pretty good. Think about the flexibility with arrays and pointers.
The basic structure (grammar) of the two languages is the same.
Differences are in the data types and the compilers.
GT should be good too :)
c#, as language, is bether than java, imho. and it provides right from
the start good performance, and very good bindings to .. everything
else:D (com, interfaces, dx9, gl ports are there as well, etc..)
.NET as platform is World Domination, but its rather cool nontheless.
at least its microsoft behind it, and they want it. so it will get good
support, and big and strong and powerful. unlike sun, who had major
problems for a long time with java, making it very “low-loved” by pc’s..
hm yeah actually you need to know how to program stuff.. then using an
api (part of “how do i program stuff”) is easy once you got access to
the docu.. and.. the docu is great:D
This might be a start, you must first find the distance to the plane
containing the poly. Like so.
both the vectorstruct and the pointstruct are float X,Y,Z; values, to
make things simplier
N1is the polys normal
POP is ANY point on that plane, AKA one of the 3 verts of the triangle
P1, is the point checking the distance from
float PointPlaneDistance(VectorStruct N1, PointStruct POP, PointStruct
Distance = ((N1.X*P1.X + N1.Y*P1.Y + N1.Z*P1.Z + (-N1.X*POP.X -
N1.Y*POP.Y - N1.Z*POP.Z)));
That will return the distance to the plane (if negative you are behind
If you need to find the distance to a poly, that is not a perpendicular
plane line, you would have to find the distance to each of the lines,
and see which is closest, why? Because if you arent closest to the face
(Plane distance) then you have to be off to the side of one of the
lines, thus the perpendicular to one of those lines is the closest
point. Got it?
//This returns the closest point on the line (which of the lines of the
triangle you pass) along with the
// distance in a pass by value.
SP1 is segment end point one, sp2 is segment end point 2, p1 is the
point checking from, and distance is self explanitory
POI is point of impact, or the closest point on the line
Build vector simply creates a NON normalized vector
dot vector, is self explanitory
Step point along vector does exactly what it says, it moves the point
along the vector passes, along with the distance passed, and returns the
PointStruct ClosestLineSegmentPoint(PointStruct SP1, PointStruct SP2,
PointStruct P1, float& Distance)
//This directly returns a point, and also pass by returns the
float c1, c2, c3;
Vec = BuildVector(SP2, SP1);
Vec = BuildVector(P1, SP1);
Vec = BuildVector(P1, SP2);
//Dot product of the first 2 vectors
c1 = DotVectors(Vec, Vec);
Distance = sqrt(DotVectors(Vec, Vec));
POI = SP1;
//Dot product of the next 2 vectors
c2 = DotVectors(Vec, Vec);
Distance = sqrt(DotVectors(Vec, Vec));
POI = SP2;
c3 = c1/c2;
//Holding variable of new point
POI = StepPointAlongVector(SP1, Vec, c3);
Vec = BuildVector(P1, POI);
Distance = DotVectors(Vec, Vec);
Hope this helps, sorry for the quick post, but off to more coding.
[in no way am I trying to shoot your harmony jam session (your view ;7 )
down in any way but it’s hard to ask this question without coming off as
offensive. please bear with me]
can I ask you to elaborate on why or where in SDL you have a problem? I
don’t mean problem - lack of a better phrase.
I’m curious and I’d like to see your point of view. I made an engine
[still in development] and it uses SDL for windowing and input. I made a
middle/manager class that controls window placement and behavior, and
the input via SDL. granted, I sort of ‘embraced’ SDL and now, I’d like a
difference in opinion. maybe there is something that some of us failed
I dont believe that above code snippet will ever create a Gimble lock.
Because it uses a temp variable so that the rotation of one axis dosnt
over ride the other axis, upon compleation. Thus things dont go
negative. I have yet to have any problems with it any ways, if someone
could come up with an instance that the above code dosnt work, let me
know. I will have to run some calcs to figure that out, and see if it is
possible with that code.
I also agree that GLUT is getting a little out dated, BUT I still use
it. WHY? Because i said so, just kidding, actualy its because I find it
much easier to work with than SDL, SDL seems to be a little over bearing
with the CONTROL of the flow of code. Now probly the BIGGEST bitch
people have with GLUT is SLOW input, I simply set a BOOL value (table)
When the key is pressed, and check that value each time, so input is not
a concern of mine. The other major problem is the glutSwapBuffers, which
indeed is a bit slow, but all in all it works nicely. I think SDL has
promise, but I dont think I will use it, because like I said, it tends
to have a control issue, that and its not as easy of a syntax.
Well, originaly microsoft was contracted with sun to use there java VM.
However, microsoft desided to go and create there own java. (Which went
against the contract, consiquently causing sun to sue MS.) The latest
court decision I believe may now force microsoft to follow through and
have the sun java vm included in windows release.
But basicly, C# is a JAVA clone.
I am! :huh:
Sad to found out that there is no information related to audio software
Is there any game developpers wants to share knowledge?
interesting point. if it’s not obvious from the general thread of this
forum, I’m a bit anti-m$
but with all things considered, I agree with you. I find nothing new
with c# that java doesn’t already do. maybe it’s just so that m$ can
have a product against sun’s popular java. or maybe there’s something
more in the fine print that you and I have missed. anyway, I’d like to
ask if anyone here thinks that anybody can write 10 pages about the
difference in c# and java. I have to write a scientific argumentative
research paper for my technical writing class [for my related field,
which is CS] and if you guys think you can write 10 pages on the
_SCIENCE_ aspect of it, then I would gladly write about the topic and
share with you folks.
and to add with what baldurk said, most of the gaming industry seeks to
release a game [or whatever] quickly - for either quicker profits and/or
patent of a certain feature. although, I’ve never heard of anybody
patenting a certain feature. for example, I had an idea for a
first-person shooter to be able to use multiple guns and have multiple
lock-on’s and with the release of lucasarts’ bounty hunter, I’m afraid
to even release it. I guess I could claim prior art, unless they truly
implemented the idea a while back… but I’m getting off topic.
but yeah, I imagine that to some people the sooner they make a release,
the sooner they can make a name for themselves and will use already-made
tools if it serves them in their best interest. I guess it’s more of a
oh yes it is.
eye + ear candy with a hint of elegance…
GLExcess would be a reason for me to return to win32.
flamebait aside, I really don’t know.
if he does, let me know. That’s simply THE best demo I’ve ever seen. Bar
I would recommend not to use a box, just a rectangle placed in the
“middle” of the AABB. You could then use the edge vertices of the quad
to build a caped pyramid from these vertices (the new view frustum).
Just compute the plane of the view point and each adjacent quad vertex
and use this for the next oclusion test. Of course you might want to do
something like test if the plane area of the quad restricted by the quad
vertices intersects the previous frustum in the recursion to determen if
the portal is even visible, so that you won’t process too many portals.
Btw. I haven’t made a portal engine yet, so this is just a pure
hypothesis, but I hope that might help (or actually work) :rolleyes: