YES!
The Game Trailer Collab has been released!
Watch it!
I am a FAB
HO HO HOPE you become a Newgrounds Supporter this year!
We're working hard to give you the best site possible, but we have bills to pay and community support is vital to keep things going and growing. Thank you for considering!
I have my reasons for enjoying Apple products, but the iPad is a device I will never possess unless they makes some SERIOUS improvements. Yes, it has a nice interface, and yes, it's designed to look pretty, but no multi-tasking, the antagonistic (and frankly hypocritical) relationship with Adobe, no phone calls (even though you gotta buy a full on contract), no camera (this, I just couldn't believe), are serious dealbreakers for me. It is my sincere hope that the Apple Mob deals with these issues in subsequent versions.
btw Dfox has a good point about the Slate. I have family that works at HP, and not at the warehouse either. Everything I've seen so far has been encouraging to say the least.
apple is way less abusive to developers (for iphone) than microsoft (for xbox), sony (for ps3/psp), or nintendo are.
At 4/10/10 08:52 AM, citricsquid wrote: The source code: http://github.com/banthar/Hell-Tetris
Updated version: http://www.kongregate.com/games/banthar/
hell-tetris
The creator: http://www.kongregate.com/accounts/banth ar
That the xkcd guy? Or did he copy that comic from this game?, cus they look identical.
"If everyone did things 75% right people would be ecstatic, so I demand that you change this C to an A+!" - Calvin and Hobbes
At 4/10/10 05:03 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote: apple is way less abusive to developers (for iphone) than microsoft (for xbox), sony (for ps3/psp), or nintendo are.
Absolutely. I never claimed otherwise. :)
At 4/10/10 09:12 AM, Xeptic wrote: Agreed, however if somewhere in the future there are technologies that can bring a similar experience as Flash at a lower cost (processing/battery life), which isn't controlled by one company (Flash > Adobe) imo you shouldn't keep clinging to the old stuff. In a way it's just like what Sony did by including a Blu-Ray drive in the PS3 a good three years ago while HD-TV's weren't that wide-spread yet (especially in Europe). It's a bit of a gamble, but if you have enough influence as a company it might just work out.
We're still waiting on that better technology though; HTML5 probably won't reach that state of ability, and we're not too sure about other options yet. If and when Flash finally gets bested, I believe that the consumers should be able to have free choice in which one to use (after all, almost all 'players' these days are free to use, I would hope those in the future will be too), and the shift should be headed by the developers; they can chose the option which will leave them with the best profits. When an alternative results in better profits (with a lower fee for building the project, as well as more buyers) than developing on Flash, the developers will move to that and more consumers will follow, and so the cycle continues until the inferior company is out of business. Forcing the change isn't fair to the consumers or developers, since it could leave them with a worse technology than otherwise.
And, although PS3 isn't exactly the perfect comparison here, I believe that they offered both DVD and Blu-Ray playing, allowing consumers to choose which they preferred for individual movies. But, since DVD and Blu-Ray players aren't free, probably not the best comparison (unless you're talking exclusively about PS3 owners).
Oh come on. You pay $100 to 'get into the club'. After that you're set. How much does Flash cost?
You forget the cost of buying a Mac. Although there are work-arounds, it looks as though Apple frowns on app development on other non-Mac computers.
Yes, Flash costs a lot, but that is more so a choice of what to use rather than expensive hoops to jump through.
Anyway, the main issue was not with just the price, but the fact that you can spend that money and then have your app pulled from the store for what seems to be no reason.
Developers aren't morons. Almost everyone with an interest in tech knows Apple is quite restrictive with these kind of things, especially developers that fork over $100 to get a license.
Well, that information only came to light a few months ago, and some people may be a little too optimistic with a kind of "Apple wouldn't hurt me" attitude.
The pros the App store offers simply outweigh the cons.
It isn't a case of "pros and cons" with the App Store. It is more so "risk and profits". App developers already have enough of a worry about whether people will buy their game or not without the added fear of Apple suddenly changing their mind about some arbitrary thing and removing their game without forewarning. I don't believe that is fair on the hard-working developers of the world.
At 4/10/10 02:04 PM, Sam wrote: I also figured out the whole "I've done this 100 times but forgot it every time" before it was revealed.
Yeah, I figured out a few things before they were 'revealed' too. Sometimes, that's good and makes you feel clever, but in this episode, I just felt that everything was blindingly obvious.
Although, I did very much enjoy the resolution at the end; beautifully done I feel.
At 4/10/10 04:18 PM, crushy wrote: Ah, error #1009. I've been getting that error so much recently, for instance, whenever I access stage properties like stage.stageWidth from one the classes it freaks out and pulls that error. Meh, I just changed it to 550 instead but I'd rather I knew why it did that.
That would be because 'stage' is a property held by every individual Display Object, one which holds a reference to a 'Stage' object. When a Display Object is first created, the value of this property is 'null' - i.e. it holds no reference to the stage. When the Display Object is added to a Display Object Container (with the addChild method), its stage property becomes that held by its parent which, unless that Display Object isn't on the display list of the stage (I'm not sure that's the proper terminology), a reference to the stage. It is also deleted again when the Display Object is removed from its parent.
So, to access the stage, you'll need to either add a Display Object to something on the stage or a child of which, or you pass the reference to the class or class instance in another way.
For example, you could pass 'stage' whenever you created an instance (it would have to be from something with a correct stage reference of course), and then stored that property away for use later:
private var myStage:Stage //you can't call it 'stage' if the class extends the Display Object class
public function MyClass(stageReference:Stage)
{
myStage = stageReference;
}
var classie:MyClass = new MyClass(stage)
Alternatively, you could make the "myStage" property a static one if you needed to do so.
At 4/10/10 05:03 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote: apple is way less abusive to developers (for iphone) than microsoft (for xbox), sony (for ps3/psp), or nintendo are.
Well, you're comparing games consoles which typically release giant games from giant companies to an online store for buying small little games from smaller companies. Of course those companies should really streamline their services for smaller groups, but I see that as more of a difficulty for the company rather than screwing the developer to benefit themselves. But, on a more comparable note, the XNA system which Microsoft has set up has rarely caused any problems and is, in my opinion, one of the best possible ways at current to deal with the process, as well as having a much nicer License Agreement for developers.
At 4/10/10 05:13 PM, Halosheep wrote: That the xkcd guy? Or did he copy that comic from this game?, cus they look identical.
Game based on comic. Not by same person.
Doomsday-One, working on stuff better than preloaders. Marginally.
haXe + preprocessor = caXe
basic preprocessor (stress basic, doesn't actually care about the syntax of the haXe language beyond knowing about comments and strings so that it can ignore them), totally textually based:
#import directory;
//translates to
import directory.class1;
import directory.class2;
import directory.subdirectory.class1;
///etc.
imports all classes (.cx and .hx) under the directory considering the directories to work with including
#import;
aka. import EVERYTHING
#def preamble #name<a rgs> postamble(#args)
#name<a rgs>
//example:
#def inline function #proc<T>(obj:#T) { do shit with #T; }
#proc<Int>(10);
//translates to:
inline function proc_Int(obj:Int) { do shit with Int; }
proc_Int(10);
#exp #name<a rgs> postamble(#args)
#name<a rgs>
//example:
#exp #init<T> var obj = new #T();
#init<Int> #init<Float>
//translates to:
var obj = new Int();
var obj = new Float();
proper example: applicatin to my physics engine:
Generic object pool class assuming property 'next' of same type for generic type.
#import;
#def class #Pool<T> { \\
\\
public var stack:#T; \\
public function new() stack = null \\
\\
public inline function alloc():#T { \\
if(stack==null) return new #T(); \\
else { \\
var ret = stack; \\
stack = stack.next; \\
return ret; \\
} \\
}\\
\\
public inline function free(obj:#T) { \\
obj.next = stack; \\
stack = obj; \\
}\\
\\
public inline function reserve(num:UInt) while(num-->0) free(new #T()) \\
public inline function clear() stack = null \\
\\
}
Allocator class:
#import;
class Allocator {
#def public var #pool<T>:#Pool<#T>; #init<#T>
#def public inline function #alloc <T>() return #pool<#T>.alloc () #init<#T>
#def public inline function #free <T>(obj:#T ) #pool<#T>.free (obj) #init<#T>
#def public inline function #reserve<T>(num:UInt) #pool<#T>.reserve(num) #init<#T>
#def public inline function #clear <T>() #pool<#T>.clear () #init<#T>
#exp #init<T> #init_new<#T> #init_clear<#T>
public function new() {
#exp #init_new<T> #pool<#T> = new #Pool<#T>();
}
public inline function clear() {
#exp #init_clear<T> #clear<#T>();
}
}
usage
var a = new Allocator();
a.#reserve<Vec2>(1000);
var arbiter = a.#alloc<a rbiter>();
with the Pool classes being auto-generated, along with the pool instances inside Allocator, and the code to initialise and clear them, and any methods of Allocator which are called directly or indirectly
There's a rule against mass zero bombings, right?
The fucking Sketch Collab is zero bombing the Game Trailer Collab right now. They even admit to it in their thread. Why couldn't they have just left us alone and let the daily awards be given out fairly?
You'll have both 0'd each other enough so zombooka will claim the top spot :p
At 4/10/10 08:42 PM, Archon68 wrote: There's a rule against mass zero bombings, right?
The fucking Sketch Collab is zero bombing the Game Trailer Collab right now. They even admit to it in their thread. Why couldn't they have just left us alone and let the daily awards be given out fairly?
Man up, and take it!
At 4/10/10 09:06 PM, SantoNinoDeCebu wrote: You'll have both 0'd each other enough so zombooka will claim the top spot :p
As long as those bastards don't get Daily Feature I'm happy.
At 4/10/10 05:33 PM, Doomsday-One wrote:At 4/10/10 04:18 PM, crushy wrote: Ah, error #1009...That would be because 'stage' is a property held by every individual Display Object, one which holds a reference to a 'Stage' object. When a Display Object is first created, the value of this property is 'null' - i.e. it holds no reference to the stage...
This is definitely the problem although as detailed as your post is I think I'm going to need to find a tutorial that caters for my need to be spoon fed such learning. I especially don't know what you mean by Display Object Container, are you referring to the .fla file?
At 4/10/10 09:17 PM, Archon68 wrote:At 4/10/10 09:06 PM, SantoNinoDeCebu wrote: You'll have both 0'd each other enough so zombooka will claim the top spot :pAs long as those bastards don't get Daily Feature I'm happy.
Archon, zero bombing is about as useful as nuclear war. It's MAD, I tell you.
Puns aren't my strong point.
Apple shutting out Adobe pisses me off, but I guess it's their prerogative. I'm still pissed about no flash in their Safari browser on ipod/iphone.
I'd like to imagine they're shooting themselves in the foot with all this bull, but I get the nagging feeling they've thought it out and weighed the pros and cons and concluded this is the best way to line their pockets the fastest.
At 4/10/10 11:35 PM, BoMToons wrote: Apple shutting out Adobe pisses me off, but I guess it's their prerogative. I'm still pissed about no flash in their Safari browser on ipod/iphone.
I'd like to imagine they're shooting themselves in the foot with all this bull, but I get the nagging feeling they've thought it out and weighed the pros and cons and concluded this is the best way to line their pockets the fastest.
So I found this little article about the topic. This guy emails steve about how he's hindering creativity by shutting out adobe. Steve replies saying something like: We've been there before, it causes lack of progress to the platform" and what not. A really interesting read and a few sub-links that also are interesting reads.
So I guess what side should we side with? Is it smarter to hinder the progress of a platform OR hinder the creativity?
Indulge me
At 4/11/10 01:22 AM, Duchednier wrote: So I guess what side should we side with? Is it smarter to hinder the progress of a platform OR hinder the creativity?
Indulge me
side with "i don't care, I wasn't gonna use flash for iphone development anyway"
At 4/10/10 10:24 PM, crushy wrote: This is definitely the problem although as detailed as your post is I think I'm going to need to find a tutorial that caters for my need to be spoon fed such learning. I especially don't know what you mean by Display Object Container, are you referring to the .fla file?
Oops, my bad.
A Display Object is anything which can be displayed on the screen. So the stage, Movie Clips, Sprites and even Text Fields inherit from the Display Object class.
A Display Object Container is anything which can 'contain' Display Objects. That essentially means objects with the addChild method and other methods and properties which deal with children (like depth-swapping functions).
The Display Object Container class inherits from the Display Object class, so all Display Object Containers are also Display Objects, but not necessarily the other way around. So, the stage, Movie Clips and Sprites are all Display Object Containers as well as Display Objects, but Text Field is not - you cannot add children to a text field.
I hope that clears it up.
Either way, you don't have to worry about it too much. Either addChild the class instance to the stage or something on the stage or something on something on the stage (and so on) if your class extends Sprite or Movie Clip or something like that, or just pass 'stage' from something on the stage (and so on) to a function in your class and store that reference in a variable somewhere (like in my code snippets).
Also, I liked your pun.
Doomsday-One, working on stuff better than preloaders. Marginally.
At 4/10/10 04:53 PM, Farza wrote: YES!
The Game Trailer Collab has been released!
Watch it!
Wow, another award for a collab you did nothing for. You're so fucking cool.
As usual, the last doctor who episodes were very disappointing, but still somewhat enjoyable to watch. The first 15 minutes are always good. Creepy smiling faces, alien prisoner being hidden in your house. Good stuff. But from there on, it always goes downhill. Seriously, the end of the episodes are always so cheesy that even I, a frenchman, cannot stand it. They have nice ideas, but the plot is always retarded. Huge space whale that carries countries on its back can't stand seeing the children crying because it's the last one of its kind and somehow it's been watching earth from space and also it's a whale so it takes the humans on its back to space but it gets tortured? Jesus christ, give me a fucking break. What is this - a power rangers episode, or a nationally accredited TV show?
At 4/11/10 04:01 PM, Toast wrote: They have nice ideas, but the plot is always retarded.
You must be new to Doctor Who, it's meant to be lowest common denominator, that what makes it so fun.
When you have a box that is bigger on the inside, can travel anywhere and anywhen instantly piloted by a man two hearts who can change is entire appearance, Starwhales are totally plausible.
At 4/11/10 04:08 PM, Kirk-Cocaine wrote:At 4/11/10 04:01 PM, Toast wrote: They have nice ideas, but the plot is always retarded.You must be new to Doctor Who, it's meant to be lowest common denominator, that what makes it so fun.
The last show I watched like crazy and became a total fan was DragonBall Z.
Then, Cartoon Network started making shows like FlapJack, Chowder, and CN Real.
Even Nick is losing itself with shows like Icarly.
Now the PowerPuff girls, those were some good times.
I am a FAB
At 4/11/10 05:20 PM, Kirk-Cocaine wrote: Also, speaking of The Doctor:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/86 07925.stm
^_^
This could be very cool, or it could be extremely lame, I pray it's the former. Then I would play the crap out of that :3
As for the new doctor, he's cool, I like his bow tie :3, he didn't steal too much from David Tennant, I love his arrogance. I really enjoyed the first one, was quite exciting and Amy is pretty hot, although she is ginger, yes I said it ;D Second one was average, the spacewhale sounded like it should've been from pokemon.
.
At 4/11/10 05:36 PM, adman wrote: This could be very cool, or it could be extremely lame, I pray it's the former. Then I would play the crap out of that :3
Yeah, hopefully the BBC higher-ups wont have to much of a say in the games. The fact it's part of their "drive to increase computer literacy" is a bit of a worry.
I really enjoyed the first one
Yeah, the food scene was hilarious. "You're Scottish, fry something" had me crying.
yes I said it ;D Second one was average
I thought it was pretty good, next weeks looks awesome though.
Amy is pretty hot, although she is ginger,
You just made my list.
I feel like I'm missing out on something everytime I see you guys talking about Dr. Who. I don't think it's ever been aired over here, must be too British for Dutch television.
What exactly is this thread for? I read the original post, but don't exactly understand it.
At 4/11/10 06:01 PM, Xeptic wrote: I feel like I'm missing out on something everytime I see you guys talking about Dr. Who. I don't think it's ever been aired over here, must be too British for Dutch television.
http://www.doctorwho-episodes.com/
Series 5 (not Season) is the newest bunch of episodes.
At 4/11/10 06:06 PM, SmartNoob wrote: What exactly is this thread for? I read the original post, but don't exactly understand it.
Like a mini-General forum for the Flash 'regs'.
At 4/11/10 04:43 PM, Farza wrote: Even Nick is losing itself with shows like Icarly.
when has there ever been a good show on there, excluding ren and stimpy
At 4/11/10 06:40 PM, turtleco wrote:At 4/11/10 04:43 PM, Farza wrote: Even Nick is losing itself with shows like Icarly.when has there ever been a good show on there, excluding ren and stimpy
*cough cough* Spongebob?
"If everyone did things 75% right people would be ecstatic, so I demand that you change this C to an A+!" - Calvin and Hobbes
At 4/11/10 06:41 PM, Halosheep wrote:At 4/11/10 06:40 PM, turtleco wrote:*cough cough* Spongebob?At 4/11/10 04:43 PM, Farza wrote: Even Nick is losing itself with shows like Icarly.when has there ever been a good show on there, excluding ren and stimpy
Spongebob's the only reason I check onto Nick once in a while.
I am a FAB
At 4/11/10 05:20 PM, Kirk-Cocaine wrote: Also, speaking of The Doctor:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/86 07925.stm
^_^
I looked that up on Saturday.
It could be really good, but It'll be most likely be ruined by the fact it has to appeal to all the younger generations too.
