Defining Awesome
  • Status Updates

  • Written by . Posted at 5:35 am on September 29th, 2009

    I’m rewriting my own physics engine – postulate #4 To get things done, plan and and do only what is needed

    Be Sociable, Share!


    1. this is getting like DNF, you’re changing your physics engine for the 3th time. Unless you state a good reason for ditching box2d your postulate #4 contradicts with it. So the new physics is built upon the basis of the one in Soldat? Or you’re taking stuff from box2d, rewrite it to your liking and call it your own? Would be nice to get some info on it. Are you designing it to work closely with your networking code? Cause that would justify the sudden change.
      looking forward to some demos.

    2. I love it when you guys get mad at me.
      Don’t worry, postulate #4 works wonders. I’ve already done 50% of the physics code in just 3.5 hours.

    3. Revised ETA for Link-Dead: Q3 2017

    4. You just can’t stick to one idea and go with it, can’t you ? 😛 I hope the next entry on the blog won’t be something like this:

      I’m not satisfied with entire concept of Link Dead. I’ve returned to pre-concept level of development and deleted everything I’ve done so far, also here are some of my new thoughts on life and development process…


      @Kosa aahahahahahhaa rofl , Michal , man up and get on with it

    6. Wait wait wait wait….MM diddnt you just finish the engine? Well anyways, can’t wait to see how its going to run.

    7. “I’ve already done 50%” From my experience – last 10% of code take 90% of time q:

    8. …and once the code is there, it’s just the 10 % of the work. The rest is bug hunting and tweaking. Wasn’t this said by MM himself? :)

      I don’t mind the delays. Actually I am not that interested in the game, but instead the devblogging interests me the most. As long as there is info about progress, I am happy.

    9. I’m not THAT interested in Link-Dead either, mostly because we have no idea about fundamental gameplay mechanics, and because nothing is as cool as jetpacks, nothing.

      I don’t see this as a big setback though. MM’s wrote passable ragdoll physics for Soldat a long time ago, I’m sure he can do it again.

    10. niko šveikovsky

      F3nyx: “nothing is as cool as jetpacks, nothing.”

      Michal, you better come up with some good gimmicks for this game, F3nyx makes a valid point.

    11. I’m pretty certain that MM will be able to write even better physics code now, and lets not forget he is not using delphi anymore, c++ is much more flexible, faster and powerful. Link-dead will be released, so don’t rush it, i myself have started learning a bit of C++ and compared to what MM is doing, this is extremely easy.

    12. SpiltCoffee

      “From my experience – last 10% of code take 90% of time q:”
      Last 10% of anything you make takes 90% of your time.

      Also, MM, are you planning to release this game any time before Duke Nukem Forever?

    13. @SpiltCoffee Well, I hope so. Duke Nukem was finally cancelled.

    14. I hope none of you guys are suggesting that MM owes you something…it’s his game and he can do whatever he wants with it. And besides, if a revised physics engine means a better end result, than i’m all for it.

    15. Well you got to understand some people read this blog since almost 2 years (like me) and now after one complete reset they read that he is writing a new physics engine. I can understand that some people get pissed off since they jsut want to play the game finally.

    16. Don’t be a perfectionist. You know what happens when you focus too much on the small details until they are “perfect”. We know you want Soldat-like success and beyond. You’ve got the engine finished, so it’s time to build the game.

      Also after you finish building the game, you may realize that physics engine X was the best, or that you should have used Y model of networking, because you realized something interesting in the game play.

      As much as you imagine the final product to be, you don’t know what the game will be like exactly until the game itself is finished and is being tested and played. For now, just build the core engine, then build, then test, THEN make changes as you see fit.

      Perhaps I’m wrong and perhaps impatient. 😀 I also don’t know your reasons, except for those you post. Just be aware of things like what happened with the first Tribes game. “Skiing” was invented by the beta testers. I can’t remember if it was either a glitch or not, but it was something that wasn’t meant to happen according to the developers. None the less, skiing changed the game play and made the game cooler.

      As an artist if I put my brush to canvas, my painting is rarely as I first envision it. That doesn’t mean, I’m a bad painter, it’s just that I realized over time that I wasn’t imagining the final product, but rather the core concept and elements I wanted in the painting. When I would start with a clear canvas, once finished, the end result looked a bit different from what I imagined, BUT, not only did it have all the concepts and expression I wanted, it managed to translate what I wanted to convey even better that what I pictured.

      There has been great debates whether or not a programmer is an artist, but I think if you compose a game, then you are an artist. Like an artist, you are making something, which engages the player/viewer.

      I could go on and on about being an artist, based on what I studied in art school, but I think you know as much as you need.

      Anyway this is just my opinion. I just get the feeling that you’re focusing on the perfect engine, which, could result in not being a perfect engine for the end result, which, means that you would be doing more work than necessary.

      Hopefully, what I’ve said isn’t going to piss you off. It’s simply observation. However, my opinion can only go so far, since, as I’ve said before, I don’t have the experience yet of building a complete game from raw code to finished product. So in this sense, I only know so much.

    17. While wishing for high quality, I say:
      I like the idea.
      I think the engine is the one thing that will define the feeling of the game and everything about it, and is the part that should be focused on carefully.
      I don’t know WHY box2D was a bad choice in your opinion, but I think you should take time and make the engine perfect, you’ve got lots of room for mistakes later.
      Right now you need a stable basis for the link-dead house, or else the house will come tumbling down.

      But as a gamer in need of his dosis, I say:
      Hurry up! And give more pictures!

    Post a comment.