4 days ago - Take your game development to the next level with Visual Studio IDE. Look into the graphics pipeline to understand exactly what occurred. Today I am working with Visual Studio Code and would love to keep working in Visual Studio Well, yes of course it is possible. But I you'd have to make some configurations yourself. It won't be as easy as using Visual Studio or MonoDevelop.
I have been WAITING around for a couple years to be able to build a game using Unreal Engine And Xcode (if I could use ANY other IDE that worked. For YEARS now I could never really XCODE to work with Unreal Engine. Even just creating the simplest project like Third Person Template. The.cpp files SHOW ALL ERRORS. I have been thru EVERY FREAKING little article about letting the project index.
And rebuilding the index. But it NEVER WORKS. This is supposed to be the BEST (available) HARD-CORE Game Engine using high performance C (compared to like unity or something). How can ANYBODY be expected to actually produce a game using a Editor that is full of errors and NO intellisens (sometimes SOME classes show auto-complete) but most times NOT.
All those millions of dollars and triple AAA console games made with Unreal Engine and the FREAKING source code editor (at least for Mac.Xcode) is complete. NOTE: Its DOES actually build successfully. But come on man. You cant build a real game with this XCODE implementation of a source editor. I mean really you would better of using a PLAIN OL TEXT EDITOR.
Because besides Tyler being a project that contains all the code for your game. It is completely useless.
SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME. ALL THIS IS JUST ME.
Xcode works fine. Does not show a million errors just simply opening the project and has auto-complete. I am just a dumb. and everything is working fine. PLEASE TELL ME THAT IS THE CASE.
Filter posts by subject: FAQs & Wiki 1 2 Posting Guidelines v3.5 is a game development community for developer-oriented content. We hope to promote discussion and a sense of community among game developers on reddit.
Off Topic Feedback requests / 'Play my game' Post an about your game or use the to trade feedback Job Offers, Recruiting, and related activities Use and for that Promotion Once-per-game feedback requests or release threads are OK, but a considerable history of participation on is required. Must be a Text Post. Devlogs that do not have a focus on being useful to other developers. Do not talk about what advancements occurred on your game this week. That is what Feedback Friday, Screenshot Saturday, and are for. Memes Giveaways Explicitly On Topic Gamedev-relevant Articles, Videos, and Announcements Free Assets (please specify license) 09/2017: Posting on-sale assets is no longer allowed Language/Framework discussions Be sure to check the.
AMAs If you have a unique perspective on something, we'd love to hear it. This is not a way to promote your game/kickstarter/etc, please see above. The focus should be on providing info to the community, not promoting yourself. Be sure to include your education and years of experience to provide some context. Restrictions Do not use tags, assign flair to your post after it's created.
Question posts. Should include what you've already tried and why it was inadequate. Be sure to check the. Minimum Text Submission Length 40 words or so. That's about two tweets.
Surveys and polls. Should have their results shared with us. Shared Assets.
Should have a proper license included in the post itself. Please include images/samples in your post!
'Share Your Stuff' threads. Should have the OP posting in the comments alongside everyone else, if they post. Socialize: Join our Watch Weekly threads: Related communities 1 2. As a long-time programmer, I have to say some of the newest visual editor-based engines have really put me off, like Unity and a couple of 2D frameworks, such as Construct. When I learned AS2 and AS3 at school, we first learned to use Adobe Flash and its' script-based approach: you create a movieclip and add code to specific frames, then access clips by their name. I remember, at the time, I was mind-blown. But, moving to AS3, our teacher forced to use FlashDevelop (and IDE) and use things such as classes, which I found ugly and offensive compared to Adobe Flash's (now Adobe Animate) nice environment.
I have never coded outside an IDE again in my life, well, if you ignore text files editing. Today, the amount of control an IDE (and a complex object-oriented coding environment) gives me seems to be much more efficient to some editor I have to learn how to master, and complex, if even present, access to some semblance of either source code or component code.
Now, instead of simply considering myself better than everyone else, I want to ask: are visual editors for game engines only useful to beginners or newcomers? Who here had a similar history, or the opposite, where you learned to code the hard way but discovered the 'marvel' that you consider editors to be? Am I completely off-track? Is the visual aspect to editors so much more efficient than looking at code? I can't get to start learning Unity because of this. I've built complex frameworks out of code, and games out of code, tools out of code. Hell, I try to stay away from UI editors, instead using code to position things.
Positioning via UI editor is a lot more efficient than by code IMO. But the Unity engine is a game development suite. Not just for programmers, but for the whole team. I haven't been in Unity for awhile, but I'm pretty sure you can do practically everything in code that you could do in the UI. Therefor you don't really need to use the UI at all if you don't want to. Outside of debugging that is. But to me, visual editing is a lot more efficient than using code sometimes.
It gives you a different perspective. They make everything easier and there is no logical reason not to use them when available. This doesn't just apply to games, BTW.
For example, say someone made the following (admittedly ridiculous) request of me: 'hey, I for some reason need you to build an application in the next couple of hours where the main form is divided into four quadrants: the top left needs to be a self-contained OpenGL widget that is constantly drawing a single triangle filled with randomly chosen colors. The top right needs to be literally just a copy of VLC Media Player embedded directly in the application window, playing a video of your choce.
The bottom left needs to be a custom-drawn scientific 'scope' widget that draws lines randomly, with its timing synchronized with the aftorementioned OpenGL widget. Finally, the bottom right needs to be an image-display widget, that the user of the application can load any picture of their choice into via a standard File menu (that the application also must have, by the way!)' I would of course wonder what drugs this person was on, but at the same time, I could easily do exactly what they're asking in Lazarus, as it has drag-and-drop visual components available that fill all the described criteria. It would literally not be a big deal or really any kind of inconvenience at all. I could have it ready to go on Windows, Mac, or any Linux distro that has GTK2, QT4 or QT5 bindings (as those are the three Linux backends supported by Lazarus) in no time at all. Now, imagine attempting to fulfill those requirements in the same timeframe in the context of the majority of other languages/IDEs that don't provide real WYSIWYG design functionality. Even in something like QT Creator it would be a nightmare! TLDR: Ease-of-use and performance are not mutually exclusive and CAN absolutely be found together, and anyone who doesn't think so has simply forgotten that languages other than Insert Something Based On C, or Sometimes Python Here exist or is the kind of myopic idiot who thinks that how well they can handle things being 'difficult for difficulty's sake' is some kind of measure of their worth as a programmer.
Yeah, you're off track. But I do understand the sentiment and I used to believe something similar. I have been a programmer for decades, and I use to resist anything like visual editors, or even existing frameworks a lot of the time, insisting I should write my own. People would tell me 'stop reinventing the wheel!' Quite often, but I didn't listen. They were right.
I was refusing to use the right tools for the job out of pride and stubbornness. I was digging swimming pools with a spoon while a backhoe sat right behind me unused. You seem to have the wrong impression when it comes to visual editors as well, at least when it comes to Unity which is the one you mention.
It's not a choice of 'Are the visual aspects better than looking at code?' I use Unity for every project now, and I look at a whole lot of code. Yeah, I'd stay away from silly things like Playmaker or some other engines with drag-and-drop coding or some shit. Those actually are for beginners and newcomers. But speaking for Unity, which is what I use, that's not what it is at all. It just takes care of the myriad amount of boring stuff that every game has to have so that you can start coding the interesting stuff right away. And it allows you to lay out visual things visually, which makes way more sense than doing it in code.
![Whats The Best Visual Studio Mac For Coding Games Whats The Best Visual Studio Mac For Coding Games](/uploads/1/2/5/4/125486596/267281083.gif)
You say you use code to position things instead of using UI editors. Visual design is visual. Code is for functionality. That said, Unity does force some things I don't agree with. I'm kind of a fanatic about object oriented design, and Unity does force me to sin. However, the benefits far outweigh the annoyances.
I'm certain it would take me four times longer to make a single game if I wasn't using Unity. Silly things like Playmaker Looks like you still have something to learn;) I'm a dev with 10+ years of experience, and coding for my game mostly in C#. But I would not call Playmaker silly. It's the same 'backhoe' story, only when it comes to managing State Machines (which has quite a lot of applications). There are no 'true developer' tools out there. Only those that either do good or bad job at providing you the best possible ability to manage your code project during the product's lifetime.
This is a really interesting comment. I might have had the erroneous impression that using Unity as a framework inside a IDE was not easily possible by itself. When I mentionned UI editors, I was taught that. Now that I think about it, it might have mostly been because the stacking algorithms are much more useful than relative or even absolute positionning.
You're also right, now that I understand it a bit more, that I shouldn't put Unity in the same basket as other, more visually-oriented game-creating software. To my knowledge, it is not possible to use the Unity framework without using the Unity environment, but coding is not done within Unity. I use MonoDevelop for C# code.
I could use Visual Studio, but I prefer open source options when available. The way Unity works is that any class that derives from the MonoBehaviour class can be attached to a Unity object. You then override the functions of MonoBehaviour to do what you want to do. For example, Awake is called whenever Unity instantiates the object the class is attached to, Update is called every frame, etc. You put the code in there to do what you want when those things happen. Then you can have an entire middle tier that has nothing to do with Unity. I have one game in development that uses a SQLite database, a data tier, a full object oriented object hierarchy, and the visual part is handled by Unity objects with classes derived from MonoBehaviour that interact with the rest of it.
The build is done in the Unity Environment though, not MonoDevelop. Not sure if you already got your answer but I'll take a crack at it. Ok, so I could build my own framework You could absolutely do this.
However, I would make sure you take a close look at the API first to make sure you're not inventing the wheel. For example, you may have a few objects models that are parented to a main object. You may want to merge all of these into a single mesh for performance reasons. On the other hand, RimWorld is pretty much all procedural generation and is made in Unity, but I don't use most of the Unity gameplay object and component system, though, because it is too heavy for the thousands of objects in RimWorld. The object framework is custom-coded and fixed-timestep.
So looks like you can pretty much do what you want. And integrate some kind of instantiation system where I would not need to add stuff to an editor? Like another poster already said, you'll need to add at least one GameObject. Then, you'll attach a script to this object that is a child of the MonoBehavior class and override specific methods on it.
For example, I have a project that is kind of like an infinite terrain runner. I have one God object who's 'Start' method instantiates a grid of procedurally generated terrain Tiles around the player's character. As the player character moves, the God object is responsible for moving the tiles that go out of range to the direction the player is moving in, and calling a method on them that procedurally generates a new mesh for the new location it's at. The Tiles themselves were originally created in the Unity editor, but only so that I could set the correct texture on them and add the script to the object. Then they were saved as a 'prefab', ie: pre-fabricated object. The God object then instantiates these prefabs at the start of the game.
If you want to look at what's possible with Unity, take a look at either RimWorld or Kerbal Space Program. You would have to add at least one thing via the editor, the object with the class that runs the other code and instantiates the other stuff. After that, you can instantiate everything else and do everything from code.
Although you'd probably be best using prefabs which are basically Unity objects which are all set up but not added to the scene. You can then instantiate those prefabs however you want and they would have their own behaviors attached to do their own stuff, and your player character would have behaviors on him to do what he needs to do, etc, so you would want to set these things up and create prefabs from them, and then instantiate them from your code. You don't have to, but it would be a lot easier than building each component in code every time. Sadly the development of those might have stopped probably because they are not really popular with most Unity devs. The component system toggled with heavy use of editor inspectors/ extensions is the recommend way, all tutorials will be teaching that, and the majority of devs will be afraid of you if you dont use the component system.
In the end what I did was completely remove Unity dependency from my engine and port it to pure C#. Then later I added Unity back but only as a possible backend (other backends include Monogame for example). At least now I can code games 100% in Visual Studio without having to deal with Unity crashes and other workflow disasters. If you really are the type of coder that hates editor workflow then this is the way to go, I think.