On 10/19/06, Alex Holkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Simon Wittber wrote:
> An easy_install'able pygame-ctypes would be very handy...
There are .eggs for all versions of Python at
http://pygame.org/ctypes/. I haven't looked into whether more is
required to make it easy_installable, but would be
I think that´s because you haven't separeted your graphics code with the physics one. In a pro game, there are 2 updates: the renderer, and the gameplay. The renderer would update every... say, 1/40 of a second, while the gameplay would update every 1/100; that would avoid problems such as colisio
>What you'd really like is a joint that constrains>motion to a plane, but ODE doesn't seem to provide
>any such joint type.--GregI really wish there was a physics engine for 2d that python could use. I have no real interest in doing 3d games, and not having to hack something like ode to work with 2
Yea well the good news is that either putting those planes in or just zeroing any z axes or a combination seems to have fixed the problems I had with my motion getting messed up.Now however i'm noticing that my boxes get stuck together if the speed is too great. If I accelerate my square really qui
Marcelo de Moraes Serpa wrote:
I'm not into 3D yet either. But I really don't like slow rendering
speeds on 2D games. Blitz has an incredible fast 2D rendering speed but
the language is basic and I don't like basic!
Most of the rendering work in 2D is blitting, which in pygame
is done by C cod
Mark Mruss wrote:
Not a 3d game of course but a simple 2d game, a side
scroller or puzzle game, and PyGame seems like a nice way to keep
things simple.
So for me I'd love to hear about what kind of performance people have
been able to achieve using straight PyGame, and whether or not it
makes se
Lionel Barret de Nazaris wrote:
Complex 3D (like seen in commercial AAA games) is quite out of the
question for now *but* simple games are very easy to do.
The trick is to find external libraries you can wrap
to do most of the hard work, and just write the high
level control code in Python.
Y
Patrick Mullen wrote:
Also, the first method doesn't deal with any
rotation that occurs - the two planes will prevent rotation most of the
time.
Another way of preventing rotation might be to use
a AMotor joint constraining the angular velocity
to zero around the x and y axes.
What you'd real
> Hi. Ode is really fidly, you have to set all the values well or it just
> wont work as expected. It can be hard to get it to work right, especially
> if you are constraining it to 2 axis. (It's designed around 3). I have
> used pyode a few times in the past, but am by no means an expert.
Thi
Thanks Greg, yeah i'm pretty sure its the viewing angle.
Quoting Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> JoN wrote:
> > the
> > perspective of the teapot is strange, it seems a bit 'fisheye' as it
> rotates
> > around, almost allowing both the spout and the handle to hide behind the
> body of
> > the p
Is it this one, or a different one ?
http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSpeed/PerformanceTips
Quoting Richard Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thursday 19 October 2006 04:14, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> > There's always ways to optimize things later. Write the code. If it's
> > not fast enough, *profi
Simon Wittber wrote:
Whats the status of pygame ctypes atm?
Functionality is complete. The few modules that are not implemented are
unofficially deprecated in Pygame, so will probably never get
implemented (pygame.movie, pygame.overlay). There are no outstanding
bugs that I'm aware of (th
JoN wrote:
the
perspective of the teapot is strange, it seems a bit 'fisheye' as it rotates
around, almost allowing both the spout and the handle to hide behind the body of
the pot together
This is a normal effect of perspective projection. If
you imagine putting your eye right up close to a te
I agree with Bob.
* Python is a very easy language to prototype in and is quite fast. Very fast
sometimes. And it is perfectly suitable for building large programs in.
* Psyco (which I only discovered recently btw) can apparently give quite
miraculous speedups in some cases.
* When you have th
I attached my little test from a year ago (I forgot to attach it to my first reply). It's been a while since I looked at it, but I think your last value of the planes are wrong. In my example they are:frontwall =
ode.GeomPlane(sp,normal=(0,0,1),dist=-1)backwall = ode.GeomPlane(sp,normal=(0,0,-1)
How exactly did you create those planes? My understanding from what you said above is that you'd create one plane at z=1 with a normal facing down the negative Z axis and another at z=-1 facing down the positive Z axis. Which I coded like this:
space = ode.Space()plane1 = ode.GeomPlane(space, (0, 0
On 10/18/06, Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Once everything is in place you first replace code that's slow with
better algorithms. If you still need better performance, then you try
other means. It usually is fast enough at this point, and you're done.
In many cases you can beat (naive)
On Thursday 19 October 2006 04:14, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> There's always ways to optimize things later. Write the code. If it's
> not fast enough, *profile* the code to see what's not fast, and take
> steps to optimize that part of the code.
>
> Sometimes using psyco is going to be enough, dependin
Once everything is in place you first replace code that's slow with
better algorithms. If you still need better performance, then you try
other means. It usually is fast enough at this point, and you're done.
In many cases you can beat (naive) C or C++ in speed simply because
it's more natural to
In other words, you could consider python as the "prototype code".
it is not fast but it is easy to code and therefore to something working
quickly.
Once everything, and i mean everything, is in place (i.e you have
overcome all obstacles), you replace part of the "prototype code" that
need it b
Hi MarkMaybe this against all programmers rules but I wouldn't concern performing the game from the beginning. If you have written the game in a proper way its quite easy to optimize later on. I do it that way and was happy about it with one big reason: I didnt spend time on optimizing it when I ha
There's always ways to optimize things later. Write the code. If it's
not fast enough, *profile* the code to see what's not fast, and take
steps to optimize that part of the code.
Sometimes using psyco is going to be enough, depending on which
platforms you care about. Otherwise you could change
I'm not into 3D yet either. But I really don't like slow rendering speeds on 2D games. Blitz has an incredible fast 2D rendering speed but the language is basic and I don't like basic!
On 10/18/06, Mark Mruss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yeah the performance of pyGame has always been a question for m
Yeah the performance of pyGame has always been a question for me,
especially since I'm thinking of writing the entire game in straight
python/pyGame. Not a 3d game of course but a simple 2d game, a side
scroller or puzzle game, and PyGame seems like a nice way to keep
things simple.
So for me I'
>So except if you want to code the next Unreal, you should have>everything you need.Actually I want to code Quake 5 :D lol..That was just for the sake of curiosity. Thanks for the the info, it helps knowing how python works.
Marcelo.On 10/18/06, Lionel Barret de Nazaris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Marcelo de Moraes Serpa wrote:
Hello list!
I used to use Blitz Basic to develop games some time ago. Now, I want
to play with the wonderful world of game development again. I've found
python to be a extremelly elegant, powerful and easy to use language,
so, pygame seems to fit perfectly for w
hi marcelo
performance depends very much on what you do. Using Opengl for the
rendering speeds up the performance. Knowing about optimising python
also helps. Check this out
http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSpeed/PerformanceTips
enrike
Marcelo de Moraes Serpa escribió:
Hello list!
I used
Whats the status of pygame ctypes atm?
An easy_install'able pygame-ctypes would be very handy...
-Sw.
Hello list!I used to use Blitz Basic to develop games some time ago. Now, I want to play with the wonderful world of game development again. I've found python to be a extremelly elegant, powerful and easy to use language, so, pygame seems to fit perfectly for what I'd like to do. However, I've seen
The two options I know of are to either force the object to remain on the same axis by arbitrarily setting z=0 after collision response; and to construct two planes at say, z=1 and z=-1 and making your objects of z-width=1.98
or so. The second method is probably more reliable, as you are using th
Quoting Alex Holkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> JoN wrote:
>
> >I have a glreport.py that I cooked up and it appears I'm getting all the
> goodies.
> >The nvidia driver installed nicely and seems to have replaced all the right
> >.so's and updated the LD' hints properly.
> >
> >
> Another thought:
JoN wrote:
I have a glreport.py that I cooked up and it appears I'm getting all the
goodies.
The nvidia driver installed nicely and seems to have replaced all the right
.so's and updated the LD' hints properly.
Another thought: AFAIK ctypes doesn't look at the LD variables, so check
that th
Quoting Alex Holkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> I'm assuming you still had glUseProgram in there ;-) I suppose if you
> don't set the value of a uniform parameter it defaults to zero anyway
> (first texture unit), so yeah, cool.
>
Yeah, that sounds right.
> >Also - when the teapot spins ro
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 17:16, Alex Holkner wrote:
> Might
> want to also check that you're actually loading the nvidia driver, not
> the open source one, or (worse) Mesa.
Mesa doesn't do shaders IIRC.
Richard
JoN wrote:
Just thought you might like to know that all works beautifully, thanks!
Couple of interesting points.
It worked even before these actions:
texture_param = glGetUniformLocation(program, "texture");
Set the sampler to use the first texture unit (0):
glUseProgram(program)
35 matches
Mail list logo