|
I generally abhor black-box frameworks. I have a set of classes that have served me very well for the last 10 years and switching over to EF is not what I really wanted to do. You're most likely right about why I feel the way I do, but that's no excuse for the piecemeal learning curve I've had to endure.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: but that's no excuse for the piecemeal learning curve I've had to endure.
It has been no bed of roses for me learning Entity Framework, and I do understand your frustration completely. You are completely justified to feel frustrated and angry about this. I guess you just have to do what you have to do to get over this hurdle. 
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't mean you have to throw out "your" classes.
Once you get more familiar with EF, you will find simpler ways to integrate than what is in the "samples"; particularly if you're using "repository patterns" already.
My "old" MODBUS serial classes are now MODBUS over TCP/IP classes.
(Easy conversion since they were "my" classes to start with).
Take the "code first" approach starting out; let EF generate your database as you go along.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Web development is like "crack": the next tool, framework, hit, etc, will be "better".
MS still cannot develop a stable browser.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
EF was designed to crush your soul. Not to mention, make us DBA's go WTF (I've seen issues with double calls, and more).
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
|
|
|
|
|
Oy
My 9 year old wants to learn how to and then make a computer/video game.
So. Unity or Unreal? Other?
I know zip about games. No interest whatsoever, but my kid...
This is what he sent me:
Trying to go in a jungle in a haunted house and In a temple of dreams
With enemies like ground trolls and fire bats
And crystal spiders
For the jungle
The haunted house has pumpkin spirits and candycorn cowboys
As for the temple of dreams there are crystals to dream for anything of the players choice
All of that adventure to save mom
From being possessed by a demon
Which game engine would be best for that sort of game? An adventure with candycorn cowboys and fire bats.
'Cause we gotta rescue Mom.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems the kid has a nice story for the game, but what about graphics? music? and most of all - programming knowledge? All those nice engines do not have them for him...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Unity has 3 languages, C# the most common (UnityScript/Javascript, and Boo), and has many tutorials online + documentation and how tos, etc., and comes with VS 2017, but I think you could get it with out 2017.
I would use this.
You mention nothing of his programming skills, so I am going to assume we are putting the cart in front of the horse here. Still, if he is willing to take baby steps and learn, then Unity is the way to go.
FYI - Blizzard Games Hearthstone was done in Unity and a handful of popular games on Steam were done in Unity as well.
Many epic 3A games do not use Unity, but rather use the Unreal Engine, etc., and/or roll their own 3D engines.
Unity is getting better with every release. It has a good asset library (free, $$) so you don't need to be a graphic artist to get going with game design/implementation.
Edit: There are some nice articles and tech blogs on this site having to do with Unity game dev.
UNITY 3D – Game Programming – Part 2[^]
This one is almost 5 years old but has a lot of links to info, etc.: So you want to be a Unity3D game developer?[^]
and the obligatory MSDN article: Unity - Developing Your First Game with Unity and C#[^]
modified 5-Nov-17 7:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah...he has no programming skills whatsoever. Says he wants to learn...but only in the context of making a game.
I downloaded Unity, opened it up and said No Way.  Maybe. MAYbe, I will look at it again, but it's doubtful.
I think he'll have to start off with Scratch or GameMaker. We don't live in the same country, so teaching him something too complicated is unlikely.
But I may send him to Code.org for a start.
|
|
|
|
|
GenJerDan wrote: I think he'll have to start off with Scratch or GameMaker.
I have been told you can't go wrong with GameMaker. I have not used it myself, but I have heard and read nothing but good things about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Check out Playmaker for unity, that might be more the speed you need to start with.
|
|
|
|
|
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly I have the same problem. My 8 year old invents levels upon levels of his super complicated game thinking in details how different monsters will kill you. I tried to bring him to think of something simple which we can do together but seems that's not that interesting after all. I don't know anything about game making either so I tried to sell him Kodu[^] - with partial success.
|
|
|
|
|
For that age, isn't RPG Maker (wikipedia) better suited than an actual game engine? I guess Kodu fills the same role?
|
|
|
|
|
I would definitely not advise to use a real game engine. Kodu is aimed at teaching programming and is free.
|
|
|
|
|
Now that you mention it, RPG Maker is paid, I never knew that. I got it in a game making magazine ages ago and had a blast. there's no actual programing required (you can use the scripting language, but it isn't necessary) you just draw maps by selecting squares with pieces from the toolbox, create npc and dialogs via a mini editor, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
Another platform worth considering is Scratch.
I helped my niece create a game in scratch and I was fairly impressed by both what it could do and the tutorials and support around it.
Scratch is nice because it feels like programming with Lego blocks - it's very visually while being faithful to programming concepts.
If I had more time I would probably use scratch myself just for fun.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: Another platform worth considering is Scratch.
My son has played with Scratch and liked it at first, but fell out of favor with it, once he found out that he can't create the games he likes to play, with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you already have, I would introduce him the 5th edition D&D books. He can get together with his friends, learn how to be a DM, and have a whole lot more fun, in my ever-so-humble experience. The books would make a great Christmas present!
|
|
|
|
|
|
In US I think it's more like this:
Dead Alewives D&D - YouTube
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Now that's just sad
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
> go north
You stand in front of a dense jungle, the air is filled with the sounds of birds. There is a spooky-looking house to the east.
> go east
|
|
|
|
|
> Run away. Run away fast.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: > go north
You stand in front of a dense jungle, the air is filled with the sounds of birds. There is a spooky-looking house to the east.
> go east
Aaah, Adventure, 1979 vintage! (That is when I got to know it)
I still have vivid memories of crawling around in a maze of twisting little passages, all alike. Discovering that glittering treasure chest. The hairy little dwarfs throwing their stone axes at me. And that deep, resounding voice declaring that "Unfortunately, you are now dead. I can resurrect you, but it will cost you a hunded points" ... No later game has had graphics and sound effects even remotely similar to this one.
---
In 1979, inspired by Adventure, our university lecturer tried to manage 25 Computer Science students, organized as five teams, in a joint effort to develop a game engine, as The Great Project of our second year as Comp.Sci students. We learned a lot about how coordination of different task forces may fail  , but also how difficult it is to make a truly "new" game. Just replacing the treasures with other kinds of treasures, and making the path turn left instead of right, doesn't make a new and exciting game. We gravely underestimated the required complexity of such an engine, to make it suitable for creating varied games.
Those who provide such game engines today of course know very well about the (required) complexity and richness, lying not primarily in the implementation but in the functions provided to the game developer. Until you truly master a complex set of offerings (and that might take years, even as a full time worker on it), it is difficult going much beyond replacing treasures with new ones, and changing the direction of paths. Or something else at a similar level.
What I try to get through: A kid may easily become very frustrated over how little he manages to make. His dream was to paint the new Mona Lisa, and all he makes is a simple children's drawing... It really IS difficult making a good game, regardless of tools!
---
When I was a dad, we chose other tools (well, game engines were not available then): For our first "books" (at age 7-8), we developed the story together, as a bedtime activity: I wrote down the new chapters as we made them up, and the next days we went through it making adjustments and edits. When she was ten, she wrote some wonderful stories on her own, and at fourteen her stories impressed even adults. (Unforunately, she never wanted to make a career as a writer.)
The (mental) cost of making a text story is a lot less than learning to master a game engine. You have much more freedom, not limited by a tool. The only tool required is simple: A text processor. The chance of success at a medium level comes much earlier and is much greater.
So if it is at all possible to maneuver the kid into devloping an enitre story in text form, based on his idea for a game, that could be an immediate step that could lead to a great feeling of success for several years - maybe with the pronounced goal to later develop it into a game. But as a ground work, make exciting, well developed stories in text form.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
