InnocentSam wrote:

thekill9714 wrote:I have a dream where SCP:CB
Can be played on anything anywhere on any way Fully not just parts of it but the full everything made for every coding system, operating systems,consoles,phone and anything other

The wonders of HTML5...

HTML5 is the best thing that have been added to the internet for a long time, I would be amazed to see a fully working scp containment breach on it in future.

IS the conversion still alive?

I'm anxious to move to a better engine for the games further development...

Mirocaine wrote:IS the conversion still alive?

I'm anxious to move to a better engine for the games further development...

He hasn't posted to his blog since February, so I wonder too.

Damn.

He actually posted 10 days ago. Looks like he's as swamped with exams as the rest of us.

MrGuilkeyFace wrote:So I was thinking, after CB has been ported, can we throw out bump-mapping? I honestly think it looks horrible. Switching it out for high-quality texture filtering would be nice.
Also, for dynamic lighting (Like in places that have light, Gate B for example) there should be low quality shadows, due to the fact that the game should be supported on devices with less processing power. By low quality, I mean like just a round "Circle" shadow that doesn't take much processing to render.
Finally, I think that the blink system should be improved, like if 173 is behind a wall and you can't see him, he can still move but not into your line of site.
Any other ideas?

Forgive me for replying so long after you posted that, but I wanted to say that those simple shadows should be mandatory only on phones, tablets, etc. For PC, there should be settings for multiple graphical features (Including your suggestion since some people still have crap PCs), and maybe even on phones as technology is progressing and allowing us to fit more power into smaller devices. Just have minimum and recommended system requirements in the app description.

MrGuilkeyFace wrote:So I was thinking, after CB has been ported, can we throw out bump-mapping? I honestly think it looks horrible. Switching it out for high-quality texture filtering would be nice.
Also, for dynamic lighting (Like in places that have light, Gate B for example) there should be low quality shadows, due to the fact that the game should be supported on devices with less processing power. By low quality, I mean like just a round "Circle" shadow that doesn't take much processing to render.
Finally, I think that the blink system should be improved, like if 173 is behind a wall and you can't see him, he can still move but not into your line of site.
Any other ideas?

Bump mapping isn't going...
Put simply...
1. Bump mapping is used everywhere in video games, it's not like it's a dying technique that isn't used anymore... [Although its usually used in variations of the straight original, usually normal mapping, but that's besides the point.]

2. Anisotropic filtering was a given, I don't know how much work it would take to implement it, but it's goin in there...

3. Anisotropic filtering and bump mapping are totally unrelated, they do different things. Do some research on the two, doesn't take much, just go on wikipedia and search "bump mapping" and "anisotropic filtering," it should give you a good understanding of their differences...


EDIT: Also, you have to remember that Blitz3D is using DirectX 7 or 8, which is SERIOUSLY outdated. This is because Blitz3D was originally created in the early 90's and hasn't really received much love since then. If it had, it would use a newer version of DirectX and would probably support OpenGL, which would allow cross-platform development... The project was abandoned by the original developer and adopted by its current owners [or I should say bought], who have moved away from it to create newer products, like their "Monkey" script thing...

You're right, just got my facts straight.
Thanks for the correction. xD

I like the idea; but I never used C++, I'm currently going to work on some games and would C++ be a good choice? :/ (sorry if this is off topic)

Cridone wrote:I like the idea; but I never used C++, I'm currently going to work on some games and would C++ be a good choice? :/ (sorry if this is off topic)

As someone who learned C++ as his first language I'd say that it would not be the greatest choice for a first game/language. C++ has no automatic garbage collection and thus it (and its predecessor C) is very unrelenting when it comes to memory allocation errors. C++ is indeed powerful, but that comes at the price of having to deal with pointers and other lower level allocation to integrate with your engine. I'd highly recommend either Python, Java, or C# if you don't plan on using a standalone engine like Unity or UDK. They might not be as powerful as C/++, but they are much easier to work with if you don't find manual garbage collection and memory management all that much fun. In addition, these languages allow you to get better at overall engine design without being forced to worry about stack overflows, segmentation faults, and the like. If you want to eventually learn C++, it will be much easier if you have a solid foundation in programming abstractions and methodologies first.

Just my .02