Re: outline for Linux Game Programing

[Christian Reiniger <warewolf@mayn.de>]

Paul Tiseo wrote:

>>>I think that this "Simple Game" should be ported to each and every
>libraryand not

>>Yep. Showing the strengths/weaknesses/different philosophies of the libs
>>is easiest then.
>
>	That's a great idea! That's the poart I'd be most interested in.
>
>	But would the stengths/weaknesses depend on the game type? I mean, there
>are FPSs, RTSs, CGRPs, wargames or simple little sidescrollers, etc. What
>if one set of tools would be best for one game type, whereas another would
>be best for another? What sample game do you choose? (It'll obviously be a
>simple one. I doubt anyone has the time to code four or more versions of
>Unreal... :) )

I'd make a game that's primarily simple (for explaining the basics) plus a
full-sized one with much code and widely varying needs (for showing
strengths etc)

The simple game is needed because people want to have something 
(1) that works and 
(2) that they understand 
fast when learning something new.

And the big game is good to
(1) show complexity handling (both in code and in project management)
(2) show how the tools are used / behave in "production" games
(3) show strengths by examining code snippets
(4) have fun ;)

>compare/contrast? One advantage would be that you could have multiple
>authors, one for each example aspect covered, thereby minimizing the
>complexity of that chapter to any one individual.

Yup. The small game should in any case exist in as many sdk-versions as
possible, and the big one's parts should use different libs

Cu
	Christian
--

AAAAA - American Association Against Acronym Abuse