Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

DarkBASIC Discussion / DBC's Advantages Over DBP?

Author
Message
Wandering Swordsman
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jun 2006
Location:
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 06:12
I have both DBC & DBP and I’m curios to know if there are any advantages to using DBC instead of DBP?

I believe I read that DBP does not have .mod support for music, but DBC does. Any other perks?

When I dream,
I carry a sword in one hand,
a gun in the other...
The Lone Programmer
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Jan 2003
Location: California, USA
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 09:34
Dark Basic Classic has a lower version of DirectX.

I would like to say that it runs off of DirectX 8.0 which is what older computers might have. So the end result is probably anyone with an 16MB graphics card could run a Dark Basic Classic application.

Dark Basic Professional will not work unless you are running the latest version of DirectX 9. Not a good thing for the older computers because the graphics cards cannot be updated to the DirectX 9. Maybe the software can be updated, but not the card hardware.

Dark Basic Professional has far more commands. Some are probably worthless but still far more.

Last time I checked, Dark Basic Classic had better sliding collision commands for 3D objects. I believe there was even a tutorial for it that came with the program.


There are probably far more differences, but I have not experienced them.


The Lone Programmer

"Is The Juice Worth The Squeeze"
-The Girl Next Door
Pincho Paxton
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 10:07
DBC has pixel perfect collision on sprites as well.

Sven B
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2005
Location: Belgium
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 18:09
DBC can export and load its own 3D animation files...

It's the programmer's life:
Have a problem, solve the problem, and have a new problem to solve.
The Lone Programmer
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Jan 2003
Location: California, USA
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 19:22
I would have imagined that Dark Basic Professional would have contained all of Dark Basic Classic's commands and more.

Instead it just looks like Dark Basic Professional contains the more.


I wonder why TGC broke away from the good features that Dark Basic Classic had. I mean it would have solved a lot of problems.


The Lone Programmer

"Is The Juice Worth The Squeeze"
-The Girl Next Door
NeX the Fairly Fast Ferret
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2005
Location: The Fifth Plane of Oblivion
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 19:41
Ghost Object on is superior in Classic and Classic is better than Pro when it comes to millions of simple objects.

<OMG></OMG>
NeX, you cant be serious - CattleRustler.
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 15th Jun 2006 20:48
Quote: "I wonder why TGC broke away from the good features that Dark Basic Classic had. I mean it would have solved a lot of problems."


I would personally support and prefer an update to DB classic to support just a few features of DX10 when the time comes in a year or two. It's simplified approach to development, optional DarkEdit IDE, any time and any where user friendly CLI, broad compatibility, extremely fast 'compiler' (try compiling anything over 30,000 lines in Pro), and more (including the ones mentioned above) all provide some nice advantages with classic. And with computers being as fast as they are these days, its interpreted design really isn't a limitation any more like it used to be.

If TGC is reading this, please consider bringing classic back to life with just a few new features perhaps in a year or two. It really is fantastic in its original form and doesn't need much more to modernize it.

SimSmall
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 16th Jun 2006 10:05
- In classic any object can become a static object at any time. DB Pro really wants people using BSPs, either I'm doing something wrong, or "load bsp" just doesn't work half of the time

- 1.5 Megabyte exes (can never remember if capital B means bit or byte) exported from classic as opposed to something like 7 megabyte exes from pro... you would not believe the amount of times I've had to delete something from my memory stick to make space for a 1000 line project in pro!
Sven B
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2005
Location: Belgium
Posted: 16th Jun 2006 17:35
Don't forget that DBP is still superior to DBC...

It's the programmer's life:
Have a problem, solve the problem, and have a new problem to solve.
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 16th Jun 2006 18:48 Edited at: 16th Jun 2006 18:53
Quote: "Don't forget that DBP is still superior to DBC..."


That's not really relevant to the topic. Nor did you provide anything substantive to back that up. You defeat your own argument when you post like that.

Quote: "- 1.5 Megabyte exes (can never remember if capital B means bit or byte) exported from classic as opposed to something like 7 megabyte exes from pro... you would not believe the amount of times I've had to delete something from my memory stick to make space for a 1000 line project in pro!"


Small EXE's are indeed a good advantage. Another is easy media management, just have all media in the same directory as your source and it gets linked together automatically.

Mod
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2005
Location: France
Posted: 16th Jun 2006 22:56
Quote: "So the end result is probably anyone with an 16MB graphics card could run a Dark Basic Classic application."


DBP and DBC functionned well on my old computer : Celeron 500, 64 MB RAM, 8 MB for video, included in RAM. Performances were equal, excepted using hundred of simple objects, what is, for me, a DBC advantage.
And DBC doesn't become slow when I load 150 images and display the 150 image. I can't say the same thing of DBP...

RPG Engine and Odyssée : http://modsoftware.ifrance.com
SimSmall
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 17th Jun 2006 06:16
DB Classic made me a bit lazy with variables.

A variable with no type declaration character was an integer
A variable with a $ was a string
A variable with a # was a float

With DBP, I commonly have problems with the way I'm used to writing integer variable names. (It says "cannot determine type of variable at line blah").

perhaps DBP could have a variant data type like Visual Basic does... so if a user forgets to declare the variable type, it doesn't just crash...
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 17th Jun 2006 08:55 Edited at: 17th Jun 2006 08:55
Quote: "perhaps DBP could have a variant data type like Visual Basic does... so if a user forgets to declare the variable type, it doesn't just crash... "


That's really how a basic should function No variable declarations needed, the language is smart enough to handle it on-demand. DBC treats variables like a good basic language should.

Sven B
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2005
Location: Belgium
Posted: 17th Jun 2006 17:31 Edited at: 17th Jun 2006 17:37
Quote: "And DBC doesn't become slow when I load 150 images and display the 150 image. I can't say the same thing of DBP..."


Build an exe with it and try again (no offence)

Quote: "Quote: "Don't forget that DBP is still superior to DBC..."

That's not really relevant to the topic. Nor did you provide anything substantive to back that up. You defeat your own argument when you post like that."


Shaders, faster 3D renderer, particles, 3D math, plugins, ...

Quote: "Quote: "- 1.5 Megabyte exes (can never remember if capital B means bit or byte) exported from classic as opposed to something like 7 megabyte exes from pro... you would not believe the amount of times I've had to delete something from my memory stick to make space for a 1000 line project in pro!"

Small EXE's are indeed a good advantage. Another is easy media management, just have all media in the same directory as your source and it gets linked together automatically."


The reason why it has such big file sizes, is because it can handle more. (And it is even possible to leave out several standard DLL's that you don't use, so the EXE will be small anyway)

DBC has its advantages, but it has also its limitations:
http://darkbasicpro.thegamecreators.com/?f=compare

So far for the "off-topic" things...

DBC advantages:
- 3DS -> X conversion using 3DS2X command
- the whole animation arsenal:
append object animation
clear object keyframe
clear all object keyframes
save object animation


- Static object support
load static objects
make static objects
delete static objects
save static objects
attach object to static
detach object from static
disable static occlusion
enable static occlusion
set static objects texture
set static objects wireframe off
set static objects wireframe on


- save bitmap

It's the programmer's life:
Have a problem, solve the problem, and have a new problem to solve.
Hamish McHaggis
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Dec 2002
Location: Modgnik Detinu
Posted: 17th Jun 2006 17:50 Edited at: 17th Jun 2006 17:52
Quote: "And DBC doesn't become slow when I load 150 images and display the 150 image. I can't say the same thing of DBP..."


Testing this code in both DBPro and DBC:



I get around 2500 fps in DBPro, and 230 fps in DBC. DBC has unbearably slow 2D commands, because it uses software rendering. DBPro uses Direct X to render sprites like 3D planes. DBPro is far superior when it comes to 2D.

DBCs main appeal is it will perform better on very old PCs, and doesn't require the latest DirectX. Also that DBC is cheaper than DBPro. DBC is by no means bad, it is very stable and has many features, but overall DBPro is far superior to DBC.

p.s. As for MOD support, get this plugin for DBPro, it supports MOD and many other formats (another advantage of DBPro, plugin support).

http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=74019&b=5

EDIT

Quote: "If TGC is reading this, please consider bringing classic back to life with just a few new features perhaps in a year or two. It really is fantastic in its original form and doesn't need much more to modernize it."


Why do this when we have DBPro? DBPro is a 'Modern' DBC.


Join the BlackOut Forum Today
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 02:54 Edited at: 18th Jun 2006 03:00
Quote: "DBC has its advantages, but it has also its limitations:"


No one is claiming DBC doesn't have limitations. But that's not the the point of this thread.

Quote: "Shaders, faster 3D renderer, particles, 3D math, plugins, ..."


If that's what you think makes it superior, great. Some of us have different priorities. Why the need to defend DBPro though? If it's so 'superior', it will be obvious to anyone who tries both of them and you'd have nothing to worry about. Why the apparent concern to come into a thread like this and post defenses?

Quote: "Why do this when we have DBPro? DBPro is a 'Modern' DBC."


Simply because for many of us, DBPro is not a modern DBC for the reasons mentioned above. If you think it is, great. Enjoy. It won't change how I or anyone else views the importance of DBC's benefits.

re faze
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Sep 2004
Location: The shores of hell.
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 04:40
dbc can load tiff images, and images with odd dimensions while dbp cannot load tiff's and the image must be width and height a power of two. and the sprites were better in dbc. but overall i think dbp has better speed and features.

Sven B
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2005
Location: Belgium
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 13:10
@SFSW

Let's drop this. This arguing is obviously leading to nowhere. I am making you more angry and you make me more angry because I made you more angry, etc...

Besides, I rather have no enemies on the net...

It's the programmer's life:
Have a problem, solve the problem, and have a new problem to solve.
Zotoaster
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Dec 2004
Location: Scotland
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 14:54
DBC doesn't take 300 years to compile.

SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 18:49 Edited at: 18th Jun 2006 18:58
Quote: "Let's drop this. This arguing is obviously leading to nowhere. I am making you more angry and you make me more angry because I made you more angry, etc..."


I'm not angry. If I see flaws in your argument, I'm going to point them out. Doesn't mean I'm your enemy or that I'm angry You're welcome to answer my points or not. But I agree, it's good to drop it if it can't stay on topic.

Quote: "DBC doesn't take 300 years to compile."


That's both a 'speed' aspect and a 'feature' I consider very useful and 'better'.

NeX the Fairly Fast Ferret
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2005
Location: The Fifth Plane of Oblivion
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 20:46
Hmm...
3000 lines compiled in 2 seconds with pro. No probs there.
EXE size: 2.9MB - Very little trouble here.

<OMG></OMG>
NeX, you cant be serious - CattleRustler.
Jack
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Oct 2004
Location: [Germany]
Posted: 18th Jun 2006 21:30
The sprites in DBC are not 3d plains so you can use the 2d commands (box dot etc... )as well

[/center]
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 19th Jun 2006 03:45 Edited at: 19th Jun 2006 03:48
Quote: "3000 lines compiled in 2 seconds with pro. No probs there.
EXE size: 2.9MB - Very little trouble here."


File size isn't much of a problem for me either. But 3000 lines is far too small to gauge the speed difference. Try 10 times that, or around 50,000-100,000 with many lines near 255 characters. You'll find you wish you had that kind of speed with Pro. For tiny little tech demos, Pro's speed is fine. For moderate game projects, it's far too slow.

To stay on topic and point out the advantage yet again, DBC can manage about 30,000-50,000 long lines in about 20-30 seconds on an average system configuration.

Mod
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2005
Location: France
Posted: 19th Jun 2006 12:38
Quote: ""And DBC doesn't become slow when I load 150 images and display the 150 image. I can't say the same thing of DBP...""


When I wrote that I was thinking about loading 150 images, then displaying on the screen then image number 150 (it's clearer with 500 images like in the example).

Test this code in DBP and DBC :



When you display the image number 1, no problem, high framerate, but with the image number 500, crash : the framerate is divided by 7.

Try this on DBC, the framerate is a bit lower, but it is the same if you use the image number 500.

RPG Engine and Odyssée : http://modsoftware.ifrance.com
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 19th Jun 2006 23:02
Quote: "Try this on DBC, the framerate is a bit lower, but it is the same if you use the image number 500."


Interesting, I hadn't noticed that before. I wonder if that is one of the reasons I've encountered so many performance problems in DBPro... where DBC can actually get 30+ FPS in my project, DBPro stutters randomly at around 10 FPS. I do use hundreds of images, many with high numerical values (simply because that's where there's room left). I wonder if it has the same effect when using those images for texturing and rendering applied to objects. I'll need to do some more tests, but that could very well be one of the major speed limitation problems in DBPro if it effects 3D useage of images in the same way. Seems similar to the numerical problems objects had a while back, could be a related bug problem.

Pincho Paxton
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 20th Jun 2006 00:54 Edited at: 20th Jun 2006 00:55
Strange? DBC seems to be winning here....

Anyhow.... I like DBC.

SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 20th Jun 2006 01:32
I wouldn't necessarily say DBC is winning, it isn't really a competition. It's just that DBC has some advantages (many of which are pretty major and important) and behaves more like a professional development tool in some ways compared to DBPro. It's for those advantages and features that I hope TGC will consider an enhancement to DBC or at the very least, options/improvements for DBPro that provide the same advantages DBC users currently get.

heartbone
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2002
Location:
Posted: 20th Jun 2006 01:53 Edited at: 20th Jun 2006 01:53
Kilokudos Mod on your important discovery.

Your observation is golden, it probably has some major implications for DBP code optimization.

I'd bet that it's the number of allocated images before the used image and not the value of the image number that causes the slowdown.

Perhaps proper notice of your findings should be given in another location.

I'm unique, just like everybody else.
Mod
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2005
Location: France
Posted: 21st Jun 2006 10:44
I found this in December when I was working on a 2d game using chipset system.(Post on 3DGC Network)
Newobiene has posted a bug report about this, but it has been rejected.

The subject is here : http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=68031&b=15

RPG Engine and Odyssée : http://modsoftware.ifrance.com
dark coder
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 21st Jun 2006 12:07
dont forget the very main disadvantage of dbc is that there is basically compiling going on, it just encryptys the surce code and it gets interpreted on runtime, whereas dbp actually compiles it to an .exe making the exe much more optimized, but in a perfect world you would have the interpreted version of dbp aswell as a version that compiles to exe and both would be exactly the same .

Hallowed are the ori.
Hobgoblin Lord
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Location: Fall River, MA USA
Posted: 21st Jun 2006 19:05
DBC's Transparency is better and pixel perfect collision is a huge asset, I was reluctant to go to pro from DBC but my RPG engine called for it. I got the demo of DBP and found some of these issues but the upgrade of 30 fps to 350fps (not that I use that speed) wioth alot of code left to incorporate kind of forced me to change. I like DBC alot but have to say I could not see myself going back to it its not any easier then pro and the pros just fall short of the cons.
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 21st Jun 2006 21:17
Quote: "dont forget the very main disadvantage of dbc is that there is basically compiling going on, it just encryptys the surce code and it gets interpreted on runtime, whereas dbp actually compiles it to an .exe making the exe much more optimized, but in a perfect world you would have the interpreted version of dbp aswell as a version that compiles to exe and both would be exactly the same "


Too bad that doesn't equate to real world speed for certain somewhat complex routines. I've run into several instances where DBC is faster, even though it is interpreted (especially for my planet system). As I pointed out above, thanks to how fast computers are these days, DBC's interpreted design isn't as much of a limitation as it used to be.

What limitations DBC does have could be remedied with an update to support just a few features. Windows Vista is cutting off support for retained mode applications anyway, so it would be a very useful and important update as well in addition to updating DBPro for the new operating system and DirectX.

NeX the Fairly Fast Ferret
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Apr 2005
Location: The Fifth Plane of Oblivion
Posted: 21st Jun 2006 22:55
Classic's main advantage: Unlike Pro, the error line it gives you is not 12 lines where it should be.

<OMG></OMG>
NeX, you cant be serious - CattleRustler.
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 21st Jun 2006 23:14
Quote: "Classic's main advantage: Unlike Pro, the error line it gives you is not 12 lines where it should be."


Added to that, DBC opens the CLI automatically when an error is encountered, instead of shutting down the entire program. This lets you print some variable values to the screen to help determine what went wrong.

And it does this without having to run in a debug mode that forces your program to operate in screen conditions you didn't establish in code. Not to mention how many times the debugger seems to crash randomly when running in that debug mode.

Steve Fash
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Dec 2002
Location: Doncaster, UK
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 00:00
Quote: "If TGC is reading this, please consider bringing classic back to life with just a few new features perhaps in a year or two. It really is fantastic in its original form and doesn't need much more to modernize it."


Could be a great idea..like to see it actually myself.

Steve

For game/demo music for YOUR PC productions visit:-www.futuredevelopments.org.uk
Pincho Paxton
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 00:18
Bring back DB Classic!!! YAYA!!!

SimSmall
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 01:25 Edited at: 22nd Jun 2006 01:31
Quote: "Added to that, DBC opens the CLI automatically when an error is encountered, instead of shutting down the entire program. This lets you print some variable values to the screen to help determine what went wrong. "


Ultimately more useful than having to know in advance that your program's going to crash, and so running it in step-through. Perhaps instead, on crashing it should bring up the variable watcher/CLI. (I've clearly been using Visual Basic for too long...)

Edit: Also forgot, it's nice that you can change things on-the-fly in DBC... Try changing something in DBPs CLI, and it sayssomething like:
Error: Broke from nested subroutine, cannot return to program after CLI usage
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 02:52
Quote: "Edit: Also forgot, it's nice that you can change things on-the-fly in DBC... Try changing something in DBPs CLI, and it sayssomething like:
Error: Broke from nested subroutine, cannot return to program after CLI usage"


Very good point, especially as your project gets larger and larger. If you're only building small tech demos or prototyping, those kinds of problems aren't too serious. But the larger your project gets, the more of a problem behaviors like that become (and the others listed above). Which is why DBC has some major advantages.

Wandering Swordsman
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Jun 2006
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 07:57
SFSW:
Quote: "Windows Vista is cutting off support for retained mode applications anyway"

Does, that mean Vista will not work with DBC or anything written in DBC?

When I dream,
I carry a sword in one hand,
a gun in the other...
dab
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2004
Location: Your Temp Folder!
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 08:42
The DBC Exe's lose 10 fps-ish or more after making the EXE. It threw me off a lot when I used DBC. With DBP, you see what the "final" fps is.

Pincho Paxton
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 10:24
Quote: "The DBC Exe's lose 10 fps-ish or more after making the EXE. It threw me off a lot when I used DBC. With DBP, you see what the "final" fps is."


I've never noticed that.

Sven B
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2005
Location: Belgium
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 12:51 Edited at: 22nd Jun 2006 12:51
not only 10 fps...
I created a DBC animator. When I pres F5 in DBC itself, I easily got 60fps, once I build the exe: barely makes 30fps...

It's the programmer's life:
Have a problem, solve the problem, and have a new problem to solve.
General Reed
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Feb 2006
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 16:37
you cant do shaders in DBC, or physics

AMD Athlon 64 3200+, 1GB ram, Geforce 6600 GTX, 250GB HDD
Vist www.scratchyrice-dev.co.uk
Pincho Paxton
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Dec 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 19:59
Of course you can do physics. Shaders can be cheated.

SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 21:41 Edited at: 22nd Jun 2006 21:53
Quote: "you cant do shaders in DBC, or physics"


Can't do physics? Oh bummer! Guess I should throw out my routines for that then, lol.

As for shaders, that could be one of the few additions made to DBC in such an update (which is what I've been trying to get at, lol). Makes me wonder if some viewers are actually reading the posts here or if they're just running off reflex actions, lol. Reading the thread topic might help to...

SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 21:51 Edited at: 22nd Jun 2006 21:58
Quote: "Does, that mean Vista will not work with DBC or anything written in DBC?"


Currently, that is correct. Which is why such an update is critical (not even to mention the need for the few features listed here). I'm not even sure DBPro EXE's will run all that well on Vista either (haven't had much luck here). However, you can get around the retained mode limitation in Vista Beta 2 by simply placing the d3drm.dll file from DirectX (from a WinXP install) into the Windows\system32 directory, or place the file with your EXE. Vista (and hence DirectX 9.0L that it depends on for its interface and universal game support) does not include this file by default... at least not yet.

Quote: "I created a DBC animator. When I pres F5 in DBC itself, I easily got 60fps, once I build the exe: barely makes 30fps..."


I'd be interested in seeing the code to such a project. The problem you encountered could have been related to something else.

Steve Fash
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Dec 2002
Location: Doncaster, UK
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 21:58 Edited at: 23rd Jun 2006 21:45
To be fair mate, there's not many people who've got both and have coded the sort of quality stuff in DBC as you have Sean. I think this more than qualifies you to state DBCs advantages over DBP.


(PS I'm not dissing any other coders btw)


For game/demo music for YOUR PC productions visit:-www.futuredevelopments.org.uk
SFSW
23
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Jun 2006 22:31 Edited at: 26th Jun 2006 20:22
Quote: "To be fair mate, there's not many people who've got both and have coded the sort of quality stuff in DBC as you have Sean. I think this more than qualifies you to state DBCs advantages over DBP."


I appreciate the compliment and I am trying to approach this fairly and objectively. I realize that every developer has unique goals and needs. For some, DBPro will do great. For others, DBC is the better choice. I'd really like to see both advance in preparation for the upcoming OS and graphics technology and I think given the current situation of changing compatibility conditions within Vista, an update to both is very important. Especially when you consider the differences between the two languages, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. If they were truly nearly identical development platforms, then just updating one would make sense. But they are very distinct in their capabilities, operation, and features... which makes each one a valuable tool in its own way and for different people. So I sincerely hope and am willing to help how I can, to advance the idea of an update to DBC.

Such an update to DBC would give TGC another product line to sell (a nice title could be DarkBasic SE, SE for Second Edition, 2.0, or whatever title they might want), shows their commitment to supporting the products they already sell, increases their potential user base by meeting the individual needs of more developers, retains the viability of commercial game creation with TGC products (including the side bonus of additional promotion of their software), and keeps their product line current with modern technology.

Thanks to Lee's hard work, DBC is a feature packed game development language that has remained useful after all these years. But the time is coming when something will need to be done with it. I hope it isn't abandoned, as that will just cause it to drop from the TGC product line entirely (not really good for anyone). DBC is already a great game development tool, only a change to immediate mode and maybe a few additional graphics features/options would be all that's needed to bring DBC up to date.

Uncle Sam
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jul 2005
Location: West Coast, USA
Posted: 25th Jun 2006 05:14 Edited at: 25th Jun 2006 05:16
Quote: "Why the apparent concern to come into a thread like this and post defenses?"


Because you attacked him:

Quote: "That's not really relevant to the topic. Nor did you provide anything substantive to back that up. You defeat your own argument when you post like that."


Quote: "If that's what you think makes it superior, great. Some of us have different priorities."


Please list some of these priorities.

It's obvious you are acting this way becasue you own DBC and are jealous of Sven B because he is defending DBPro, and thus you assume he owns it, and thus making you more jealous. Don't worry, that's how I felt too.

Uncle Sam
Nvidia Geforce 7600 GS 256MB PCIEx, 2.66 GHZ Pentium 4 proccessor, 768MB RAM
Need particles? Click here!
hyrichter
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Feb 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 25th Jun 2006 06:09
I'm quite certain the SFSW owns both DBC and DBP. I own both as well (though I haven't really programmed in either for over a year.)

SFSW has plenty of room to talk here. Just look at all his Starwraith games. BTW SFSW, I remember a while back that you were trying to write your next game with DBP or something like that. Did that ever happen, or do you still use DBC for everything? Just wondering.

Good performance is better than a good excuse.
CodeSurge -- DBP Editor for serious programmers.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2026-07-07 02:38:23
Your offset time is: 2026-07-07 02:38:23