Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
How to do this properly with OCaml?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Games
On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 03:44 +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:

> If the mutual recursion from having them "all know about each other" causes a 
> problem then you can use objects to circumvent the mutual recursion,

That isn't really the problem. Consider two fighters, with various
kinds of attacks and defences: what happens when A uses punch type P,
and B defends with action D .. taking into account other properties
like speed and strength.. now consider all the possible combinations:
it isn't possible to actually list them all.

You also cannot simulate the real physics -- there isn't
time for a proper simulation.

This problem is often handled by sending messages and
interpreting them.. and having a default. If the default
seems wrong, it is fixed.

Play testing is essential here. The problem is basically
that the interactions are covariant.

Crudely, you need an approximation physics that works
for the game: and this is what most games get wrong.
They don't actually design a physics, they do hoc
hacks left right and centre, and then the whole
system becomes almost impossible to manage.

This is why simplistic games work, and more sophisticated
ones tend to be full of stupid bugs .. for example
casting a 'life leech' spell on an undead monster
or stone gargoyle .. the programmers forgot to
make a special case, and they didn't design
a workable physics either.

> Yes, I doubt anyone here has used their language on a console but there is a 
> lot of interesting non-console stuff to discuss.

Felix has been used on an X-Box .. not really a console like 
a PS2 but anyhow .. :)

>  I know when I'm doing console/mobile
> > stuff, my memory and perfomance limits are REALLY tight. Sometimes all I
> > have memory free is like 200kb out of 32mb total. And it HAS to work, many
> > hours on end.
> 
> Yes, this is the kind of games programming that OCaml is least well-suited to.

Why do you think that it is any worse than C++?

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sourceforge dot net>