When I tried to look up the exercise, it didn’t exist! Except, exercise 7-6 of whatever edition of Learning Processing is available through the Concordia Library. This week, I ran into my first difficulties with Processing – exercise 7-6. The swan should know.” JanuJess Rowan Marcotte Platforms and Programming: My Flower Garden adventures in gaming, Process Writing, Uncategorized
Meat sucked off bones like fingers, wings,īut forgot until the silk was caught in our teeth
#STENCYL STILL SUCKS FOR FREE#
PS: Here’s a 3-year-old poem you can use for free in your game, based on how I think the animated adaptation of Swan Lake should have ended: That’s a big abbreviation of a much-more nuanced and far-reaching discussion. But people would definitely be willing to put your free art in their games. For art – people are willing to sell 3D models on asset stores, but it also feels personal. And writing somehow feels like something that “everyone can do for themselves.” For audio, there’s no shortage of free soundbanks and CC0-licensed items.
#STENCYL STILL SUCKS CODE#
Writing somehow feels personal while code doesn’t quite as much. But then, nobody wants to take your example poem and put it in their game (probably) – but most writers might not offer either. For example, on forums, people post example code for each other all the time. Eventually, this lead into a discussion of the relative perceived value of some of the different elements that might go into making a game. Our first discussion focused heavily on Twine, and we discussed what it might look like to make a platformer in Twine, and what the essential qualities of a genre are, and whether they are important. Meanwhile, our discussion (this week between Rilla and I) has shifted to game-making softwares. Something about shoving/jostling through a crowd, perhaps? Or about taking space and making space? I think I want to use bright colours and balls that are repelled away from the mouse…Or something like that. Which is fine – it’s a personal game.Īnyhow, because of its use of primitive objects as containers for meaning, I thought about it for this next project that I’m planning. I also don’t really relate to the “meaning” of the game. It comes onto my radar every now and again, and the last time that I encountered it was without explanation at IndieCade East as part of the love and rejection arcade at the Museum of the Moving Image, and it reminded me of how annoyed I felt by it. By Humble’s own admission, it is a game that “requires explanation” and honestly, it’s a game that I just don’t like. One of the things that immediately came to mind was visual metaphor and simple “procedural rhetoric” - which, in turn, reminded me of The Marriage by Rod Humble. That has me thinking about what kinds of stories and mechanics I can create (within a reasonable scope) using just what I know so far. I’m trying to stick to things that I have learned in Daniel Schiffman’s Learning Processing so far, rather than jumping ahead so that means that I only have limited resources at my disposal (why, why, why is text so far away? - I may have to break this rule). gif of me playing with the cat:īefore moving onto arrays and the rest of the book, I’ll be making another object-oriented interactive thing. So, essentially, when I tried to make my first “game” after redefining my cat drawing as an object (thanks to Gersande for talking some stuff through with me in regards to the constructor), everything broke! And it stayed broken until I spoke with Pippin - together, we rewrote an example program that did everything that I wanted, and then I took that and fixed my broken code. So, when calling a new method, sometimes all of a sudden Processing says that my class/object isn’t defined. The other interesting thing about defining classes and objects and calling methods and all that, is that the error messages in Processing are no longer as accurate as they were for the more basic stuff – Processing no longer necessarily knows where the problem is. And there’s no right or wrong way of doing that – just ways that break everything and ways that don’t. It’s pretty different from just having “setup()” and “draw().” Going forward, on top of learning how one actually does different things with different functions and techniques, my work will be learning about where to place my code. It’s not that the concept of something that is object-oriented was hard for me to understand, but that all of a sudden, there are so many options for where to put a bit of code, and on top of that, the methods in my code need to be called somewhere, and where I call them can make them work, or not. Object-oriented programming really does change a lot of things for Processing.
0 kommentar(er)
