By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - free,offline game making software?

 

which is best

unity game engine 22 62.86%
 
udk(unreal development kit) 5 14.29%
 
game maker 8.1 3 8.57%
 
game maker studio 2 5.71%
 
Total:32
chris_wing on 01 February 2014
JoeTheBro said:
daredevil.shark said:
I am learning gamemaker. Unity is good if your game is freeware. Otherwise gamemaker or blender.


Are you allowed to sell games made in blender? I'm pretty sure the fact it's open source means you can't sell blender itself, soI'm not sure how that works.

 

OT: I've used game maker, unity, blender, unreal, and phyre. If you don't want to spend money or make money,unity is the best for most games. Pro costs around a thousand dollars but most of the features are in the free version. No need to upgrade if you're just starting out.

You can't sell Blender itself, but as long as you include legal acknowledgement of Blender in the final product then you can sell your Blender games.  I remember skimming the legal section & you needed to include the blender GNU (? sorry, I read this years ago) licence which only applies to the engine basically, not your art work and your game progrming which you can sell, but I never dug deaper to learn just what that meant & how to "include" it.

I remember seeing a nonfree Blender game on Steam, can't remember the name, it was a shooter, had UN in the name.



Around the Network
Fifaguy360 on 01 February 2014
walsufnir said:
ViFifaguy360 said:
walsufnir said:
Fifaguy360 said:
Soleron said:
Fifaguy360 said:
walsufnir said:
Fifaguy360 said:
Zkuq said:
I'm currently studying IT and hope to learn how to make my own games from scratch eventually. That is, code them myself. For that, even Notepad suffices, although you might want something fancier depending on your choice of programming language.


Notepad?? Maybe if you're making a web game. All coding is normally done in an IDE.


What? Not necessarily. I know a lot of *very* skilled coders who write their code in vi and put it automatically in tools like VS to make it build or debug but the writing itself can be dony in any editor (with syntax highlighting, that is, of course).

Help me understand. Why would you write in vi then import to VS to build in debug rather than write in the editor in the IDE and build and debug?

You're right it can be done in any editor, but it's a matter of efficiency.

Because vi is much faster and fuller featured for the expert user working on pure text.

Maybe 20 years ago. IDE's have gotten so advanced with features vi and the like just inherently can't do.


As Soleron said, it's for the expert user. Saying "20 years ago" just clearly shows your prejudices and that you are obviously not an expert.

My prejudices? You sound like you've never used an IDE in your life. Tell me which IDE you have used and how vi is more efficient. I'm going to call you on this "expertise" of yours.


Oh, I've used a lot. Starting from Borlands TurboPascal 5.x (this lacked syntax highlighting, sadly) TurboC++, Bloodshed's IDE, Eclispe, VS, Embarcaderos Delphi IDE, Xilinx ISE and others I probably forgot.

Nowadays I just write code in perl, bash or python, so I :
easily prefer vi(m). The text-editing functions just extend everything other editors are capable of. You can even do refactorin with vim, if you are skilled.

For being used by experts, try this:

 

Perhaps to make it more clear:

kamidphish: http://au.linkedin.com/in/danglastonbury

rygorous: coding genius, worked at Farbrausch (demoscene group), now at RAD

Martin Ridgers: http://se.linkedin.com/in/martinridgers

You named a bunch of IDE's, provided 1 vague statement about vi(m)'s capability and gave 1 reason why vi(m) is superior by mentioning refactoring. Then proceeded to name a few accomplished people which is meaningless because I can just cite that MS, Google, EA and Apple all use IDEs which encompasses hundreds of thousands of twitters and linkedins which I don't have the time/capacity to even think of fishing out for you so that's just over right there.

The question was Tell me which IDE you have used and how vi is more efficient. This is what the discussion is revolving around.



walsufnir on 01 February 2014
Fifaguy360 said:
walsufnir said:
ViFifaguy360 said:

My prejudices? You sound like you've never used an IDE in your life. Tell me which IDE you have used and how vi is more efficient. I'm going to call you on this "expertise" of yours.


Oh, I've used a lot. Starting from Borlands TurboPascal 5.x (this lacked syntax highlighting, sadly) TurboC++, Bloodshed's IDE, Eclispe, VS, Embarcaderos Delphi IDE, Xilinx ISE and others I probably forgot.

Nowadays I just write code in perl, bash or python, so I :
easily prefer vi(m). The text-editing functions just extend everything other editors are capable of. You can even do refactorin with vim, if you are skilled.

For being used by experts, try this:

 

Perhaps to make it more clear:

kamidphish: http://au.linkedin.com/in/danglastonbury

rygorous: coding genius, worked at Farbrausch (demoscene group), now at RAD

Martin Ridgers: http://se.linkedin.com/in/martinridgers

You named a bunch of IDE's, provided 1 vague statement about vi(m)'s capability and gave 1 reason why vi(m) is superior by mentioning refactoring. Then proceeded to name a few accomplished people which is meaningless because I can just cite that MS, Google, EA and Apple all use IDEs which encompasses hundreds of thousands of twitters and linkedins which I don't have the time/capacity to even think of fishing out for you so that's just over right there.

The question was Tell me which IDE you have used and how vi is more efficient. This is what the discussion is revolving around.


What? I didn't name them, I used them. If vims capabilities are not known to you, it's not my problem. The fact itself that you can customize and make it behave like you want makes it better than anything else out there (except escape, meta, alt, control, shift, of course).

I am *not* saying nobody uses IDEs. I am saying that for text-editing purposes, vim easily is better than built-in IDE text-editors.



Fifaguy360 on 01 February 2014
walsufnir said:
Fifaguy360 said:
walsufnir said:
ViFifaguy360 said:

My prejudices? You sound like you've never used an IDE in your life. Tell me which IDE you have used and how vi is more efficient. I'm going to call you on this "expertise" of yours.


Oh, I've used a lot. Starting from Borlands TurboPascal 5.x (this lacked syntax highlighting, sadly) TurboC++, Bloodshed's IDE, Eclispe, VS, Embarcaderos Delphi IDE, Xilinx ISE and others I probably forgot.

Nowadays I just write code in perl, bash or python, so I :
easily prefer vi(m). The text-editing functions just extend everything other editors are capable of. You can even do refactorin with vim, if you are skilled.

For being used by experts, try this:

 

Perhaps to make it more clear:

kamidphish: http://au.linkedin.com/in/danglastonbury

rygorous: coding genius, worked at Farbrausch (demoscene group), now at RAD

Martin Ridgers: http://se.linkedin.com/in/martinridgers

You named a bunch of IDE's, provided 1 vague statement about vi(m)'s capability and gave 1 reason why vi(m) is superior by mentioning refactoring. Then proceeded to name a few accomplished people which is meaningless because I can just cite that MS, Google, EA and Apple all use IDEs which encompasses hundreds of thousands of twitters and linkedins which I don't have the time/capacity to even think of fishing out for you so that's just over right there.

The question was Tell me which IDE you have used and how vi is more efficient. This is what the discussion is revolving around.


What? I didn't name them, I used them. If vims capabilities are not known to you, it's not my problem. The fact itself that you can customize and make it behave like you want makes it better than anything else out there (except escape, meta, alt, control, shift, of course).

I am *not* saying nobody uses IDEs. I am saying that for text-editing purposes, vim easily is better than built-in IDE text-editors.

As expected. Completely full of shit. That's what happens when you jump feet first brains last into other people's conversations.