On Oct 10, 2005, at 6:56 PM, andrew at kellerfarm dot com wrote:
I have a couple of games written in REALbasic... currently available
only for the Mac, but I hope to get them built for Windows in the
next week or two; see <http://www.codenautics.com/>. Source code
included.
I really like Armageddon! Hmm... Seeing that, I think it would be
entirely possible to create something like StarCraft...
What is the approximate limit of RB with regard to graphics? Is it
close to WarCraft III ?
On modern hardware you could probably match Warcraft III. In other
words, it's not quite up to speed. That's just my experience/opinion
though, and some may argue that I am not neutral on the topic.
The improvements made in r3 are a very good thing however, and I
haven't played much with Rb3D since 5.5. I mostly deal with OpenGL
directly, as I am writing my own scenegraph (which may or may not turn
out to be better than Rb3D, but I can hope :-) )
For most games that you can practically make (i.e. you are not going to
code Doom 4 all by yourself), Rb3D is fine. The speed issues I
experienced might have been my code or hardware, and most of the basic
lacking functionality was added in r3. Things like shadows and shaders
are Quesa's problem, not Rb3D. Quesa (quesa.sourceforge.net) is the
underlying 3D engine Rb3D uses.
Yes, I did just say something positive about Rb3D, even if it was a
tepid endorsement ;-)
Asher Dunn
--------------------------------------------------------
President and Head Developer of Fireye Software
<http://www.fireyesoftware.com/>
AIM, Yahoo, MSN: crazedglkid
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|