• Hey Guest! Ever feel like entering a Game Jam, but the time limit is always too much pressure? We get it... You lead a hectic life and dedicating 3 whole days to make a game just doesn't work for you! So, why not enter the GMC SLOW JAM? Take your time! Kick back and make your game over 4 months! Interested? Then just click here!

Asset - Extension Suggestion to have a (for-pay) 3D physics DLL extension for gms all.

Status
Not open for further replies.

hippyman

Member
You don't remember our old argument about how you were so positive that the raycasting was working fine? We had a HUGE argument over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roa
M

Misty

Guest
You don't remember our old argument about how you were so positive that the raycasting was working fine? We had a HUGE argument over it.
Direct me to the topic so I can see exactly what I said.
 

Roa

Member
oh look, its this thread again! Asked for an extension, goes into a debate of how and why people shouldn't and shouldn't use gamemaker.

@Misty you got your answer, slayer64 has done the deed, use it.
And yeah @Fel666 , pretty sure bullets has a wrapper for GM.
 
M

Misty

Guest
What happened to bullet physics? You used to be so adamant about that old DLL being perfectly functional. ;)
You seem to have a sloppy, unfactual way of making your statements, which seems to be a problem inherent with most humans. Mostly, recognizing this and correcting this (self-consciousness) would improve your communications ability as well as improve your own success at not only interpersonal communcations, but your own state of mind and mental clarity.

I remember that old gm file you made for me, it was very excessively organized, so organized that it was actually very sloppy feeling, had lots of unneeeded variables and strange inter-object relationships only adding to the confusion.

What I mean by this, is how your quote of this says this
"What happened to bullet physics? You used to be so adamant about that old DLL being perfectly functional. ;)"
This is total, complete unfactual hyperbole.

My entire topic was about how Bullet physics was dysfunctional and could not do car physics.

I only stated that you were doing the raytracing incorrectly. Which you were and I proved that you were because I was able to do it correctly. Because you weren't using enum's properly if I recall. Though I would say I don't blame you or fault you for this, the manual was full of errors and generally sucked, which was why I made this topic in the first place, to seek an alternative to the obsolete Bullet GM port from 2009-ish.


Also, I dont think slayer's upgrade supports car physics or any kind of physics, if it does let me know and I will erase this.

Slayers upgrade helps you make 3D games more easily. It's an extension package with lots of code already written for you so making a sweet game will be no problem! Hard stuff like vector math, quaternions, ray tracing, collision detection, or clicking on something with the mouse is a lot easier with this
If he HAD physics, then he should advertise that it has it.
Thus I highly doubt it has any kind of physics.

You can make Quake Live using GM Newton. But it has a lot of flaws, just like GM Bullet. Im looking for something far more versatile. For instance, GM Newton is missing a lot of features of the latest Newton, and it doesnt even have raycast cars like in Newton 3. But the worst thing about GM Newton is that it randomly crashes 1/10 times with no explanation. The worst thing about GM Bullet is that Debug Draw only works in GM8, and various functions fail in different versions of GM, you have to change what you do depending on what version of GM you are using, all the while, having no ability to debug draw problems while in studio, a crippling state of affairs.
 
Last edited:

hippyman

Member
You seem to have a sloppy, unfactual way of making your statements, which seems to be a problem inherent with most humans. Mostly, recognizing this and correcting this (self-consciousness) would improve your communications ability as well as improve your own success at not only interpersonal communcations, but your own state of mind and mental clarity.

I remember that old gm file you made for me, it was very excessively organized, so organized that it was actually very sloppy feeling, had lots of unneeeded variables and strange inter-object relationships only adding to the confusion.

What I mean by this, is how your quote of this says this
This is total, complete unfactual hyperbole.

My entire topic was about how Bullet physics was dysfunctional and could not do car physics.

I only stated that you were doing the raytracing incorrectly. Which you were and I proved that you were because I was able to do it correctly. Because you weren't using enum's properly if I recall. Though I would say I don't blame you or fault you for this, the manual was full of errors and generally sucked, which was why I made this topic in the first place, to seek an alternative to the obsolete Bullet GM port from 2009-ish.
The project I gave to you had an inheritance tree that was apparently too much for you to just traverse on your own and figure out. If using inheritance the way it's suppose to be used is considered "excessive organization", then I would HATE to see what your projects must look like. Spaghetti is only nice on a plate. I'd also like to mention that passive aggressive isn't attractive on anybody. Go ahead and enjoy waiting for the same responses that you got in that train-wreck of a topic before. Don't even get me started on your non-sense with the raycasting. Same old Misty, completely different day. You've had a year to study physics but instead you're back here asking for somebody else to do it for you and taking these little pansy jabs at people that actually reply.

I found this really useful feature on the GMC where you can COMPLETELY ignore people. I think I'll add you to that list so I don't have to deal with you anymore.
 

Yal

🐧 *penguin noises*
GMC Elder
"excessive organization"
Just reading these words make me cringe... glad I didn't have to read them first-hand :p
There's no such thing as excessive organization; there's excessive planning where you plan in so great detail you can't adapt the project in case something unexpected happens, but that's something completely different. Organization features makes the project MORE robust because it reduces the number of things that must be changed individually in case of a change.

So yeah, I second it: keep the spaghetti in your fridge.

I found this really useful feature on the GMC where you can COMPLETELY ignore people. I think I'll add you to that list so I don't have to deal with you anymore.
Took you long enough :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top