PureBasic Forums - English

sampb wrote:Hi Irene, Rook Zimbabwe, Trond, BriceManuel, Fluid Byte, PB:

If you are going to create a commerial game, which option would you select:
1. purebasic + OGRE
2. purebasic + irrlicht wrapper beta
3. GLbasic

Since you asked... My opinion only...

I would not use any of the above.

OGRE is a great engine and a commercial grade engine, but PB's implementation is worthless. I would have no problem using OGRE for a commercial project, but I would use VC++/C# for the project.

GLBasic would be a no-go for me for a commercial project, as OpenGL on Windows is a major no-no. ATI's OpenGL support is horrid and Intel's OpenGL support is hit and miss. You cannot count on all of your EUs having Nvidia cards.

PB itself has too many unresolved issues for me to ever consider it for a commercial project.

I am currently working on a 3D project using Emergence BASIC and its 3D engine which uses DX9. I am very pleased. Since it is 100% free, you have nothing to lose by giving it a try.

sampb wrote:Hi Irene, Rook Zimbabwe, Trond, BriceManuel, Fluid Byte, PB:

If you are going to create a commerial game, which option would you select:
1. purebasic + OGRE
2. purebasic + irrlicht wrapper beta
3. GLbasic

None of them, really... But if I had to choose, PB with the irrlicht wrapper.

topic splitted, watch
offtopic section for flaming topics

Hmmmm 3D? That would be tight.

PB Will have support. BLitz3D has DX7 built in and you can do great things with it, but not everything todays picky game kiddies expect.

I would use VC++ and Torque maybe, or VC++ and the HL2 engine if possible.

Torque: http://www.garagegames.com/products/27/

After I had a good design and plan and IF I just wanted to create a demo to shop around for interest.

PB is coming on strong for games. The new Chipmunk Engine stuff looks good for 2D and, by extension ISOMETRIC. 3D I owuld use TORQUE or IRRLICHT too!

OGRE and Irrlicht are good choices, but can be very difficult to work with, especially for beginners. Somebody in another thread is mentioning the B3D SDK. Unfortunately, it doesn't work and has major issues with modern hardware and operating systems, just like B3D does.

The 3D engine in Aurora and Emergence BASIC is based on DX9, is very stable, has adequate performance and can easily be wrapped for use with PB and most other languages. It is free and there are no licensing issues to worry about when wrapping it and using it with other languages. IMHO (based on actual experience) it is the easiest 3D solution to get up and running with PureBasic.

Some loyal TGA/TGEA users want to use other engines because Torque change the details of indie and commercial license.
http://www.garagegames.com/mg/forums/re ... p?qt=71874

A little 3Dsample done mostly in PB for you.
All I can say about this 1 is "respect" to Traumatic for this example & how I wish I had the patients & ability to do stuff like this

http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtopic.php?t=14775

As my post has been switched to the flame battle war, here is just a link for "amateur 3d games creators" : http://www.dreamotion3d.com

I precise that I'm not afilitiated in any way to dreamotion (now opensource).

Trond wrote:I took a look at it, and GLBasic actually isn't a "real" compiler, it just converts from basic to C++ and lets GCC do the rest. Compiling and linking a sample project took 23 seconds! Compare that to PB!

If you replace "C++" with "ASM" and replace "GCC" with "FASM", you'd described PB's compilation process Therefore, if PB is a real compiler, so is GLBasic.

Unless all of that changed with the version 4.x series.

X wrote:

Trond wrote:I took a look at it, and GLBasic actually isn't a "real" compiler, it just converts from basic to C++ and lets GCC do the rest. Compiling and linking a sample project took 23 seconds! Compare that to PB!

If you replace "C++" with "ASM" and replace "GCC" with "FASM", you'd described PB's compilation process Therefore, if PB is a real compiler, so is GLBasic.

Unless all of that changed with the version 4.x series.

At the risk of saying too little, GLBasic would be considered more of a "translator" than a compiler since it would be producing a "high-level" language, C++, as a result of the compiling. GCC is actually doing the compiling and then the assembling and linking.

With PureBasic the compiler produces output in a "low-level" language, assembly. FASM is then assembling and linking the code.

So if I got all my facts straight, PureBasic would be like GCC. GLBasic would be like a precompiler for PureBasic.

I was thinking I missed something. I was thinking that since both languages uses an external compiler to compile code. But thinking on that, doesn't VC++ use an external compiler to assemble code?

The 3D engine in Aurora and Emergence BASIC is based on DX9, is very stable

Is there a wrapper out there?

Rook Zimbabwe wrote:Is there a wrapper out there?

Yes.