PureBasic Forums - English

waffle wrote:oh, you want to load the alpha channel from a png file ....
sorry, I thought you just wanted to create your own blend
on the fly...

no, I'm looking for a proper way to mask objects transparently. I don't care where the alpha channel comes from, even if I have to load it separately from a grayscale bitmap file or some other dumb hack ... I only wish it were possible AT ALL.

for lack of better, I'm using single-color masking now, which of course makes the edges of all objects look totally jagged, giving a completely cheapo amateur look to anything you make! :( ... what's worse, if you rotate an object with a single-color mask, the edges of that object aren't anti-aliased, which further adds to the retro-80s "Amiga" look you're going to get on everything.

hm.

maybe I really should switch to Blitz ... I find it bulky and slow compared to PB, but at least you can make stuff that LOOKS professional.

You can program with both OpenGL and DirectX easily in PB... Over the years you could have written your own alphablending routines... It sounds to me like you're looking for a Make-Me-A-Game-Please type of language... If that is the case, pick between Blitz and DBPro...

[rant]
If I see one more kiddie moaning about one feature on loop, I'm going to be sick...
1) This is the wrong forum for a Feature Request... Maybe one day Fred will add a "Feature Complaining" forum, but until then, use the Feature Request forum...
2) To this day, I haven't seen Fred respond to the 'threat' of "Hmmm, maybe I shouldn't buy PB beacause of Feature-X.... Mayyyyyyyybe i'll buy Blitz."
3) PB is not a game development language... It can make games, but that's not it's only purpose...

mp303 wrote: Is it just me, or is this getting a little embarassing?

Yup, these kinds of posts are rather embarassing for the PB community...
[/rant]

PolyVector wrote:You can program with both OpenGL and DirectX easily in PB...

no, as a matter of fact, I can't - I thought that was why I was using a basic language that comes with game libraries, so I wouldn't have to learn complicated APIs myself.

if I wanted to learn all that stuff, I would be using C++ instead.

PolyVector wrote:It sounds to me like you're looking for a Make-Me-A-Game-Please type of language... If that is the case, pick between Blitz and DBPro...

no, I just figured since PB comes with a games library, maybe that means you're supposed to be able to make games with it - good looking games, not amateur looking crap without even the most basic of modern graphic features.

As much as I like PB, a basic language's power comes from the libraries it ships with - and if those libraries are incomplete or primitive, what's the point? If you can't use the libraries, you might as well go and code everything yourself in ASM or C++ ... Both the 2D and 3D libraries are still lacking masses of important features, this being one of them.

Unless the game libraries provided with PB were merely meant as previews of what the future might bring (but in this case doesn't), I don't see the point in having them in the first place - at the moment, it feels like all I'm getting is a "teaser" ... so I guess what you're telling me is "you can't have your cake and eat it too"?

by the way,

PolyVector wrote:2) To this day, I haven't seen Fred respond to the 'threat' of "Hmmm, maybe I shouldn't buy PB beacause of Feature-X.... Mayyyyyyyybe i'll buy Blitz."

that was not at all meant as a threat, I'm merely weighing the facts to try to decide if I'm wasting my time waiting for these features - which you're telling me, I am. That helps me make my decision, I guess.

PolyVector wrote:3) PB is not a game development language...

You mind telling me what the game libraries are for then?

I know it's an application language as well, but that doesn't mean it's not a game language too. And certainly an unstructured language like basic is a lot more suitable for small games than it is for applications, but that's besides the point really ...

what you're telling me, is the PB is unsuitable for games, and that's not what it was meant for - I think that would be a very discouraging statement to a large group of PB users, had it come from the developers, but okay then, I give up ... PB is not for me, I guess. And thank you for clearing that up.

ta ta :roll:

I have to say this though ... PB is lightyears ahead of the competion in terms of speed and executable size - it would have been perfect for games, and it saddens me to have to choose a different language

Oh well, life goes on...

Um, why not use both? Blitz for the blitzy bits and Pure for the pure bits?

PolyVector wrote:You can program with both OpenGL and DirectX

DX yes, OpenGL yes, but its unclear whether you can actually use the features of OGL past version 1.1, meaning you can use OGL but only using videocard technology from 1996...

I have the headers, and some very clear Delphi ones,...all we need is a skilled Delphi programmer to convert them and were away!

DX yes, OpenGL yes, but its unclear whether you can actually use the features of OGL past version 1.1, meaning you can use OGL but only using videocard technology from 1996...
I have the headers, and some very clear Delphi ones,...all we need is a skilled Delphi programmer to convert them and were away!

Have you seen this: http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articl ... le1929.asp

Thanks Kale Yes I have seen it, but unfortunately its not much good if we dont have the headers which declare all the extensions and functions etc for the versions beyond 1.1. What we need is for someone with a good understanding of Delphi to have a gander at and possibly convert the files here:

http://www.delphi3d.net/download/glunits.zip

To mp303:
I can understand that you're a little bit disappointed about Pure Basic and I'll agree that the "game libraries" are a joke (really). If you want a language with a lot of functions that makes it easier to create games you should look into Blitz3D as PolyVector and Dare2 pointed out.
You can do all kind of games you want with PB but it takes a bit more effort from your part. The alpha masking you're talking about can be done in OpenGL pretty easy. If you want to start out learning OpenGL under Pure Basic you can go to this site:

http://www.pbgl.xdn.de/

and if you have questions about OpenGL:

http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/

I agree... that means you have to learn yet another language! But it's not that hard really. Or use Blitz3D to prototype your game and then for compactness and maybe speed convert it to PB ... Just kidding.

To Moonshine:
Hmmm... it seems I'm beginning to stalk you on this issue lol lol but I can't resist; You don't need to understand Delphi/Pascal to convert the files, you can find them on the OpenGL home site as C-headers and convert them to PB. But of course you need to know C...
I like the hardware info application you can find at http://www.delphi.net
You can easily find out what extensions your card/drivers support.
Maybe someone should convert the extension headers to Pure Basic and also write good tutorials to show people new (and experienced ones) to PB how to use OpenGL and DirectX with Pure Basic? I think 'papers' and tutorials on these issues would help PB to grow.

To Dare2:
Thanks for greeting me to this community in another thread, though I didn't answered you then so I decided to do so now. Thank you

Ok Escobar, thanks for the info. I took the DirectX route as opposed to OpenGL (unfortunately, I dont know C:?) but it seems to work fine in PB. DX9b is the one Im using at the moment.

[edit] I just re-read your post Escobar - the reason I put the Delphi headers up is because they are much more readable and easier to convert than the C headers on the OGL site - the OGL C headers are the most poorly formatted I'd seen and C is cryptic enough as it is Those were the first I tried but the header converter missed out about 200k worth of the header

Once Im further into my 3D engine project I'll try to roll out a few tutorials, its really quite simple once you get the hang of how DX works - unfortunately its a big and very volatile thing to code - by volatile I mean that changing a slight bit of your code can cause your program to compile no longer, thus beginning a massive trawl through forums, documentation and tutorials to try and see what went wrong.

Anyways, thanks

some nice work from a german guy you can finde here (in english) http://www.bradan.i-networx.de/pbgl/en/index.php

Hmm... compare these two sites:

http://www.pbgl.xdn.de/

http://www.bradan.i-networx.de/pbgl/en/index.php

I know I'm just being a smartass but they seems to be duplicated

Well maybe I should take on the challenge and translate the extension headers and make a tutorial on how to start using OpenGL. At least it should be a motivation for me to learn more about PB and OpenGL.
I know there are a couple of sites out there that tells you how to start like those linked above but my opinion is that if you're supposed to learn something and make a tutorial worth the name one should explain code that are presented more thoroughly and motivate what you're doing in the tutorials. Not only show some code and hope for the best. With that said I'm not criticizing anyone but something to think about maybe? What about translating those NeHe-tutorials to PB?