Flood - physics based game in blitz max

Community Forums/Showcase/Flood - physics based game in blitz max

Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#1]
This is my entry to the blitz max community framework competition, but I am so proud of it that I will post it here as well.

I present to you...



download here

http://naillproductions.synthasite.com/resources/Flood/Flood%20Beta%201.zip

Be sure to read the readme file before playing.


InvisibleKid(Posted 2009) [#2]
fun stuff, i like it nice job nate


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#3]
Looks interesting; however, runs like a dog on my laptop which I kind of expected with the number of particles running around in the game :(


kfprimm(Posted 2009) [#4]
Hey, this quite fun!

In order to cut down on the executable size, you may want to use the whole framework deal. Put this right after SuperStrict.



RifRaf(Posted 2009) [#5]
very nice


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#6]
thanks khomy prime ill try that.

@ _Skully what are your specs? so far ive tested on 1.6 ghz - runs slow but still playable... 2.6 ghz - 60 fps on every level but the 3rd one


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#7]
Updated my sig to include it...


josk(Posted 2009) [#8]
Neat little game.


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#9]
hmm I thought 2 ghz would run it smoothly... maybe when/if I ever get it multithreaded it will run better for everyone.


GIB3D(Posted 2009) [#10]
I like it.


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#11]
It started out ok but as more particles appeared the frame rate just started bottoming out.. it was playable but in a chug chug kind of way


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#12]
@ skully - yeah thats how it is on my old computer too... ah well... I still havent finished optimizing it.

@ GIA Green Fire - sorry I couldnt work in your powerup you thought of but it does have the storyline about the earth heating up etc. :)


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#13]
With the number of particles your running every ounce of optimization in that code will benefit


jkrankie(Posted 2009) [#14]
How many particles are you actually drawing? really fun actually.

Cheers
Charlie


beanage(Posted 2009) [#15]
It ran 60 fps everywhere for me. I love the code. Recommend everyone to check out his previous sph tech demo to get a clue of particle count.


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#16]
How many particles are you actually drawing? really fun actually.



hmm for the big levels about 2500 to 3500 particles... 500-1000 used for the walls

I really want to find a good solid free shader-compatible rendering engine to go with my physics engine if anyone knows of one, it would speed up the games a whole lot.


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#17]
Your using particles for the walls? any particular reason for that? it seems like a waste of cpu time.


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#18]
well the line segments are much slower for "proper" fluid collision calculation... and again I havent had more than a week and a half for this game, I didnt really have time to research solutions to faster line-circle collisions

also I plan on having destructable terrain later on so I may keep the particle walls in the end...


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#19]
Destructible terrain is very possible with a tile system... TileMax for sure has dynamic tiles... ie, they can be modified on the fly... quite easy to do really. I'm currently using this technique to merge tiles together without using layers to overlay them... just gives more level creation options

Since your needs would be fairly basic (i think) you could use a tile system for the level and have your particles exist within that... destruction just means you are modifying the original tile copied to a custom image. On the other hand, depending on how large you want to have levels be.. you may be able to get away with a big image instead.


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#20]
hmm I was thinking more along the lines of a less blocky destruction although I must admit, tile max looks pretty cool and easy to use! ever seen pixel junk shooter? thats the effect im aiming for with destructable terrain which I dont think I can do with tiles...

just wondering
Is tile max free or commercial?


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#21]
I honestly don't know yet LOL... I just started making it to create a game for my daughters but its really coming together and has some really cool features... so I guess I'm just undecided ;)


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#22]
I'd definitely give it out for free if there was something in it for me ;) lol

Ya, I've got to see if I can get this all working and have a decent frame-rate before I make any judgments on this. Theres still no particle system, no sound management, no actors, collisions ... long way to go yet.

I had to modularize to separate the editor from the running game so I can add a player, and work on the collision system. Once thats done its smooth sailing from there.

Once I get things working decently I'll start to think about what I would want to let someone else use it. For example, I think I would be much more inclined to let someone use it if they are a contributor to the "free" market than I would to someone who never seems to contribute, or someone that trades for some useful code.. I dunno... haven't put much thought into this.


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#23]
ok well good luck with tile max!


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#24]
If your interested in using it I'm not opposed, but its too immature for anyones needs just yet... I'm definitely adding a physics lib of some kind to this (constrained to defined regions) and when I get there I'd like to be able to have flowing water etc as you have in your flood game. It's really nice! but I think you could really ramp that up by using a dynamic tile-map system in behind


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#25]
I'm definitely adding a physics lib of some kind to this (constrained to defined regions) and when I get there I'd like to be able to have flowing water etc as you have in your flood game. It's really nice! but I think you could really ramp that up by using a dynamic tile-map system in behind



feel free to use my physics engine, I still need to work out some quirks and stuff before an official release.

of if you want to go the other way around, I could try to make my physics engine load your tilemaps as some sort of physics body...

but I think you could really ramp that up by using a dynamic tile-map system in behind


I really think Im going in the right direction here with using circular physics bodies for the walls. It has almost no preformance hit compared to if there are no walls because of the way my physics engine optimizes it... on a map with 2500 particles and 1000 wall particles, runs within 2 millisecs of the simulation of just 2500 particles... But a tilemap based fluid game would be a fun project for me later.


_Skully(Posted 2009) [#26]
feel free to use my physics engine,


Thanks! I'll reciprocate when you need a tilemap system :)


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#27]
oops... I better upload a new version now... the last version is at least 6 months old :p


slenkar(Posted 2009) [#28]
You could add a giant scoop to the front of the ship so you can interact with the particles.


Nate the Great(Posted 2009) [#29]
You could add a giant scoop to the front of the ship so you can interact with the particles.



haha thats kinda funny, my brother just said I should do that... ***Nate the Great ponders the possibilities.......***