|
Some fresh meat for the table:
I'm an aspiring ASM programmer. I decide to write my game for a SHELL, such as Ion. We all know that ion provides many benefits, such as helping reduce the space used by a program.
Here I am, writing this glorious game. Instead of making my own sprite blitting code, I use a canned version that comes packaged with the shell. Does that make me any less of a programmer? No.
This is what ARGP whatever programmers are doing. Instead of reinventing the wheel, they take what is available and produce a game. Do you think professional's working with C++ rewrite iostream.h (input-output library)? I doubt it. Are these people any less of skilled programmers? No.
For years, computer programmers have used pre-written code and engines to avoid re-inventing the wheel. If it works, use it. Think about the Xing Mpeg engine. We don't complain when Big old Corperation X uses it, because Xing's product is suitable. Where would we be without Xing's mpeg engine? We would have a lower quality of product, because programmers would have to spend more time developing an engine, than making a great interface, colorful plugins, and testing to meet deadlines. Is it obvious that an engine will promote the creation of deeper plots, and allow a programmer to focus on gameplay? Yes.
So, to all the ASM programmers, even if you write machine level hex (psh, look at Ztetris beta :] ), you still have no right to use this programmer as the scapegoat to all of your ARGP whatever issues. Is that what is going on? Yes.
IMHO, Texas Instruments needs to take one standard looking case, and adapt it completly to every calculator. A select few of you are breeding a calcism-type emnity, witch discourages normal people creating average games that have high replay values. Did you expect me to end this paragraph with a question, only to answer itself? Yes.
that's my 327 c's worth.
(one last note. It comfuses me, when I hear people complain about that Argp whatever's graphics looking the same for every game. An rpg (as stated many times before) should be about the plot, not about graphics. I have cleverly dubbed this condition FinalFantasy7ism, and FinalFantasy8ism. We opt for eyecandy over gameplay. I'm not bashing their gameplay, its just that I found that FF3 (or almost any 16bit or less ff) had a great plot, without quadroople racasting projected on an imaginary z buffer, with 4d anti-paralaxed fmv's, boasting 1,415,926,535,897,932,384,626,433,832 polygons refreshing at 47E+94 frames per second.Oh well. I got the gas, bring on the flames!!!)
|
