Page 4 of 48

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 2:25 pm
by Aero
Joey wrote:If you're making this in VB.NET, you might as well just call it SMBX 1.4.
I wouldn't want to call it SMBX 1.4 since it's not really the same program as SMBX, and secondly there's already too many rumors and speculation about 1.4 to the point where it would be a bad idea to affiliate this with that name.
You can host it here if you want, I don't care, but we'll need to see a lot more progress before this even should have a forum anyway. (not like you need my approval or anything, I just advise you to not worry about that until you have a solid game ready)
I was wanting to get a lot more progress done before I even asked, but since it came up, I still need to come up with a plan of action for releasing this anyway (after significant progress, of course).
I would also suggest using Wohlstand's reverse-engineering of the LVL format (if that's applicable, I haven't really looked at it) and maybe making some sort of converter down the road for use with SMBX levels.
That could be possible since Wohlstand's format is SMBX compatible, and all it would take to make a converter is a few code-related headaches and some time.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 2:56 pm
by Shadow Yoshi
GhostHawk wrote:it's not really the same program as SMBX
What's going to be different about it?

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:11 pm
by Aero
Joey wrote:
GhostHawk wrote:it's not really the same program as SMBX
What's going to be different about it?
What I meant by that is I'm not working off of the smbx exe, so that would make mine a different program all together. To answer your question though, I plan on having more content in general and better support for online as starters. I'm just using SMBX's layout and what not as a reference to add these features.

New Screenshot with BGOs:

Image

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:33 pm
by FanofSMBX
Looks great!
Look I'm sorry to say this but I suggest to
1. Use transparent gifs, png, or else
2. Use 1x1 graphics
Because using masks and resizing makes making graphics take longer, so this would be more convenient in the long run. Thanks!

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:47 pm
by Raster
I think Redigit used 2x2 graphics to make the Level Editor window look good. If the game resized the graphics by itself it would take away more resources.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:45 pm
by Natsu
One question, are you going to allow people to decide which BGO is placed in the back and which in front (background and foreground)?

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:51 pm
by Raster
I think that will be up to the level creator. Implementing a foreground/background system shouldn't be hard.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 4:52 pm
by SMBXxer
I just thought of something, can you add World Map Events? Please? That's a really wanted feature by the SMBX Community. I promise it will make VSMBX 11346483% better.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:03 pm
by Wohlstand
And...You forgot about main!
Visual Basic can't directly use GPU Acceleration, and without them, graphics in original SMBX too slow.
Why I select C++ for new engine project, because:
- Best optimization of binary code target application;
- Always know, why your program crashing (because error with class type, wrong pointer, wrong array's index, overflow memory, but NEVER because you put dot instead comma in text file!!!) (remember the decimals bug in NPX.txt for SMBX, and you will understand);
- Always possible use in other platforms (Windows, Linux, MacOS X, FreeBSD, etc...);
- Available to use hardware directly (with ASM includes, or with Hardware Libraries, like OpenGL, GLUT, SDL);
- Full support for dynamic memory using, this very useful for give unlimited sizes of arrays for items (example, class std::vector);
- full support for Object-oriented programming.
But, for something programming in C++ can be difficult, because it very strict in coding style and data types;

I don't deny opportunity to use different features for direct use hardware, but I can't grant stable of them.
If i did use .NET, i'd use the C# instead VB, because it have more possibles for use full Window's functional and hardware support.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:09 pm
by Raster
- full support for Object-oriented programming.
VB.NET is a fully OOP language.
If i did use .NET, i'd use the C# instead VB, because it have more possibles for use full Window's functional and hardware support.
Both are similar in functionality but have different syntax. Same results can be achieved with both.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Sun May 25, 2014 5:12 pm
by Aero
Natsu wrote:One question, are you going to allow people to decide which BGO is placed in the back and which in front (background and foreground)?
All bgos are placed behind tiles. They will appear in the order you place them in, as I tried to demonstrate in the screenshot.
SMBXxer wrote:I just thought of something, can you add World Map Events? Please? That's a really wanted feature by the SMBX Community. I promise it will make VSMBX 11346483% better.
I'm not taking suggestions right now, but this is something I have considered.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Mon May 26, 2014 8:35 am
by SnifitGuy
So why exactly are you going with VB.NET over C++ / C#? I can see that it recreates the old interface, but C# / C++ have a lot more options and are easier to understand than VB.NET.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Mon May 26, 2014 10:43 am
by Wohlstand
SnifitGuy wrote:So why exactly are you going with VB.NET over C++ / C#? I can see that it recreates the old interface, but C# / C++ have a lot more options and are easier to understand than VB.NET.
And... even MinGW's C++ faster that .NET's Visual C++ (I tested them)

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Mon May 26, 2014 12:28 pm
by Aero
SnifitGuy wrote:So why exactly are you going with VB.NET over C++ / C#? I can see that it recreates the old interface, but C# / C++ have a lot more options and are easier to understand than VB.NET.
For C#, VB.NET can create the same outcome as a project in C# and I'm better at programming in VB.NET than C# as it is. For C++, that's just a language I don't understand too well to make a game out of, let alone a "Hello World" program. I'm using VB.NET because I understand the syntax well, and I've had a few years of practice with it.
Wohlstand wrote:And... even MinGW's C++ faster that .NET's Visual C++ (I tested them)
I couldn't comment on either of those compilers for C++.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Mon May 26, 2014 12:40 pm
by Wohlstand
GhostHawk wrote:
SnifitGuy wrote:So why exactly are you going with VB.NET over C++ / C#? I can see that it recreates the old interface, but C# / C++ have a lot more options and are easier to understand than VB.NET.
For C#, VB.NET can create the same outcome as a project in C# and I'm better at programming in VB.NET than C# as it is. For C++, that's just a language I don't understand too well to make a game out of, let alone a "Hello World" program. I'm using VB.NET because I understand the syntax well, and I've had a few years of practice with it.
Wohlstand wrote:And... even MinGW's C++ faster that .NET's Visual C++ (I tested them)
I couldn't comment on either of those compilers for C++.
I'm understand, who writes on C ++, who on Java, who on Paskal, who on VB/VB.NET, etc. I talking about efficiency of the compiler

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 7:24 pm
by Aero
Just finished adding all of the current BGOs that are in SMBX to VSMBX. Tomorrow, I'll finish implementing the display mode and then get started on Level Settings and general bug fixes/performance fixes.

Here's a new screenshot showing the BGO window and a demonstration of layering with the SMB3 quick sand.
Spoiler: show
Image

NOTE: I only implemented foreground/background layering for the sand as it is in SMBX. As I mentioned, this will be optional for the sand as well as any other background object you choose.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 7:30 pm
by Magna DominXus
Good job, GhostHawk, you have finished all the bog's. Keep up the good work.

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 7:51 pm
by FanofSMBX
Magna DominXus wrote:Good job, GhostHawk, you have finished all the bog's. Keep up the good work.
I could make a level "Boring *** Bog Slog" with them! Yahoo!
Could you please fix the SMB2 red door? Zant made one but it doesn't work in SMBX due to the masks.
https://www.mediafire.com/?ebhn1ezzzira2co

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 8:44 pm
by SnifitGuy
Ghosthawk, do you have a planned release date for this? Also, I know you aren't taking suggestions, but could you possibly make the semi-transparent masks work like their supposed to? For example, when you have black background, and a grey mask, could the background make everything in it darker? Also, could you make masks for every graphic instead of the ones that aren't 32x32 squares?

Re: Visual Super Mario Bros. X (VSMBX) Thread

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 9:00 pm
by Aero
SnifitGuy wrote:Ghosthawk, do you have a planned release date for this? Also, I know you aren't taking suggestions, but could you possibly make the semi-transparent masks work like their supposed to? For example, when you have black background, and a grey mask, could the background make everything in it darker? Also, could you make masks for every graphic instead of the ones that aren't 32x32 squares?
I think the release date for the beta will be around Christmas. I'm not sure when the first actual version will be released. It's really too soon to say if it will be quicker than that or take longer.

For the masks, I could probably make transparency work correctly assuming you mean that lighter shades of gray are less transparent and darker are more transparent. I don't know why you would want masks for every graphic since they're not displayed if there aren't any transparent parts of the graphic though.