|
|
I also tried to create a do-all engine, but what the real purpose is? I think it is to create games, not to waste energy in doing something that could extend to any type of gameplay or provide the most flexible architecture ever. Well, I started the first project, which I believe, can be completed to some degree of actual "playability". I have rewritten the code twice for the level loader and space partitioning, succeeded to implement hardware accelerated skinning but this lead me to the stage where I walked my levels, watching some figures be in "idle" state. I decided to make some sort of Quake II/III type FPS, but the implementation of logic proved to be far more difficult than the programming of map loaders and other core engine functionality. IMHO the game has to be clearly defined in order for you to be able to program it! John Carmack generally rewrote all of the engines, he did not intend to create the ultimate engine. But he created almost the ultimate games :) Currently I think that things should be more concrete than abstract, because really good ideas come with experience, not with visions while you sleep. First try, then second try, which will surely be better. No one can skip a step in the progress ladder... Completing a simple game can be far more boosting than torturing the brain with the idea that you should create something you are not ready for! All this that I wrote is what I think, and pls. do not consider that I am trying to preach :)
|