|
So can anyone teach me how to make a game/game mod? I don't care if it sucks or if you have to call me a noob, I just want to learn how to program.
Los gatos cantan en el cuarto del bano a medianoche. :D
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 1 at 04:28 UTC
— Ed. 2010 Apr 1 at 04:29 UTC
|
|
|
|
Chose a language first. VB, C#, C++, C, Python, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 1 at 04:31 UTC
|
|
|
Rockbomb
Dog fucker (but in a good way now)
2009 Nov 14 • 2045
|
I recommend starting out with VB, its pretty easy to learn and it'll give you the basic feel of the programming environment. You can download for free directly from Microsoft here. There are a lot of good tutorials out there, if you wanna check out one that I wrote myself you can see it here.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 1 at 04:48 UTC
|
|
|
|
Rockbomb said: ...it'll give you the basic feel of the programming environment...
I disagree.
Its a BASIC-like programming language. Its a step up from being a 'script kiddie.' But most people don't consider BASIC-like programming languages 'real' programming languages.
Go with C#.
C++ is to complicated, tedious, and over the top.
C# is right in the middle.
Also with C# you get the XNA framework for making your own games. You don't get that with VB or C plusplus
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 1 at 05:05 UTC
— Ed. 2010 Apr 1 at 05:08 UTC
|
|
|
|
If you want to try C#, XNA Game Studio comes with code for a small example platformer game you can mess around with. (Although it is a bit cluster-fucky in places, which is odd for an example.)
www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=80782277-d584-42d2-8024-893fcd9d3e82&displaylang=en
Honestly though, I don't think C# is the easiest language to start with. C++ would be about the hardest. I don't think Basic is a bad choice for beginners. It's designed for beginners which is why some people say it's not "real". 
My recommendation: get some books on learning to program in whatever language. I rarely see people get anywhere without programming books. I've been programming for ~20 years and my biggest regret is not reading more at the beginning. I could have learned a lot more a lot faster. 
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 1 at 06:04 UTC
— Ed. 2010 Apr 1 at 06:05 UTC
|
|
|
Down Rodeo
Cap'n Moth of the Firehouse
2007 Oct 19 • 5486
57,583 ₧
|
Something like K&R C would do you well, perhaps. Or... I'd say reading through Java introductions maybe? I dunno. I started with True BASIC way back when but that was a taught course. Good times. Yeah, could be that a BASIC language is the best start. Keeps things simple and you get results *very* quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 1 at 22:53 UTC
|
|
|
|
Learn LC-3 assembly then C/C++, this way you will at least understand basic logic structures, computer memory, pointers, data types, and interrupts before moving into a high level language. Write your first LC-3 program in binary and then start using assembly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LC-3
You could learn a high-level language first, but learning how a computer works first would give you a much stronger foundation.
SRAW said: hey a rare cameo by adhesive
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 7 at 01:35 UTC
|
|
|
|
:O ITS A SUPERJER REUNION
I drink to forget but I always remember.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 7 at 23:21 UTC
|
|
|
SRAW
Rocket Man
2007 Nov 6 • 2525
601 ₧
|
i suggest learning x86 assembly first
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 12 at 01:06 UTC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 15 at 19:26 UTC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 16 at 08:39 UTC
|
|
|
|
Killer-Duck said:
OOH, free is truth. Plus MIT has an OCW class using that book. I just like the Little Schemer series because it talks about food a lot, and I'm fat.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 16 at 15:23 UTC
|
|
|
|
phoenix_r said: ...it talks about food a lot, and I'm fat.
No you're not. Although your pants are bigger than the entire world.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 17 at 00:00 UTC
|
|
|
aaronjer
*****'n Admin
2005 Mar 21 • 5105
1,227 ₧
|
Well let's hurry up and get fatter at CJ Carlito's!
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 Apr 17 at 07:40 UTC
|
|
|
|
superjer said: No you're not. Although your pants are bigger than the entire world.
Ahh, my regrettable "phatpants" stage. I've since moved on to a "black or grey slacks almost all of the time" phase. Extra points if the waistbands have hidden elastic bits (to accommodate my fatness - srsly, cubiclejob+girlfriend=fattyjer).
I think my next phase will be either nopants or perhaps a "pants so tight you can tell my religion" phase.
|
|
|
|
|
≡
|
2010 May 17 at 19:24 UTC
|
|
|
|
Page [1]
|
