This also meant that the whole compiler/interpreter had to be included in all the builds. The GML would be "compiled" run-time into the interpreted format. Any string could be valid code, and could be interpreted back then.
#Particle designer gms2 code
In fact, I used to have objects and the code defined in code in order to create new objects at run-time.
The same GML we know and love now used to exclusively be a run-time interpreted language. But, in my opinion, it is still a scripting language, more than anything because it doesn't exist much of anywhere else, and because it is totally dependent on the Gamemaker Engine.Īlso, just because they can now compile it to C++(and then into compiled code in an executable) doesn't mean it was always that way. They are both pretty much the same in terms of what is seen traditionally as a programming language, both are typed in a similliar syntax, compiled then executed.Įven thou GML is very forgiving in terms of syntax etc it is still a fully fledged and expandable programming language with lots of functions built in for game development to make developing games easier and faster and not some "scripting" language.Īnother thought that occurs to me.can the language be used without the accompanying engine? If so, that argues towards a language not so much being a "scripting language." I love Gamemaker and how useful GML is, and the fact that it can do much more than what the word "scripting" implies.
If you really want to bend the terms you can make anything a scripting language or anything a programming language just like you can bend any terms, but do not reference GML as being a scripting language and C# to be a programming language in the same sentence. The compilation is done at some point but it does not work in a way that you compile your complete PHP or JavaScript code as an executable file yourself and then upload that file to a webserver.Ī scripting language is a language that "scripts" other things to do stuff. You drop it in a lamp-stack for example and see the results in a web browser. You write PHP or JavaScript, you do not compile it. Code is compiled to a standalone program. If you want to make a game for people to play in a non-speculative, non-hypothetical way then that's when you might look at something like GMS2-to actually get it done.Ĭlick to expand.True in a sense but still, no you are wrong.Ī script is a sequence or instructions carried out by another program.
So yeah, if your criteria is you need ultra-high resolution graphics, real-time physics, particle effects, dynamic real-time shadows, best to just stick with U3D or UE, because while you can achieve some of those things in GMS2 there's no easy-button for doing them, it's not really geared that way. But that was never the point and I never saw this obsession with fame and money in that community, and pretty much zero toxicity, since everyone is a developer what goes around comes around in terms of feedback. More recently, the products are somewhat commercially viable, with a few hits here and there. GameMaker is about an individual being able to create a game in a reasonable time frame, with a community to share it with. In the GameMaker community, it always seemed like everyone was making their own game. The others do related work, such as art or music, or writing. For every 10 Unity users I've talked to, maybe 2 are actually lone-wolf, one-man-army developers. We've had more than our fair share of debates about who is/isn't making games, but the truth of the matter is that the GameMaker community members produce a lot more unique games than the Unity community does, and in my view not by any small margin. GameMaker isn't about cutting-edge graphics, and I think that's where a lot of people get turned around. Comparing GMS2 to Unity based on features like an advanced particle system, physics-based collision detection, etc.
0 kommentar(er)
