TNT Basic Forums > Programming Q&A
We've gotta get RealBasic progamers to swith! ;-)
< Last Thread     Next Thread >
Thread        Post A Reply

06-07-2002 10:03

Posted by:

Find more posts by Franz

We've gotta get RealBasic progamers to swith! ;-)
i just tried to convert one.

they will be so much happier using TNT!

just about to relace my first public betas! ;-)

06-07-2002 10:26

Posted by:

Find more posts by ERaZer

For games, I've already switched. TNT Basic is so much better to make games with, its easier and its faster(to make em, and the framerate). Oh, and its much cheaper too.

06-09-2002 21:42

Posted by:

Find more posts by Socrates


I'm a REALbasc programmer, and I for one was certainly not happier switching to TNT. It's lack of object-orientation makes it almost impossible to write anything complex, and it's features are very poor by comparison.

True the framerate is better, but that is down to the fact that it is only good for doing 2D scrolling game sand nothing else. RB allows 3D or 2D games, and skillful programmers can make masterpieces in it. As yet the potential of both RB and TNT have yet to be reached, but when they are, RB will be way ahead. If I ever get round to writing anything I'll prove it to you :-)

It's worth noting that RB is already cross-platform and has a plug in architecture that allows anything to be achieved with a mixture of C and RB code. There are already plugins available to do most of what's missing from it, and new features get added on a weekly, sometimes daily basis. TNT by comparison has none of these abilities, and goes for months between updates, all of which have been minor so far anyway.

It won't lure away RB programmers, what it will lure away is the small subset of RB programmers who only set their sights as high as TNT can reach.

I would go as far as to say that TNT basic itself could probably be written in RB pretty easily, and would be corss platform to boot. The upcoming Bang! will prove that if it ever gets released. In fact I recommend to the authors that they switch their interface code to RB, if nothing else. It will be faster, less buggy, and cross platform, not to mention the fact that it will speed up their development process by a factor of 100 or more.

06-10-2002 00:54

Posted by:
Douglas O'Brien

Find more posts by Douglas O'Brien

They Are Different

Real Basic can be used for a bunch of other stuff. TNT has a narrow focus, but for making general 2D games TNT is better.

What scares me is the frame rate thing. I thought RB compiled. TNT is a fairly slow interpreter and its running faster than RB? What about for general math calculations? But I happy there are other Mac programmers out there using whatever they use.

And, are any TNT programmers going to make any games for that uDevGames thing? Cause it would be kind of degrading for a new programming environment dedicated to making games to not have one entered. If the Network problems are fixed and released soon I'll have a game.

06-10-2002 06:22

Posted by:

Find more posts by Franz

We should all enter it.

IDev contest?

We should all enter it,
(whatever language you prefer! ;-)

I've got a shooter and a puzzle game almost ready.

06-12-2002 13:50

Posted by:

Find more posts by Socrates

RB is compiled, but for some reason is still slow as a dead dog, probably because of redundant coding to simplify the cross-platformness.

It's not that hard to make a bytecode interpeter fast in this context, because all the graphics and so on are handled via compiled code, so calling it directly, or via a bytecode won't make much difference.

RB's graphics are much more versatile, and hence slower, becuase the user is responsible for handling then at a lower level.

For playing a Quicktime movie, or actually drawing a picture though, it makes little difference, since this is handled by lightning fast Apple libraries.

TNT would be a lot more attractive if it didn't insist on having escape bring up their own pause dialog and so on. With RB you can at least write software that doesn't shout "I was written in BASIC" from the rooftops (with a bit of effort). TNT games are instantly recogniseable, which would be a good thing were it not for the fact that they're recogniseable as being a bit crappy :-)

I'd rather write a great game and have people only find out that I wrote it in RB by reading the docs. I think that actually makes a better advertisement for the development software. It also makes it more likely that people will play it rather than trash it as soon as they see the tell-tale interface (happens with RB stuff quite a bit when people are sloppy).

I'd like to see some RB and TNT stuff at uDev though, truth is that for all their potential, I've seen squat that's playable. A few cheesy RB asteroids games have shown up on Version Tracker, but nothing from TNT.

10-25-2002 20:48

Posted by:
Joe Nowak

Click Here to Email Joe Nowak   Find more posts by Joe Nowak

Don't switch, use both!

Why is it always an either/or with everyone?

Use both. Use RB when you need to get complex. Use gcc when you want to get even more complex.

Use TNT when you want to whip up a fast game -- without getting too complex. Sometimes I just don't want to deal with interface issues... sometimes I just want to bang away on a game, one modification at a time. Interpeters are awsome in that respect.

I own both, I use both. I like both. They are both great at
what they do. BOTH get my financial support.

nuff said.

11-01-2002 21:17

Posted by:

Find more posts by chrisd

long time no post...

> probably because of redundant coding to simplify the cross-platformness

Totally fasle.

RB simply has a simplistic sprite system based on dirty rects and copy bits.

Very general purpose and easy to implement.

Real never tried to make RB a game dev system.

11-02-2002 09:10

Posted by:
Danlab Games

Click Here to Email Danlab Games   Find more posts by Danlab Games

You can make complexe code in TNT too... ;-)

11-10-2002 20:08

Posted by:

Find more posts by Frenchy

complex code

It seems to me that some of you are missing the point. TNT basic was developed to avoid having to write complex code. I have programmed in assembling, which is lenghty and "complicated". Now days with the speed of computing, I much rather concentrating on graphics, sound, music and original ideas than spending time on the coding. After all do we really care what language a really good game is written in? I would not buy a bad game just because it was written in assembing-

11-10-2002 20:57

Posted by:

Click Here to Email eLL   Find more posts by eLL


There's nothing noble about wasting time coding in something as low level as Assembly/machine etc you code 3 pages of cryptic syntax using a compiler/ide that gives you cryptic bug alerts and read Records insteadd of live input...low Level languages.

...long story short...there is nothing noble about excessive oding except for the often pompous/arrogant feeling of accomplishment.

this is where time is best spent, and as for RB if you're out to build a game, don't waste your time, as soon as we get windowMode its a dead tie...unless your out for 3D then still pick crystal space or DIM3 etc.

All times are GMT        Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
< Last Thread     Next Thread >

< Contact Us - TNT Basic >

Powered by: vBulletin Lite Version 1.0.1 Lite
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Limited 2000.