FPS in Turing?

[hamid14]

Would it be possible to create a FPS in Turing 4.1?

[TheGuardian001]

Theoretically yes.

Realistically no.

[hamid14]

why not? couldnt you just make an illusion that it looks 3d?

[Tony]

Wait, he didn't say anything about the framerate

It's possible, but you need to be aware of the limitations -- detail level in graphics, accuracy of physics, number of objects in the world... I'm under the impression that an FPS has been done with all of those turned _way_ down.

[TheGuardian001]

hamid14 @ Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:13 am wrote:

why not? couldnt you just make an illusion that it looks 3d?

How would that be any different than actual 3D graphics? Whenever you're seeing a 3D image on your screen (assuming it isn't pre-rendered,) your computer takes the 3D space in memory, and figures out what the 2D image of what the camera is looking at. On top of which, you can't "fake" an environment the user actually moves around. If they're going to walk around it, it needs to be able to be seen from any given angle at any given time.

Turing simply doesn't have the power to do this kind of thing effectively. Turing is meant to teach the basics of programming to absolute beginners. For almost anything beyond that, you'll need to learn a proper language.

As Tony said, it is theoretically possible to do this, if you wanted to. But your final product would be next to worthless, and probably a waste of your time.

[Tony]

TheGuardian001 @ Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:57 am wrote:

probably a waste of your time.

I'm sure that there is plenty to be learned during the development. A different language will not magically turn weekend effort into Halo, and anyway I don't think that commercial level production is not the goal here.

[copthesaint]

To be honest, ditch the idea, turing could only handle a poly count of up too 600 with a good run speed when I made an engine and tried to make a good 3D game. And btw 600 poly count will be reduced even further to about 400 when you add GUI and collision ect ect.

[Zren]

You cannot control the mouse to reset it to the center of the screen, thus ruining any hope of a FPS with rotation.

Your best hope is a simple button shooter. A single backdrop with buttons scaling/zooming in as they come closer to you.
Eg: http://www.flashgames247.com/play/5089.htm
This is boring, over used method that could be done in flash [and better] within an hour.

You could improve on that, by looking at a 2d shooter from above like this where the bullets each have their own coordinates. Except draw it in the form of a first person view.

Your best bet is scaling images according to the depth [not sure how efficient that is in a large scale], and not doing a 3D engine.

[Bored]

TheGuardian001 @ Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:57 am wrote:

hamid14 @ Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:13 am wrote:

why not? couldnt you just make an illusion that it looks 3d?

How would that be any different than actual 3D graphics? Whenever you're seeing a 3D image on your screen (assuming it isn't pre-rendered,) your computer takes the 3D space in memory, and figures out what the 2D image of what the camera is looking at. On top of which, you can't "fake" an environment the user actually moves around. If they're going to walk around it, it needs to be able to be seen from any given angle at any given time.

Turing simply doesn't have the power to do this kind of thing effectively. Turing is meant to teach the basics of programming to absolute beginners. For almost anything beyond that, you'll need to learn a proper language.

As Tony said, it is theoretically possible to do this, if you wanted to. But your final product would be next to worthless, and probably a waste of your time.

Don't you remember old 3D (2.5D) which used static 2-D image that were streched and or scewed to make the appearence of depth. Non environment (aka enemies, items, etc.) were 2-D sprites drawn at usually 8 angles to create the illusion of direction and simply shrunk and grown to show distance. Given how long we've been doing butchered 3-D it is definately completely possible to do a 3-D FPS in turing if your willing for it to look like shit. Hell TBH, you could probably remake say Duke-Nukem 3D, or Wolfenstein 3D if you were good enough and had the time and effort.

[TheGuardian001]

[quote="Bored @ Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:21 pm"]

TheGuardian001 @ Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:57 am wrote:

Don't you remember old 3D (2.5D) which used static 2-D image that were streched and or scewed to make the appearence of depth. Non environment (aka enemies, items, etc.) were 2-D sprites drawn at usually 8 angles to create the illusion of direction and simply shrunk and grown to show distance. Given how long we've been doing butchered 3-D it is definately completely possible to do a 3-D FPS in turing if your willing for it to look like shit. Hell TBH, you could probably remake say Duke-Nukem 3D, or Wolfenstein 3D if you were good enough and had the time and effort.

Can Turing even skew images? I think you might be stuck at a wireframe world, cause turing's image manip tools are pretty weak too. I guess you could rotate+stretch, but that wouldn't really be the right result

Plus, as Zren said, you have no way to reset the mouse, meaning turning would be horrible (and aiming would too)

[SNIPERDUDE]

Turing can skew images.
Another idea to look at is Raycasting the world - using 2D sprites.

[Turing_Gamer]

Already I saw 2 games using Ray casting, which is similar to FPS. One was the Doom3 build your own map. The other was a Mario fps that actually acts like an fps. Unfortunately it only work with 2D pics. You can make 3d models like in 3D Plane Shooter.

[Srlancelot39]

whats an FPS exactly? =\

[andrew.]

LET ME GOOGLE THAT FOR YOU.

No offense, but please stop making useless posts to rack up your post count.

[Srlancelot39]

or maybe i was posting because i had interest in the topic? ever think of that? btw, if i were to google fps, i would get 300k pages on frames per second. the fps that is being talked about here looks different.
so instead of being a jerk on a forum how about you think first.