SyntaxBomb - Indie Coders

Languages & Coding => AGK => Topic started by: Pfaber11 on April 28, 2019, 01:41:05 PM

Title: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on April 28, 2019, 01:41:05 PM
Was just wondering what you guys think. I've been using AGK2 for over a year now and it took me a couple of months to get into it . Just been playing around with Pure Basic this morning without much success and am thinking is it worth spending time on . In your opinions which is the better of the two? Is it much faster than AGK2 ?
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on April 28, 2019, 02:12:45 PM
I think I've came to my own conclusion. AGK2 seems much easier to program in my opinion . I've been thinking of learning a new language and have looked at a few and none of them seem as nice to use as AGK2 . So far looked at unity purebasic and python. Maybe I'm just used to what I'm currently using . I suppose if I'd been using purebasic for a year or so and tried AGK i'd have the same thoughts . Personally I find it very hard to learn a new computer language and so would like to make the right choice . What I really wanted was to learn a language which might point to some kind of employment such as Unity or Python. Although I really like AGK I don't think it's considered a professional language which is a shame as I really get on with it . Thoughts anyone. I'm rambling a bit today. Happy programming .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: TomToad on April 28, 2019, 02:49:36 PM
This site has what is probably the best languages to learn if you are looking for employment.
https://hackernoon.com/best-coding-languages-to-learn-in-2019-b49b49250a25

Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: MikeHart on April 28, 2019, 03:19:05 PM
If you are looking for employment, you should specify the field you want to work in.
Web technology mostly requires html, javascript, css, php, sql, etc.  and knowledge of tools like angular, node, docker, etc.
Keep in mind that the coud is a big term these days, so definitely that would be my choice.


If you want to work in research, Python is well received there. Imho it is an awesome tool. But also capable creating awesome tools. Python can also be used for web stuff.


For the rest I would say C/C++



Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on April 28, 2019, 03:55:51 PM
Thanks for the input. If I had to make a choice now I think by Others opinions it would probably be Python. Just doesn't seem too user friendly to me right now . Think I'll take another look at it . Bonjour . I'll keep you all posted on my progress and see how long it takes to write my first program . Decided pure basic is out of the running . Did take another look at it and it's not my thing. Can't seem to get anything to run on it. compiles then the computer crashes .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Derron on April 28, 2019, 04:14:49 PM
Python - uses indentation not just for structuring but also as necessity/logic structure. Keep this in mind but if you are OK with it you will learn a pretty nice and powerful language. If you want to dive into statistical stuff / mathematics numPy is what you will learn to love.

If you wanted to learn Java while creating games and are not keen to limit to Android, then try "libGDX".

With Urho3D and C++ you can learn something too.

If you do as all others: learn C# and use it in Unity (or Godot).

Web programming (frontend: html5/JS, PHP/Ruby/Python/Perl or even again JS to drive your backend) is als easy to "begin with" (but hard to master especially if you have to take care of security - read user credentials, payment processes, ...).


bye
Ron
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on April 29, 2019, 01:02:10 AM
If your ultimate goal is to get employment then both AGK and PureBASIC are useless to learn :o

For the business environment there are many popular options as mentioned above. Also note that if you are seeking a programming job then it's more likely employers are going to want a lot of experience and qualifications. Unless you're lucky enough to get an apprentice role. Employers want very specific skill sets and often specialising in a certain area.

Alternatively you could go down the route I did and go self employed ( 20 years now \o/ ). That way clients don't give a damn what the apps are written in so long as it does the job they want. The down side is of course getting the work and more importantly sustainable work. It's a catch-22 and there are no guarantees with anything. Most of my apps written for clients are in Delphi, VB.net and PHP ( with html, javascript and css ). I love Delphi ( PASCAL based ) but I don't think I've ever seen a job requiring it :))

For personal use, use whatever works best for you. Personally I like AGK a lot. It's very easy to get into and for an interpreted language its pretty quick. Sure PureBASIC is faster at pure code execution but it doesn't offer as much as AGK does for game making. AGK isn't perfect but for me it's a modern Blitz3D and I'm having a load of fun with it so that'll do me ;D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: 3DzForMe on April 29, 2019, 05:20:45 PM
Quote
AGK isn't perfect but for me it's a modern Blitz3D and I'm having a load of fun with it so that'll do me ;D

Just had to shell out 560 quid on the car, 2nd steering rack in less than a year - yep living in the country has its pitfalls and potholes.

I might break the 600 pound spend mark by treating myself to AGK2..... :o

I was employed doing Web stuff in javascript, html and C# - even the old  'C' for a while with Korn shell scripting - although coding to pay bills stole my mojo for hobby coding for a few years...
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Rick Nasher on April 29, 2019, 06:53:41 PM
Actually.. If you don't mind going back a few version, than you can also use C# for AGK.
And C# is a language appreciated by pro's, lots of jobs there.

See:
CheckAnnouncing AppGameKit for C#! (https://www.thegamecreators.com/post/announcing-appgamekit-for-c)
And:
AgkSharp for Windows (http://madbit.bplaced.com/?page_id=136)


Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on April 29, 2019, 07:21:28 PM
Well I've watched a few tutorials and done a online coarse in the last 24 hours and have decided on python . It didn't cost me a bean. Also downloaded panda3d for it to check out what the graphics can do . Modules they are called . Will still be using AGK2 for the foreseeable. Gonna be a while until I produce anything in python at least a month or two anyway if my efforts with AGK2
were anything to go by. I hate the first couple of weeks with a new language it can be very frustrating but we get there eventually . Think I'll watch another tutorial tonight there's one for six hours .     
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: MikeHart on April 29, 2019, 07:35:09 PM
You know, there is a AGK2 for Python version.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Rick Nasher on April 29, 2019, 07:45:20 PM
This is AGK, do you see?
(https://i.imgur.com/E7Gyjwq.gif)
 ;D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on April 29, 2019, 07:52:52 PM
yes I had heard gonna have to check it out . would put me in familiar territory. I doubt it can be ported to mobile though as tier one can be . But will be taking a look later. I'm now 24 hours or so into the python and haven't written a thing yet but that's about to change . just looking for a good reference manual to get going . I still think AGK2 is an awesome piece of kit and would recommend it to anyone . It's not a toy it's a great bit of kit and I've got 7 products on my website created with it .
 Ok they're not that great but I intend to keep them up there and I may keep using AGK2 for Android development and IOS . Or maybe in a couple of months I'll be fed up with python and revert back to what I know best. Bonjour.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on April 30, 2019, 02:02:40 PM
Still curious has anybody spent time with AGK2 and purebasic and can say which one they prefer . I had a look at purebasic and it seemed very similar to AGK2 but I didn't really spend enough time with it to get used to the syntax.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: MikeHart on April 30, 2019, 02:50:38 PM
I did. And imho you can't compare the two. Purebasic is much more powerful regarding general application development. Agk2 Tier has a super simple Basic syntax, perfect for beginners. Both ship with extensive documentation. Both apis are big, have more features than  you will ever use.


Question: if you are familiar with agk2, why change?
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on April 30, 2019, 05:33:33 PM
Still curious has anybody spent time with AGK2 and purebasic and can say which one they prefer . I had a look at purebasic and it seemed very similar to AGK2 but I didn't really spend enough time with it to get used to the syntax.
Speaking from a game making perspective then AGK2 is more feature rich than PureBASIC and easier to accomplish things in. If your game requires CPU intensive routines per frame then PB has the raw compiled grunt and advantage over AGK Tier 1. Likewise if you wanted to code both games and native desktop apps in one language then PB would more likely be suited to your needs.

AGK is a lot easier to get into and personally for me a lot more fun than PB. I don't like the way PB works and find things like initialising graphic and sound engines really old fashioned and something the compiler should do in the background, for example "Oh, he's called a sound command. I'll add in the sound engine". Overall I find the structure and syntax of PB more messy than AGK.

So in a nutshell, it's going to take something special to drag me away from AGK for making 2D games :)
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 01, 2019, 12:09:16 PM
Why do I want to move away from AGK2 ? I want to learn a semi professional language and out of them all I think python is going to be the easiest to get along with. Having said that I've been playing around with it for the last couple of days and so far have nothing to run on it. using the wing 101 IDE for now. Yes the indentation thing can be a right pain and I'm not sure I really get the class thing but hopefully it'll grow on me. AGK2 is a great place to start and I do love using it and would recommend it to anyone . Haven't found anything wrong with it and once you've put a few weeks into it you're off . It's a shame it's not what I would call a professional language because if it was it would take the world by storm.   
The best thing about what I'm doing right now is python is free as is the IDE and the 3 modules I've installed. Got pygame and panda3d so should be able to produce some good games. Python compiles to byte code as far as I'm aware so probably won't be much faster than AGK2 but I guess we'll see. If I can't get along with python then I will probably go to AGKstudio .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 05, 2019, 04:33:16 PM
Well for the time being I've decided to stick with AGK for the reason that I think it would take me a year to get into python properly and I don't won't to spend a year learning another language . I've decided the way forward for myself is to put my time into becoming a better AGK programmer. I really don't get the OOP style of programming , classes and all that def this def that . I think if you're into basic and want a current language then for me it's gotta be AGK or Pure basic and for some reason when I try to run a programme in Pure basic it crashes even with there demo programmes not just my own . For some reason my computer doesn't like pure basic . I tried the demo and the cracked version and the same thing happens with both of them . so Happy I didn't pay for it but I would of if it worked . So I'm very happy to be using AGK2. Enjoy your day and happy coding .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: MikeHart on May 05, 2019, 08:14:00 PM
You are using warez? And want to make money with software. I hate warez users.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 06, 2019, 08:57:52 AM
Warez ? What is warez . sorry if I've offended you.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 06, 2019, 09:00:23 AM
If you mean cracked software no I don't use it . just wanted to check out Pure basic . If it would of worked I would of purchased it .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 06, 2019, 09:04:38 AM
At the end of the day it didn't work the demo or the crack . Don't know why but there you go . My AGK2 and all my other stuff is either freeware or I've purchased it.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 06, 2019, 09:14:37 AM
What if I would of purchased Pure Basic and that didn't work also I just wanted to take a look at it before diving in . If I would of spent 79 euros on it and it wouldn't of worked where would that of left me . out of pocket .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Derron on May 06, 2019, 09:17:56 AM
A programmer can learn almost any (coding) language which follows the same principles (so not talking about "brain fuck" or other more esoteric languages).

Programming is logic driven and I do not understand why someone who searches a _new_ language prefers a paid-solution (AGK) over a more proven language (Python) plus an huge amount of libraries/modules.

I would understand to stay with a language (eg. BlitzMax/3D/... or AGK) if you learned programming with it - or used it for years now - but as said, searching for a NEW language, especially if you want to use them professionally, ... nah.

Go with Python in your spare time, eg. write little snippets for Blender (scripting via Python) or write little tools in Python ... it might have some disadvantages (indentation is a "needs to get used to" thing) but else it has a huge user base which means that you will most probably find an answer for most of your questions. I doubt that for AGK, BlitzMax, Blitz3D ... and all the little "indie tools".


bye
Ron
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 06, 2019, 09:34:59 AM
You know Ron I agree with you . I really wish there was a professional basic out there of some description . Yes I will keep python handy and have a play with it every now and then .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on May 06, 2019, 03:29:36 PM
Quote
I really wish there was a professional basic out there of some description
Visual BASIC .net is about as professional you can get for a BASIC based language. Although in a work environment they'll more likely be wanting C# .net over VB .net.

BASIC which has come on leaps and bounds since it's conception will never every be accepted as a professional language, ever! - Although you could argue that during the VB6 era it was more accepted in that area.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on May 06, 2019, 04:29:31 PM
I read somewhere that VB was given the axe and people were swapping over to C# . I think that TGC should start saying AGK is for Indies hobbyists and professionals alike . It kind of has a ring to it and I think  their sales would go up. Otherwise it's like saying it's a toy.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on May 06, 2019, 04:51:55 PM
Well I quite like the name 'Application Game Kit' (rather than yet another XYZ BASIC).  It does sound more professional I think, but the language itself is old skool BASIC, so doesn't match the modern name.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: 3DzForMe on May 06, 2019, 06:58:47 PM
Quote
Although you could argue that during the VB6 era it was more accepted in that area.

I can recall battling with vb6 to achieve a plotting thing for some data I was importing - I was so glad Blitz 3D  was around. VB is still awesome for front end GUI applications - but I much prefer B3D (I suppose AGK today - still supported for one) rather than VB for under the covers coding grunt. :D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on May 06, 2019, 07:15:56 PM
So basically (lol) there's still not a simple but powerful language that suits all.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on May 06, 2019, 07:25:48 PM
So basically (lol) there's still not a simple but powerful language that suits all.
Nope, never has and never will be the ultimate does it all perfectly language. Different things and all that :)
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on May 06, 2019, 07:28:32 PM
Yes there will be.   ;)
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on May 06, 2019, 07:31:35 PM
;D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Madjack on August 24, 2019, 06:17:48 PM
So just confirm, leaving graphics aside, AGK2 BASIC is about how much slower than Blitz3d in code execution?
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on August 24, 2019, 07:29:07 PM
I don't personally know the answer to that but I have used both and the results I got were better with AGK2 however it was my first game for the pc I created with bltz3d and it wasn't up to much. I think the potential is better with AGK2 but I'm sure there's  many who would disagree. I couldn't get pure basic to run seemed to be having a problem with OGRE . I think it was using FMOD for the sound too which has some copyright stuff going on I believe. Hmm .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Rick Nasher on August 24, 2019, 10:07:53 PM
So just confirm, leaving graphics aside, AGK2 BASIC is about how much slower than Blitz3d in code execution?

Can only speak for myself and while using 3D gfx. In comparison, in AGK on my old core2duo from 2007 was a breeze: could now use shadows, animated water and lighting in hi-res at a descent rate opposed to Blitz3d, which then would start to crawl.

I understood different people on occasion experienced results that were more slow in regards to Blitz3D when using other aspect of the language, but I can't say I've got adequate material to compare it with, for I basically didn't care to much about that and could live with it very well.

Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on August 24, 2019, 11:17:54 PM
So just confirm, leaving graphics aside, AGK2 BASIC is about how much slower than Blitz3d in code execution?
For pure code execution Blitz3D is faster than AGK but nothing that really limits the type of game you want to do. I've never had any speed issues with AGK as the byte code it outputs is easily fast enough for all my needs to date. If your game is logic heavy and you don't want to optimise it then Blitz will out perform AGK on pure code speed grunt.

If you're asking for a speed difference in code alone then I'd say that Blitz is around 30% faster but once you start to introduce graphics, sound and music then the speed difference drops as AGK's 2D side is very fast.

Or to put it another way AGK is capable of creating any 2D game you want. Yes it does 3D too but I'd personally use something like Unity for 3D games as it's feature set is so much more richer.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: RemiD on August 25, 2019, 09:15:13 AM
Quote
most bizarre moment was, when i realized that example supplied by AGK, uses lightmap on a OBJ format which doesnt support 2nd UV map channel, while those which does (X, B3D), simply doesnt work..

so, a few months ago, some of you guys wrote that AGK was the best language / game engine, which would replace blitz3d, and now you complain to not manage to apply a diffuse texture on a mesh. :))
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Naughty Alien on August 25, 2019, 09:38:04 AM
..i was the one of very enthusiastic AGK users..no mistake about it...until i started to dig deeper in to 3d side of things (before that i was working on GUI and few other things, 2D related)...soon after that, whole thing was not so optimistic to me and it is like that right now..thats how it went for me..
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on August 25, 2019, 09:42:43 AM
It depends if you want to write 3D games or are happy developing 2D games like I am.  AGK is great for 2D with Box2D built-in and a very simple language that runs on many platforms, as for full 3D features?  Not so much.  Also, the syntax is very wordy (which is not something I like).  Pure BASIC is even more wordy though, both companies don't seem to know the word abbreviation!
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on August 25, 2019, 04:16:33 PM
Quote
so, a few months ago, some of you guys wrote that AGK was the best language / game engine, which would replace blitz3d, and now you complain to not manage to apply a diffuse texture on a mesh. :))
Lol, the 3D side does work with textures, it just that it doesn't fully implement certain 3D model formats and can be quirky about which UV it wants to apply the texture to depending on model format.

It's easy enough and straight forward but in the case of the other thread his model didn't have any UV data at all, hence the problem.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: RemiD on August 25, 2019, 04:34:16 PM
oh i see... well it is reassuring that it works for such basic features :P
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on August 25, 2019, 05:17:46 PM
oh i see... well it is reassuring that it works for such basic features :P
Has more features and can push more polys than Blitz3D :P
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on August 25, 2019, 05:21:03 PM
Quote
Has more features and can push more polys than Blitz3D :P

And is in active development...It even has a website and forum!  :P
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: iWasAdam on August 25, 2019, 06:19:47 PM
Touché Steve  :D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on August 25, 2019, 06:23:37 PM
Hehe  ;D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on August 26, 2019, 05:14:24 AM
And is in active development...It even has a website and forum!  :P
Damn! I so missed that point. My sarcasm mojo needs a boost. Thanks for stepping in with that ;D :)) :P
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on August 27, 2019, 10:24:49 AM
could someone tell me the difference between a language like basic or c# and a scripted language like AGK tier 1. I took a look at pure basic  a while ago and it also has a lot of commands like agk  so is this a scripted language as well?
I guess what I'm asking is what defines a scripted language.

Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on August 27, 2019, 10:55:28 AM
Generally a scripting language is interpreted rather than compiled to machine code like C++ or Pure BASIC.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on August 28, 2019, 03:28:35 AM
could someone tell me the difference between a language like basic or c# and a scripted language like AGK tier 1. I took a look at pure basic  a while ago and it also has a lot of commands like agk  so is this a scripted language as well?
I guess what I'm asking is what defines a scripted language.
Steve explains it in a nutshell and there other exceptions too. A language can be compiled to byte code which is faster than interpreted. Some scripting languages also are classed as JIT ( Just In Time - compiled at runtime ) which compiles from mainly byte code into machine code at runtime.

AGK compiles to byte code, other BASIC's may be straight interpreted or compiled, C# is compiled to an intermediate language and then into JIT. Pure Basic compiles to machine code and has a vast library of optimised code. JavaScript was an interpreted language for many years but is now mostly JIT.

It's all madness ;D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on August 28, 2019, 11:04:11 AM
thanks for that you learn something new every day.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Rick Nasher on August 28, 2019, 07:51:42 PM
This is on feat I really liked about Blitz3D and hold opposed to AGK.
But in the end it doesn't really matter if gets the job done and end result is better than Blitz's, it's just the feel.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Qube on August 28, 2019, 08:48:33 PM
This is on feat I really liked about Blitz3D and hold opposed to AGK.
But in the end it doesn't really matter if gets the job done and end result is better than Blitz's, it's just the feel.
I'd like to see AGK Studio end up with a proper native compiler but I doubt it'll happen. I think it'd be a popular decision if they did go down that route and I'd happily buy it if it was sold as a plugin or AGK Studio 2.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Kris on August 28, 2019, 09:25:37 PM
It would be great if they add a compiler as an option even if only for the desktop targets. Games could take advantage of the extra speed that wouldn't be released on mobile anyway.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on August 29, 2019, 09:44:59 AM
Yes the one thing I really thought AGK studio would have is a machine code compiler . I too would gladly part with my money for  such an upgrade even if it was just for the desktop. Although upto now the speed hasn't been a problem for me . I would rather have a Porsche than a 2CV . To be honest I don't like the look of AGK studio as far as the IDE is concerned . I don't need the scene editor and I keep my assets where I want them and have no problems with it . The only reason for me to upgrade to studio is for the vulkan upgrade which is a lot of money just for that . I think if AGK came with a machine code compiler it would gain a lot of new customers and I think TGC know this . Maybe it's too hard to do .
 
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 02, 2019, 12:12:29 PM
just downloaded the free version of Pure Basic for a second look and am going to give it another go . This time it is working for some reason Gonna go and try and take a look at some examples and see if I can make a start . Any tips or advice on how to use Pure Basic would be appreciated . Bonjour
  I'm not going to stop using AGK as it is cross platform (Android) but would like to have a language that compiles to machine code also. I figure it can't hurt to take a look anyway . I might not like it but we'll see.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 04, 2019, 11:50:28 AM
Well I've had a play with pure basic and so far haven't even managed to print my name on the screen. I know how to open and close a window but that's it . Not going to delete it just yet will see where I'm at in a couple of weeks .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: RemiD on October 04, 2019, 05:46:27 PM
Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic vs KingOfBasic (blitzbasic)
Code: [Select]
Graphics(640,480,32,2)
XStr$ = "hello pfaber"
Color(255,255,255)
Text(GraphicsWidth()/2-StringWidth(XStr)/2,GraphicsHeight()/2,XStr)
WaitKey()
End()
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Kris on October 04, 2019, 06:59:55 PM
As I said in "the other thread", in PureBasic you have to do certain things manually. A little extra work.

:D


Code: [Select]
InitKeyboard()
InitSprite()
OpenWindow(0,0,0,640,480,"PureBasic is good for you !",#PB_Window_ScreenCentered)
OpenWindowedScreen(WindowID(0),0,0,640,480)

Repeat
  WindowEvent()
  ExamineKeyboard()
  ClearScreen(RGB(0,0,0))
  StartDrawing(ScreenOutput())
  DrawText(260,240,"I Like PureBasic !")
  StopDrawing()
  FlipBuffers()
Until KeyboardPushed(#PB_Key_All)
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: 3DzForMe on October 04, 2019, 07:17:14 PM
I was wondering how Blitz basic would fair against Ago and pure, will try for comparison s later on....
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 05, 2019, 08:16:40 AM
I think it's a case of the grass is always greener . really not enjoying my time with pure basic so far and will probably ditch it shortly . Nothing I try seems to work. I actually got on way better with blitz3d where everything I typed more or less worked . I think what I need is a faster computer maybe . But yes you're right why swap when I Know quite a bit of AGK. By no means mastered it though . Right that's it gonna free up some space on my hard drive . The pure basic is going back.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 05, 2019, 08:48:46 AM
I think what I'm after is a computer language which compiles to machine code is current and I get along with . unfortunately pure basic is not it . AGK2 comes close but I would like the machine code . On this computer as it is I'm lucky to get 30 frames per second But I realise that's down to the computer. I'm looking for the holy grail eg AGK2  with machine code. Nothing out there seems to fit the bill at the moment. A nice universal language.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: GaborD on October 05, 2019, 11:29:46 AM
Why are you so set on the machine code compiling? I have argued this before, sorry for bringing it up again, but for usual games it barely makes a difference, your bottleneck is almost always rendering and not the execution of the game code itself.
The engine is doing all the heavy lifting (object management, input handling, playing sounds, scene management, 3D transformations, pushing data to the GPU, etc) and it already runs in machine code.

Machine code compiling only improves the execution speed of your own bit of game logic code, which is generally a tiny tiny fraction of the overall performance.
That used to be different in the older do it all yourself days where you were blitting stuff manually and whatnot. Nowadays, you barely do anything in the game code, you are essentially just scripting the engine, which already runs in optimized code for the platform. (well, hopefully haha).

Caveat: Are you doing heavy simulations? Then it's understandable and you can forget what I said. In that case tier2 or running them on the GPU might indeed be necessary.

Sorry for sounding nitpicky, just trying to understand why you seem unhappy with the performance aspect of a quite performant engine. The only one that was as performant as AGK in my tests was NB, assuming you tweak them both a bit. Nothing else ever came close for me.

In the end, most modern engines are similar and use fully shader based rendering, if you find something that suits your workflows and feels good syntax-wise, I would say stick with it, that's worth much more than a few percent performance here or there.

Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: c0d3r9 on October 05, 2019, 11:31:56 AM
@pfaber: what are your hardware specs?
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: RemiD on October 05, 2019, 11:52:59 AM
@Pfaber>>
consider what Gabor said... seeing his renders, he must have done many many experiments and measuring procedures / rendering speeds.

imo, choose a language / engine and stick with it until your understanding becomes so good that when you think about a new game / tool to make, the language is not an issue anymore, you just have to mix reusable procedures / systems (that you have created in the past) and a few new procedures specific to your project, and the progress is fast !!! 8)

about rendering time, often it is because you render carelessely everything, so take a look at hidden surfaces determination and culling... or for your level, simplify your meshes / textures... (=less surfaces, less vertices and triangles, less texels)
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 05, 2019, 01:16:40 PM
Yes gonna stick with AGK for the time being until as you say I think of a program and know how to accomplish the desired result straight away. More or less.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 05, 2019, 01:27:50 PM
Hi coder9 my system specs are 1.6 ghz duel processor 4 gigs ram 32gb storage and HD400 graphics. Nothing to get excited about . I have a desktop but my son has taken it over and it is now described as his computer. I really didn't think this machine would handle 3d graphics at all but runs my programs at about the same speed as my phone . Definitely playable.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: GaborD on October 05, 2019, 01:36:16 PM
Really good challenge to develop 3D games for that hardware.
Blitz / Max / AGK should all be up to it, you just need to optimize the heck out of things, which is the fun part anyway.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 05, 2019, 01:55:43 PM
yes my games might not be that great but they're not bad . They are designed to run at 30 fps although I only get about 20 on my laptop but even so they're playable. Gonna be a while until I get a new one and intend to buy new when I do as mine's in use constantly .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 10, 2019, 10:20:09 AM
Good morning .  Ran into a problem when putting an Image or text on the screen in PB. Basically the transparency isn't working and I have a black rectangle around my image . I'm gonna post some code here so you can see where I'm at . I'll include the plane.png file as well . Anybody know how to sort this . I'm on day three of learning PB and think I'm doing ok so far . Maybe I should be using sprites or something .
Code: [Select]
InitSprite()
UsePNGImageDecoder()
InitKeyboard()
OpenWindow(0,0,0,1366,768,"Paul's program! Press Return To Exit!")
OpenWindowedScreen(WindowID(0),0,0,1366,768)
SetWindowColor(0,#Black)
ClearScreen(#Black)
x = -179
y = 400
pf = LoadImage(1,"plane.png")

  Loopy:
 
 
  StartDrawing(WindowOutput(0))
  DrawText(10,10,"hello world")
 
  DrawImage(pf,x,y)
  x=x+10
  If x >= 1366
    x= -179
    EndIf
    StopDrawing()
    FlipBuffers()
  WindowEvent()
  ExamineKeyboard()
  If  KeyboardPushed(#PB_Key_Return)
    End
  EndIf
  If  KeyboardPushed(#PB_Key_W)
    y=y-10
  EndIf
 
   If  KeyboardPushed(#PB_Key_S)
    y=y+10
  EndIf
 Goto loopy
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 10, 2019, 10:25:19 AM
As you can see the transparency works fine on the page above but when I put it into my program it loses it's transparency . Hope I'm not being a pain In  the arse . Thanks for reading . Happy coding .
Sorry for posting this here thought I was in the other forum. !!!
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on October 10, 2019, 11:03:44 AM
I don't currently have Pure BASIC installed any longer, but a quick look through some old code and I noticed this line with an alpha blending flag:

Code: [Select]
Name = LoadSprite( #Any, File, #PB_Sprite_AlphaBlending )
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 10, 2019, 11:23:19 AM
Thanks Steve gonna try it out .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 10, 2019, 12:05:40 PM
Steve you are magic it worked . Really feel like I'm making progress now . collisions next . What did you think of PB steve ?
What I've decided is to learn a few new things a day . I was overwhelmed with PB at first but am getting into it now and it's only going to get easier(I hope) the more I learn . Anyway thanks for your input .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on October 11, 2019, 08:11:48 AM
You're welcome, glad it worked for you!

What I liked about Pure BASIC is it's very fast and produces a small exe.  You can produce application software with it (Windows, menus and such) as well as games.  What I didn't like was the very wordy syntax, like DisplayTransparentSprite(), old fashioned syntax with having to use StartDrawing and StopDrawing blocks and it's Windows only.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 11, 2019, 01:47:51 PM
Yes I see your point steve the code once deploy everywhere is a real plus for AGK . I've got 3 of my games on my phone how cool is that. The PB is coming along nicely gonna check out the sound today . Trying to learn a couple of new things a day and I think after a few few weeks I'll be doing good . so far got sprites on the screen detecting collisions and text. I think this is day 4 so not bad . When I originally looked at PB a few months ago it looked too complex to me but now getting into it am really enthusiastic . I tried an If Then bit of code to be told you can't do that . I take it Then isn't in it's vocabulary. Not that it really matters . Fantasia say there are over 1400 commands in PB so I should imagine they've got all the bases covered . AGK has loads as well but don't know how many. Have a nice day and yes you guessed it Happy coding .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Kris on October 11, 2019, 04:02:21 PM
You're welcome, glad it worked for you!

What I liked about Pure BASIC is it's very fast and produces a small exe.  You can produce application software with it (Windows, menus and such) as well as games.  What I didn't like was the very wordy syntax, like DisplayTransparentSprite(), old fashioned syntax with having to use StartDrawing and StopDrawing blocks and it's Windows only.

What's windows only? PureBasic? It's Win32/64, OSX, and Linux.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Steve Elliott on October 11, 2019, 05:09:53 PM
That's true, I was thinking of Nuclear BASIC.  As you say, Pure BASIC does indeed run on Windows, Mac OS and Linux.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on October 29, 2019, 12:16:25 PM
Well I've had 17 days learning PureBasic and I have come to the conclusion they both have their merits . Pure Basic is much faster and if speed is king this is the thing . Just such a shame it doesn't do Android like AGK2 . The style of the syntax is very similar in some ways but also different . I think PB is just as easy to learn as AGK2 and it comes with many good examples to learn from . Happy coding .
 
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on December 25, 2019, 07:31:41 PM
 You know I've come to the conclusion that no computer language is easy and programming is an extremely  skillful thing to be able to do . The Game Creators say that AGK is simple to learn but I think it depends what level of programming you are talking about . It's all pretty tricky if you ask me and you've gotta be dedicated . I've been at this on the pc for 2 years now and my programs have improved immensely but I'm not exactly about to produce the next GTA5 . Dug out my first pc game written in Blitz3D . It runs fine on my desktop but for some reason it won't run properly on my laptop . It crashes after a while which is a shame and the score doesn't update properly . Still there you go . It's not too bad either . The second game I wrote in AGK2 and it is really terrible . The worst excuse for a game I've ever seen ,no fault of AGK2 but very poor programming. But there you go you've got to start somewhere . Really hoping to produce something worthwhile in 2020 using PureBasic or at least finish what I'm currently working on . Merry Christmas and a Happy and Productive new year.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: zxretrosoft on February 08, 2020, 08:21:21 PM
For me, AGK is a much more friendly language than PureBasic. I will mention a few essential elements that PureBasic does not have: Simple work with animations, easy work with physics, adjustable depth of sprites, particles, export to Android...
In all this, PureBasic is lagging behind.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on February 08, 2020, 08:40:27 PM
Yeah you're right . I believe PB has a particle thingy now though. But yeah having no Android export is a shame and I'm not bothering with spiderbasic I'd rather use AGK for that. I do like the PureBasic syntax now I've gotten used to it , at first I found it complicated but once I became accustomed to it I really like it. If I had a faster computer I don't think speed would be an issue with AGK but my computer struggles a bit . If AGK had a machine code compiler for desktops in tier one I'd be straight back over to that side . And I think they could manage that quite easily . would at least double the speed I'm thinking . As it is to do this you have to use C++ tier 2 and I don't see myself learning C++ in the near future when I can use PureBasic at about the same speed .
  You know the first time I looked at PB I thought sod this and was straight back to AGK but then I decided to give it a fair crack of the whip and once I had picked up a few things I was off . In fact although different a lot of what I learnt using AGK applies pretty much to PB and I see that as part of my learning curve . Most of what I do is 3d these days so physics and sprite animation are not so important to me . I saw somebody post that the 3d with AGK was incomplete and not that good but personally I found it really excellent although I'm no expert (YET) . Anyway enjoy your evening . over and out . 
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: zxretrosoft on February 08, 2020, 09:56:34 PM
I'm surprised that you're still writing about PureBasic speed. This is somewhat strange...  :-X From my point of view, the AGK speed is exactly the same as the PureBasic.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on February 08, 2020, 10:33:43 PM
Hmm that is probably because you have a faster computer than me . Seriously I do really rate AGK as I do PB . Different horses for different courses . Just depends what is needed at the time .  Message to self do not talk any more about PB speed . It has been said .  8)
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: zxretrosoft on February 08, 2020, 10:40:39 PM
It's strange...  :-X I've tried on multiple computers. Something must be wrong.
Show me a specific program that is slow in AGK and fast in PureBasic.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on February 08, 2020, 10:46:36 PM
Hmm I can't do that as don't have a program which does the same in both languages . But I accept what you say about them being the same . I think if you tried one of your programs on my computer you would see the difference . Mine is an especially slow beast . I should imagine on a 3 ghz machine there may well be no difference . 60 fps is 60 fps at the end of the day.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on February 08, 2020, 10:53:39 PM
This is a really subjective topic and I'm surprised I haven't been shot down in flames . The things to avoid talking about politics religion and choice of computer language . 
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Pfaber11 on February 08, 2020, 11:13:22 PM
Hi zxretrosoft just took a look at your website and it's very impressive . I see you have coded in many languages and produced quite a few programs over the last 5 years or so . I guess you know what works best . For the last year I've been doing 3d programs and sometimes I may have 20 models on the screen at once all moving plus the terrain moving as well . I don't think I would get away with this in AGK2 on my laptop at 60 fps but I do with PB . If I had a better computer there would be no difference . I've had enough for one evening . Enjoy the rest of yours . Bonjour over and out .
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: zxretrosoft on February 09, 2020, 09:54:47 AM
This is a really subjective topic and I'm surprised I haven't been shot down in flames . The things to avoid talking about politics religion and choice of computer language .

YES, exactly, languages are an irrational thing, no arguments, no truth, just brand worship!  ^-^ I have the same feelings.

But no, just a supplement. I was just surprised that you write many times that PB is fast and AGK slow, which is not true to me.

Thank you very much, my friend, for your appreciation! I looked at your website too, 3D is very interesting! I wish good luck with 3D coding projects! AGK is a very powerful tool combined with GameGuru  8) But I understand PureBasic's passion. It is a high quality language!!
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: xaby on April 29, 2020, 07:48:04 PM
PureBasic is a mature language. I bought it back in 2003, I guess. And it was better than Visual Studio 6 back than.
It was a boxed version of PureBasic 3.30, I am using it mostly for tools. It can do XML, JSON, HTTP, SQLite, ... all out of the box.
The GUI elements are fine and so on.

But I am also using App Game Kit Studio. But we have two products and ideas behind that.
PureBasic has like FL Studio a lifetime license. I bought it back than and could update till today and will so tomorrow for free.
App Game Kit was before DarkBasic, than App Game Kit 2, now it is App Game Kit Studio. The same is it with First Person Shooter Creator, First Person Shooter Creator X, FPS Reloaded, Game Guru
and now we have Game Guru MAX. Every few year, we would have to buy another product. It is like an update fee, but feels better, I guess  ;D

You could do great tools and games with PureBasic. Would be possible to publish something to Steam with it. You were able to do it back in 2014, because it was matured.
You could do games with App Game Kit in 2014, because it had to many bugs. Today its great.

PureBasic has a very small install size and has a German help integrated. For App Game Kit Studio you could say the same, nearly about 15 years later compared to PureBasic 3.30

"Dune 2077" was done completly in PureBasic 3.30
And you could search for "Restricted Area", I guess, it is from 2004. Great game.

I love both of them. PureBasic e.g. runs on Windows 95 and on Windows 10. App Game Kit can export to Android 4.1 for the OUYA. And it runs on the Raspberry Pi 3.
And the commands work nearly the same. I love the integrated "3D Engine" of App Game Kit. I miss some GUI things like the Gadgets in PureBasic.

Also the Win32-API calls are nice in PureBasic. But I can't use PureBasic for exporting games to my OUYA. For HTML5 I guess, it would be possible to use SpiderBasic from the creators of PureBasic.

Both are great and fast. Unity, Game Maker Studio and Unreal Engine are too big for there own good. And Godot needs Android Studio for exporting.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Xerra on May 02, 2020, 09:31:11 PM
Game Maker Studio and Unreal Engine are too big for there own good. And Godot needs Android Studio for exporting.

I'd dispute putting Gamemaker Studio into that bracket, to be honest. I've been using it for around 3 years now and it's ridiculously easy to get something up and running quickly. Even if I was to write a game using a different system I'd still probably prototype with GMS. It's a single app that has most of the tools built in to create games. And it's absolutely nothing like Unity or Unreal in terms of size or getting to grips with.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: 3DzForMe on May 03, 2020, 05:33:32 AM
Quote
I'd still probably prototype with GMS. It's a single app that has most of the tools built in to create games. And it's absolutely nothing like Unity or Unreal in terms of size or getting to grips with.

Another vote for GMS being easy(ish) to get to grips with compared to Unity - tried both - preferred GMS - I like easier.  ;D
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: xaby on May 06, 2020, 12:28:18 PM
@Xerra,

oh, that was my mistake. I wanted to say "Unity" and "Unreal", but I was thinking about this Online-Thingly with Studio 2.x in mind, I guess.
Yeah. If there wouldn't be the problem with online connection in Game Maker Studio 2.x it would be one of the best programs.
And what I meant was also, it is all good for Windows, but trying to get a game to Android is also hard in Game Maker Studio. With all other stuff needed.
But you are right, you have a build in drawing-app, you could create sounds on the fly with audio-buffers and path tools and visual scripting is all there.
And the help is integrated. And there are a lot examples and so on.
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: round157 on May 06, 2020, 11:04:54 PM
I read a thread. Oh, I want to ask a question. Is B4A as popular as PureBasic and AGK? :)
https://www.b4x.com/android/forum/threads/prediction-b4a-going-free-will-really-boost-number-of-devs-using-b4a-for-games.113402/
Title: Re: AGK2 vs Pure Basic
Post by: Xerra on May 07, 2020, 03:19:27 PM
Gamemaker 2 can be used offline. I believe it's one in every 50 or so launches that the program does stop you working unless it can connect with homebase but that's not unreasonable. They have to do something to limit piracy.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal